Ygg setting - rebooting the thread

[Christoffer Lernö]

Ok, second attempt here. I'm starting a new thread instead of reviving the old one.

I've recieved some heavy flak because of my use of the concept of "standard fantasy" to describe my world, so I'll try to use it as little as possible (only once so far in this thread ;) )

I'm trying to create a really magical world where the focus still isn't on magic, but on the stories of heroic adventure.

Currently the story is set a few hundred years after the fall of the mighty land of many kingdoms (how do I give it a name which isn't "Empire"?). The realms, once split into many kingdoms had been united by Scyld into one great land. Roads had been built, a lingua franca established and peace had reigned until the fourth in the line of kings so abused his reign that the people rose up against him.

After his death, the most prominent rebel leader himself died in mysterious circumstances and the world was plunged into many wars between self declared kings and warlords. (It is in this time of civil war the game is set.)

But all had not been good during the reign of man. They had slain most of the witchpeople and made the rest into homeless drifters. The mystic trolls of great wisdom had been forced into the depth of the forests. With the dwarves they made peace only because the dwarven mine towns where of little use to them. The goblins were enslaved for their great talent of languages.

Of the other races they killed them where they could.

But now there are no soldiers patrolling the old guard towers. The hobgoblins, stronger and meaner cousins of the enslaved goblins have returned in great numbers. The Ogres, a magical shape shifting race of great magical powers, once defeated by the witchpeople millennia ago are coming back too. Attracted by the scent of blood of the battles where men slay men in their ambition for power. And in the night even deeper secrets lurk in the ever changing guise of "The Dark" which makes the dead rise against the living.

In the north, the frost giants still live, sometimes journeying south on solitary treks of destruction and plunder.

The wilderness has grown dark and dangerous since the now legendary rule of the great Kings. Villages has to fend themselves from both the dangers of the wild. But sometimes, men themselves are even greater monsters than the inhumans.

It was a time of terrible tragedies and great perils, but also of noble heroic deeds which would live on in the times to come.

The players will play either as humans, trolls, witchpeople, dwarves or goblins.

The trolls and the witchpeople possess mystic powers which most of which is totally unknown to the race of man. They live for centuries and can accumulate much wisdom during this time.
Of the two, the trolls are considered the wiser, and although not as quick in wit and thinking, their understanding is much more profound.
The witchpeople is a race of great grace and cunning. They are quick to anger but equally quick to forget. In physical appearance the witch people look much like humans, although tend to be slightly shorter. They all have distinctly pointed ears.
Male trolls are quite the opposite of the witch people, with crude features, and features like noses and ears growing increasingly bigger with age. Female trolls on the other hand look almost human, except for the slightly pointed ears with tufts (like that of the troll male) and their cow-like tails. Trolls are slow to anger, but once aroused will rarely fade until they had their vengeance.

The dwarves are a hardy people who long was confined to the mountains by the men who destroyed their kingdoms. They are all gifted with an ability to infuse any item they make with some of their essence, which makes every item they make intimately associated with their being, as well as magical on its own. Dwarven items are therefore both highly valued as well as only reluctantly given away and even more rarely sold.

Male dwarves are of stocky built with strong hair growth and crude features. Female dwarves on the other hand, share their male counterparts diminuitive size but not necessarily their crude features, making them look rather human, although of course much shorter.

The goblins most exploited talent has been that of language. The goblins have a natural ability to learn any language in almost no time. Because of that they were held as slaves by the humans and not simply exterminated.

The goblins are of similar height as that of the dwarves, but have very little hair growth, (this is especially true for male goblins). Humans tend to find goblins rather revolting in appearance and hygiene :) Goblins tend to be very greedy, but that doesn't mean they are egotistical. They are able to found very deep friendships with others, even with people of other races. In fact, goblins might be one of the most social of all races, although their culture is sufficiently different from that of humans that few humans understand that.

