The Iron Devils Quandary

[James V. West]

[Uncle Dark]

James,

One way to introduce setting through the back door would be to create some major NPCs, of the sort you'd find in the middle of a relationship map.  This would allow you to define the nescesary backstory for them, which (naturally) establishes something of the setting.  Then give write-ups to the Players as "example characters."

The advantage this has over presenting a ready-made setting on its own is that  it demonstrates how setting elements are attatched to characters, and not the other way around.  It shows them what you mean when you say that they will be co-creating the setting through their characters.  It fulfills one function of a premade setting -- giving players common points of reference to attatch to -- without making the setting primary in their minds.

Lon

[James V. West]

On 2002-01-01 18:48, Uncle Dark wrote:

One way to introduce setting through the back door would be to create some major NPCs, of the sort you'd find in the middle of a relationship map.  This would allow you to define the nescesary backstory for them, which (naturally) establishes something of the setting.  Then give write-ups to the Players as "example characters."

The advantage this has over presenting a ready-made setting on its own is that  it demonstrates how setting elements are attatched to characters, and not the other way around.  It shows them what you mean when you say that they will be co-creating the setting through their characters.  It fulfills one function of a premade setting -- giving players common points of reference to attatch to -- without making the setting primary in their minds.

Lon

Yeah, this is a great idea, Lon. I had considered something like this but wasn't certain about it. Now that you mention it, it deserves more attention. The pulp stories that inspired me to do this game are really all about character so it makes sense to let the game's full thrust be on characters and not on places.

High Fantasy puts a big price tag on places. Everything is important because it connects to the whole of the land in some way. S&S really doesn't go that route at all. Elric tales really aren't about Melnibone or the Young Kingdoms, they're about Elric.

Thanks for sparking some thought.

[hardcoremoose]

Hey James,

We should talk.  Inspired by Ron's Sorcerer & Sword, and what little I've heard about Bloodlust, I've begun working on my own S&S project.  I don't want to curse myself by saying too much, but in short, the few constant elements of the setting are conveyed primarily through the personalities the PCs interact with.

I'm excited to see your take on the subject.  Now if only Jared's pulp sorcery plug-in for octaNe were available...

:smile:

- Moose  

[Paganini]

Hehe... great minds think alike. Or maybe just redundant ones. :smile: Cornerstone is supposed to be generic, but the setting I was planning on releasing with it was going to be hyperborean / hyborean in nature.

James, maybe you could give a little bit to both devils. :smile: Present your game as a genre system, and then present your setting as an example of how to draw together all of the elements and techniques you mention.

[Cynthia Celeste Miller]

The advantage this has over presenting a ready-made setting on its own is that  it demonstrates how setting elements are attatched to characters, and not the other way around.  It shows them what you mean when you say that they will be co-creating the setting through their characters.  It fulfills one function of a premade setting -- giving players common points of reference to attatch to -- without making the setting primary in their minds.

This approach worked for Champions.  Until the mid-90's (I believe), there was no "Champions Universe" to speak of.  Sure, there was one, by default, but only because many of their NPC's had criss-crossing backgrounds that tied them to one another.

So, while these characters co-existed in the same universe, that universe wasn't really set in stone.

Another way to handle this might be to create a specific world, but only give a certain amount of detail to it.  Maintain the mystery and wonder of the setting by only telling the readers about the stuff that truly defines what your theme is (in this case, "man versus magic").

This would allow you to easily cement the theme into the reader's mind without spoiling the previously mentioned wonder of the world.

Just my thoughts.

[Matt Snyder]

Lon, James & everyone

The advantage this has over presenting a ready-made setting on its own is that  it demonstrates how setting elements are attatched to characters, and not the other way around.  It shows them what you mean when you say that they will be co-creating the setting through their characters.  It fulfills one function of a premade setting -- giving players common points of reference to attatch to -- without making the setting primary in their minds.

This is EXACTLY the issue I've been exploring with my own players. I'm constantly tinkering w/ world building ideas, and I've come to the realization that the process needs contributions from my fellow players. When I suggested to them that we start anew to create a new world, new campaign, etc., they mostly said they didn't know where to begin or even how to create a setting. Then one (my brother, in fact) said he would start the only way he knew how -- by creating a character.

Of course, he was dead on. This is perhaps the best way they can contribute to world-building -- by creating compelling characters, then coloring the world details around that. I as GM, meanwhile, can create my own "characters" and generally act as the glue that binds their concepts together.

We're still pretty damned early in this process, but so far it's changed the way I approach building a setting. This is far less daunting, and more fun.

I believe James (perhaps someone else?) said that Elric stories arent about the Young Kingdoms, they're about Elric. EXACTLY the same conclusion I came to when starting my groups new world idea. I was looking at the Elric! rulebook to craft the system (trying a house version of BRP this time around), so Elric stories have been an influence in this process. Of course, since I'm an Elric nut anyway, this ain't so bad!

Anyway, James (and you, too, Moose!), I'd love to hear what you're up to for a S&S system. Sounds really cool, and right up my alley.

Matt
matt@chimera.info

[ This Message was edited by: chimera on 2002-01-02 11:56 ]

[Laurel]

** is the little red devil **

Go for the setting.  Take those elements of Conan et al that appealed to you in the first place and make a setting that helps refine the mechanics.  Leave the borders and the details vague so that there's plenty of options open for GMs to make their own towns and adventures, but give them something to work with- a canvas and jars of paint :smile:

[James V. West]

Everybody is giving me terrific food for thought and I appreciate it.

I think it was Cynthia who mentioned that there was no Champions Universe at first. This hits on the core idea of what I've been wanting to do for a long time.

In the old days (so to speak), there were tomes of monsters and gods and what not. I spent more nights flipping through the Legends and Lore ADnD book than I can remember. The magic of it was that there were characters and some of them tied together directly, and some didn't. But there was no map or concrete setting. They could play in your mind and you could tinker with them all you wanted without feeling bound to anything.

I believe this is an innocent effect. I don't think anyone actully planned it that way, but this is probably the most natural way of going about it.

So what I've been kicking around in my head is Iron Devils as a kind of "cookbook" for S&S roleplaying. Basically, it would consist of intro/expository material about the genre, the rules for chargen and play, and a big encyclopedia-style list of all the elements that might be called "setting". Characters, demons, gods, artifacts or items, ideas, specific places (not countries, but tombs or castles or whatever) all loosely connected by relationship strings of varying thickness (so to speak).

Players could just browse the book and use the things they like if and when the inspiration strikes--which is exactly what I did with virtually every rpg I ever owned.

Pretty simple and straighforward, really. The way I like it.

[hardcoremoose]

Heh.

What James describes is exactly the approach I'm taking with WYRD. After months of deliberating on how to present the setting, I decided a few weeks ago to take the simplest possible route.  That means encyclopedic entries for every significant person, place, and thing within the myths and epics, but without strict adherence to geography or chronology.  I mean, where the hell is Jotunheim in relation to Sweden or Denmark anyway?  Who exactly were the Geats?  You get the picture.

Anyway, I think it's a great idea.  

- Moose
 

[Uncle Dark]

Moose,

Jotuinheim was in the east.  Niflheim was north, Muspielhiem was south, Vanaheim was east.

The Geats were a Germanic tribe.

Next? :smile:

Lon

[Bankuei]

  I'm glad I hit this thread...I've been delving deep trying to put together background for my Persona system, but I think this idea of using elements or entries to as ingredients the players can mix as they see fit being a great idea...It seems so obvious now.  I guess sometimes we need to look at the old stuff(D&D) and see exactly what DID work, since it must have worked real well to get as popular as it did.

Chris

[Blake Hutchins]

To be even more precise, the Geats were a tribe located in what is now southern Sweden.  In Swedish, they're called Gotas, with an umlaut over the "o" denoting a soft "y" sound for the "g," such that you pronounce it "Yu-ta."  Again in Swedish, using the same umlaut-driven pronounciation, southern Sweden is called Gotaland, and the city of Gothenburg is called Goteborg.  The water Beowulf sailed across to get to Hrothgar's hall was the strait between Sweden and Denmark.

Interesting etymology there, I think.

Best,

Blake

[hardcoremoose]

Blake, Lon,

Not to make this a discussion about Beowulf and WYRD, but yeah, the exact nature of the Geats is pretty important when you consider the emotional content of the source material.  The Geats relationship with the Swedes is pretty important to the overall understanding of Beowulf, as is the relationship these people had to their leaders.  Come to think of it, it was probably a bad example to use in this thread, as the Geats and their story are very much rooted to a specific time and place.  My bad.

But Lon's comments about the mythological realms of Scandinavia work well for me.  Supposedly they were connected to the mortal realm of Midgard, but giving them vague associations with compass points leaves the interpretation wide open.

Now, can someone tell me where Yggsdrasil is located?

- Moose

[Uncle Dark]

Moose,

Yggdrasil was located in the middle of everything.  Picture the nine worlds as five disks on a pole, with Hel at the base, Svartalfheim next up, then Midgard, then Lojsalfheim, then Asgard.  Midgard includes Earth, Niflheim, Mussplheim, Jotunheim, and Vanaheim.  The central pole is Yggdrasil.

Now back to your regularly scheduled topic...

Lon