The hobgoblins are similar to the goblins in some ways, and vastly different in others. Unlike goblins, which are generally quite weak, the hobgoblins are very strong for their stature. A little taller than dwarves with dispropornately long arms and usually a hunchbacked appearance, they are surprisingly strong. Hobgoblins have even less of a human-like face than goblins. Their facial features are very weak features and often "decorated" by many scars sustained in fights and combat.

Hobgoblins are mainly viewed as "monsters" by most humans, but they are not as mindless as they are commonly thought to be. Hobgoblins are flesh-eaters and as such hunt for food. Sometimes they even eat hobgoblins of other tribes, but such occassions are few. Hobgoblin culture is one favouring strength and power. Because of that, hobgoblins often go on raids on other tribes or in human lands, both for aquisition of food and treasures, as well as "proving their worthiness".
Luckily for the humans, their built, although powerful, makes them very slow and because of that they rely on fighting which puts emphasis on strength rather than mobility.
For that reason, men were able to keep them at bay with tactics like employing distance weapons, spears and other weapons designed to keep foes at bay. Once in close hand-to-hand combat though, they can easily tear a man's limb off.

Finally the ogres. These provide the most varied race in the Realms. Althought they have very shifting appearance, they are generally agreed to be of one race. Some look like witch people, others more troll like, and some even more inhuman than that. They all tend to be of large stature, taller than humans, and possess strength according their size. Beyond that they might possess shifting magical abilities. In general, they are carnivores with a special liking for human flesh. Many settle alone in remote areas where they enslave people to do their bidding and to help them indulging in their desires. Many ogres possess magical weapons, but these are not made by dwarves or by demons unlike those possessed by men.

(To be continued)

What I set out to do is to create a brand of fantasy which, despite being different from Tolkien & AD&D still feels like an option for those who want to play fairly standard fantasy. I want to put in as much new stuff as possible while still making it "acceptable" as fantasy without sliding into a subgenre such as Dark Fantasy or other sub-genres (for example, making the undead power of "the Dark" the dominating force would probably forced the setting into the Dark Fantasy genre)

Am I on track so far?

[Clinton R. Nixon]

Just from your stated goals, here's what I'd recommend:

- I'd use d20 or a d20-like system for the majority of the game. It sounds like you want swords flashing and mysterious magic all over the place, and these systems give you a pretty good feel of that. I would create a magic system where spells are not codified, though, unlike D&D. A freeform magic system would be good, although I'm thinking, for simplicity's sake, that you could create a magic system with certain codified 'effects' with difficulties. For example, you could have the effect 'Damage' and (in d20) have the difficulty be DC 12 + (3 per d6 of damage). Then the player would narrate the actual look and feel of the spell - one player might describe arcing shafts of purple light from his fingertips while another might describe an enemy bursting into flame from the inside.

- I would make the system an "open-ended" die roll system - that is, when you roll the maximum number on a die, you re-roll and add, producing some splendid effects. I might recommend a smaller die size than d20 in order to increase the chances of this - a d10 might work well.

- For magical peoples, I would have a 'coincidential magic' rule - when they roll maximum on any task, the effect is magical, not mundane. Alternatively, they might be able to activate their magic on any task and get a bonus on the roll.

- Lastly, you need a 'heroic surge' set of rules. Let's imagine the characters have a 'Power' statistic. This would let them add, for example, a d6 to any roll a number of times per day equal to their Power stat. If you have levels, this could increase to a d8, d10, d12, and d20 as they go up levels. Alternatively, they could automatically roll maximum on a roll (and get to re-roll) whenever they use a heroic surge. I think this will allow for the heroic action you seem to want. Perhaps each race could have a bit of a different take on this - humans have a mundane heroic surge, while witchpeople have a 'coincidential magic' thing like above.

[Valamir]

If what you're looking for is an alternative to the Forgetable Realms, then yes.  Your sketch above seems quite reasonable.

If what you're asking is if there is anything you've described that would make me want to play in Ygg as opposed to the more easily accessable Forgetable Realms...not really.

My advice to you, is think small.  Its easy to create sweeping history...thats why there are dozens of "fantasy alternative worlds" out there.  Do a web search...dozens?...more like hundreds.  

Its much harder to create a small corner of the world in such detail that it actually feels real.  Unless you intend to start players out as some sort of princes or legendary heros, their characters aren't going to be interacting with your great sweeping history anyway.

I suggest detailing one piece of one kingdom in great detail.  1 castle where the local lord resides.  Who is on his staff, who are his retainers, what personal web of relationships are there.  Who are the people of the local village.  Who is the respected elders of the community.  Who is a slacker troublemaker.  What is the name of the wandering tinker who comes through town twice a year and what is he like.  Who might be a local rival.  Another lord who might covet these lands.  Who is the local lord's liege and what kind of network does he have.  When was the last time the liege visited and what was that like.  What about the nearby forest, the fringe of the forest where the peasants get their timber and firewood.  The deeper forest where the nobles hunt and the occassional bandit hides out from the law.  The really deep forest where no one goes.

Don't tell me there are Trolls and they are large mishapen creatures with great wisdom.  Show me.  Put one of these Trolls in the deep woods.  Give him a name.  Describe his relationship to the people of the village (is he the local Boogey Man, do the villagers leave him offerings of food and such to placate him, are people facing trouble advised to go into the deep woods and seek out Shaggolath the Old One and ask for his wisdom, what).

That is how you make a compelling world.  That is how you create something wondrous and real.  That is how you get the players to care when the dark threatens to over run this village.  The rest of it is great to have in your own mind to help flesh out the legends and stories the local villagers would know, but I wouldn't make it the core of your setting.  

Otherwise you just have Yet Another Fantasy Setting.  

Which, again, if thats what you want, Great.  Go for it.  But I can't say I'd have any interest in it, I'm afraid.  I've seen to many of those to really care about another one.

Does this help at all, or am I just making things more difficult for you?

[Ron Edwards]

Hi PF,

One of the difficulties I'm having with all of your threads is the disconnect between (1) your stated ideas and (2) your material itself. I'm not seeing how #2 is the implementation of #1 at all.

In this thread, you wrote,
"I'm thinking of just produce a setting, maybe detail a small small kingdom where the adventurers can start their careers. More kingdoms, villages and places can easily be added by the GM without risking that they
be overruled by later world supplements because the world is so big and the "known areas" are so few. It would be a world where the GM has the chance to build his own campaign and come up with a new kingdom just because it would be convenient for his/her next adventure.
"That, however would be in sharp contrast to many games out there which produces more and more detail, practically forcing the GM to only play within the pieces of the world described by the appropriate supplements or risk running into all too many contradictions.
"I think even a "Map of the World" is a really a thing one might want to avoid."

Now, having pioneered this approach to setting in my supplement to Sorcerer, Sorcerer &Sword, and having praised John Wick's Orkworld due to its unusual presentation of map with setting on the same basis, I completely agree with you on all counts above, as I stated in that thread.

But I'm looking at your Yggdrasil setting thread, and now I'm looking at this one, and I need to know the answer to this question:
Is the Yggdrasil setting supposed to be an implementation of the "build the setting through play" concept, as you describe above, or is it supposed to be a more traditional, laid-out-in-detail setting?

Until I understand this, I'm going to have a really hard time addressing your goals in posting this material here.

Best,
Ron

[Christoffer Lernö]

- I'd use d20 or a d20-like system for the majority of the game.

People have pointed out that my system include quite a few d20 system like features (although they evolved from a quite different basis), so I guess I can say I reached pretty much a similar conclusion.

I would create a magic system where spells are not codified, though, unlike D&D. A freeform magic system would be good, although I'm thinking, for simplicity's sake, that you could create a magic system with certain codified 'effects' with difficulties. For example, you could have the effect 'Damage' and (in d20) have the difficulty be DC 12 + (3 per d6 of damage). Then the player would narrate the actual look and feel of the spell - one player might describe arcing shafts of purple light from his fingertips while another might describe an enemy bursting into flame from the inside.

As discussed earlier I'm considering a system where there will be a list of codified spells, although these will be different from the AD&D style execution.

I was thinking (if we bog down in system details here) of simply giving each spell a rough ranking from 1-7 or 1-8.

Spell resistance would work rather in a rather simplistic manner "you resist magic on 5+ on a D6" with some stuff like magic talent weighted in for good measure but in general a rather crude system.

Unlike AD&D, spells would only have a rough casting time rating and maybe some technical description of the spell's primary use. Beyond that, each spell would have a range of other potential uses. The uses might be hinted at in the spell descriptions, but no additional rules would be provided, leaving it up to GM and players to work out secondary effects.

In addition, I was thinking of connecting a lot of effects to basic rules. So if you're throwing that fireball (just an example, I won't have fireballs in my games) damage is not gonna be written down on the spell. Instead it will refer to rules for damage for burns in the standard rules. Thus there should be very few "extra rules" hidden within the spell descriptions compared to AD&D style games, despite the fact that the spells are a lot more versatile.

- I would make the system an "open-ended" die roll system - that is, when you roll the maximum number on a die, you re-roll and add, producing some splendid effects. I might recommend a smaller die size than d20 in order to increase the chances of this - a d10 might work well.

Yes, I agree. I like AHQ's system for this purpose. It uses a D12.

- For magical peoples, I would have a 'coincidential magic' rule - when they roll maximum on any task, the effect is magical, not mundane. Alternatively, they might be able to activate their magic on any task and get a bonus on the roll.

I don't quite understand. Could you give me an example?

- Lastly, you need a 'heroic surge' set of rules. Let's imagine the characters have a 'Power' statistic.

I don't know if this is exactly what I want. But maybe I simply need to see an example. In any case I'm gonna have (AHQ style) fatepoints.

I've found that fate points works very nicely in telling people "this is not working, I have to flee" without actually maiming the heroes first. It also makes for some heroic saves.

(For you unfamiliar with AHQ use of fate points, let me offer my take on it: 1 fate point - you might start out with 2 and maybe have 5-6 when you're BAD (tm) - would retroactively remove any damage sustained in a round of fighting OR convert a failed non-opposed skill roll into a narrow success. All used fate points will be restored at the end of an adventure)

[Christoffer Lernö]

One of the difficulties I'm having with all of your threads is the disconnect between (1) your stated ideas and (2) your material itself. I'm not seeing how #2 is the implementation of #1 at all.

And I'm having difficuties seeing their at conflict. But since more share your views, I guess I must conceed the problem lies with me :)

But I'm looking at your Yggdrasil setting thread, and now I'm looking at this one, and I need to know the answer to this question:
Is the Yggdrasil setting supposed to be an implementation of the "build the setting through play" concept, as you describe above, or is it supposed to be a more traditional, laid-out-in-detail setting?

Until I understand this, I'm going to have a really hard time addressing your goals in posting this material here.

I want for people to build the setting, but before we run into more problems understanding each other, let me elaborate on what I mean.

Take D&D. Let's just pick the old "D&D basic" set and not AD&D in any of it's editions. It provides a few races (human, halfling, dwarf, elf), four professions, some spells, a large bunch of monsters... and that's pretty much it.

The GM is told to build his world and create dungeons for the players to explore.

Now with this material, there is already a very solid outline provided for the D&D games. We know how the races look, what kind of professions are important, the technology level, we know how spells look and what kind of adventures we're supposed to run.

But D&D doesn't have a world map. There are no mention of politics or countries or whatever. The GM is free to make his own.

Another example is a Swedish RPG called "Mutant". The very first edition is what I'm gonna talk about.

Basically there's an "after the bomb" setting. Lot of mutated humans and animals who map out the land which is mostly wilderness and irradiated "forbidden zones" where the old technology still can be found. Technology is essentially medival.

You know you're playing in Scandinavia, but that's pretty much it. Aside from that you're free to put in your own mutated monsters, or isolated villages, or old bunkers or "forbidden zones".

Again the basic outline is provided: a background story, the "races", example of monsters, ideas for adventures, but aside from those things the GM is totally free to make his own stories and put towns and villages as he/she pleases.

These two are good examples of what I want. So I figure I need to use a similar approach: give a background story, provide some races, examples of monsters, ideas for adventure and leave the world pretty much unmarked and free for the GM to develop on his own.

Am I'm making sense this time?

[Clinton R. Nixon]

Unlike AD&D, spells would only have a rough casting time rating and maybe some technical description of the spell's primary use. Beyond that, each spell would have a range of other potential uses. The uses might be hinted at in the spell descriptions, but no additional rules would be provided, leaving it up to GM and players to work out secondary effects.

I think - and you would know best, but this is my opinion - that you're going to trip up here. In my experience, rule-sets that codify effects, but leave descriptions up to the player work a lot better than systems that codify description, and leave effects up to the player. In other words, I think having an effect like 'open doors' and letting the player describe whether this is magical manipulation of the lock, the door 'phasing out', or a blasting spell that knocks the door off its hinges, will work better than having a 'blasting spell' and letting the player decide whether that is damage to NPCs or used to open doors or whatever. I think you'll get a lot more fantastic magic the first way.

- For magical peoples, I would have a 'coincidential magic' rule - when they roll maximum on any task, the effect is magical, not mundane. Alternatively, they might be able to activate their magic on any task and get a bonus on the roll.

I don't quite understand. Could you give me an example?

Sure - let's say you have three witchpeople, one planting a crop, one mending a wound, and one forging a sword. All three roll maximum, and have 'coincidential magic'. The one planting a crop might have the crop spring from the ground fully grown the next day, or maybe the plants have a magical effect, or perhaps they grow at a normal rate, but grow to five times normal size. The one mending a wound not only stablizes the wounded person, but causes the wound to heal quicker and leave no scar. The one forging a sword may create a sword that can never be dulled, or never be broken, or always seeks the heart of its foes.

For coincidental magic, I'd definitely give lots of examples of what it can do, and then let the player decide. A lot of the effect would depend on the heart of the character.

- Lastly, you need a 'heroic surge' set of rules. Let's imagine the characters have a 'Power' statistic.

I don't know if this is exactly what I want. But maybe I simply need to see an example. In any case I'm gonna have (AHQ style) fatepoints.

Again, this is a personal opinion - but fate points blow goats in Tijuana back-alleys. They convert a complete fuck-up into a marginal "whew-just-got-away" success. That's not the stuff of heroes. You want an "anti-fate-point," a way for the player to know that this time, I'm going to lay the smack down. You want a way to kick-ass and chew bubblegum at the same time.

[Valamir]

D&D has one of the most detailed filled in settings of any fantasy game out there.  Maybe not back to the white book days, but by the time of the basic and expert box sets, The Grand Duchy of Karmeikos, Princedoms of Glantri and a few dozen other "kingdoms" were well established and detailed.

But aside from that I understand the point you're attempting to make.  My question is left at "why".  

What you want is to provide a skeleton of a fantasy world and then let the GM invent everything else...

So what.

Seriously.  Like I said above, this has been done a hundred times already.  What are you offering that would make me want to play in your skeleton setting over someone elses?  Theres a dozen fantasy worlds already published and several times that many sitting out on websites.  

You really need to start thinking outside the box, and by this I mean the box that you've created for yourself.   I get the sense that you think you need to do this in order to meet some "market expectation" of the way things are supposed to be.  Doesn't exist.  There is no such thing.

[Christoffer Lernö]

If what you're looking for is an alternative to the Forgetable Realms, then yes.  Your sketch above seems quite reasonable.

No that's not really what I'm looking for, if you're talking about forgotten realms as a package of places with a great "sweeping history" as you put it.

Is it the "empire" which is the problem? It's not supposed to more than a backdrop and a reason to explain why there is so much unexplored wilderness and why there is war everywhere and why you can loot old ruins which still contain treasure. It's just an interchangable backdrop.

I suggest detailing one piece of one kingdom in great detail.  1 castle where the local lord resides.  Who is on his staff, who are his retainers, what personal web of relationships are there.  Who are the people of the local village.  Who is the respected elders of the community.  Who is a slacker troublemaker.  What is the name of the wandering tinker who comes through town twice a year and what is he like.  Who might be a local rival.

Yeah, I think I wrote stuff like that in some other thread? Making a starting place for a new GMs first adventures as well as providing an template to work from to create new places.

Now I just went and replied to Ron that I only want to provide some outlines, but in my opinion creating a place like this is not contradictory to my previous statements. In fact I feel this is exactly what will help the GM to map out his world later.

deep woods and seek out Shaggolath the Old One and ask for his wisdom, what

Haha, neat name.

Does this help at all, or am I just making things more difficult for you?

No no, it's very helpful. Especially since you spell it out so clearly.

[Christoffer Lernö]

I think - and you would know best, but this is my opinion - that you're going to trip up here. In my experience, rule-sets that codify effects, but leave descriptions up to the player work a lot better than systems that codify description, and leave effects up to the player. In other words, I think having an effect like 'open doors' and letting the player describe whether this is magical manipulation of the lock, the door 'phasing out', or a blasting spell that knocks the door off its hinges, will work better than having a 'blasting spell' and letting the player decide whether that is damage to NPCs or used to open doors or whatever. I think you'll get a lot more fantastic magic the first way.

Let's get a little more concrete. I cut and paste a few spells here:

* Imbue item with demonic power: By drawing arcane symbols on an item, the magician may infuse it with demon energies. The actual effect varies, but the approximate magical request conforms to the casters wish. Magical items created this way may or may not be possessed by demonic spirits. In that case the spirits will try to take control over anyone handling the object except for its maker. The item will always carry some sign of its demonic taint

* Banish demon: Many types of banishings exist, one is performed with the mage opening his palm towards the ground where the demon stands. Demonlight seals will form into a magic circle surrounding the demon and seconds later it will seemingly burst from inside in a shower of magical light, while immediately afterwards implode into a dark sphere which shrinks out of existence. As the sphere disappears, the seals slowly fade and disappear.

* Deathlight: A magical seal in the form of an eye appears in the palm of the mage. From this seal a fascinating light radiates which draws attention. Any person looking at it will stand hypnotised. If not pushed away they will remain standing there looking into the light until their mind is permanently destroyed.

Of course, the above are only quick descriptions of the spells. For the "Deathlight" there would be rules about how each round one point of willpower would be lost, and when the character goes down to 0, his mind is completely an irrevocably destroyed. Any character who is affected, but taken out of the light will start regaining willpower every other round but will be unable to think clearly (act) until all are regained.

Pretty detailed rules.

Ideally I'd like the GM and players to come up with similar spells. Preferably colourful and detailed. For some, the colour and the detail could have actual sideeffects that might give it alternate uses (as in the case of the Death Lanterns). What I'm doing is trying to provide colourful basic spells so that they players and the GM knows what they should strive for, lest their spells become pale copies of AD&D spells.

To create a spell you don't really have to do much more than to come up with an effect and then rate it from 1-7. From mini-magic to "FAT POTENTIALLY UPROOTING THE FABRIC OF SPACE AND TIME"-spells. I want to make it really easy for the GM to classify spells.

As for the magic it is inherently unbalanced within the game system but is countered by it being demonic taint leading to the eventual corruption of it's user (and a consequent loss of the ability to cast spells)

I hope that describes my intentions a little better.

Sure - let's say you have three witchpeople, one planting a crop, one mending a wound, and one forging a sword. All three roll maximum, and have 'coincidential magic'. The one planting a crop might have the crop spring from the ground fully grown the next day, or maybe the plants have a magical effect, or perhaps they grow at a normal rate, but grow to five times normal size. The one mending a wound not only stablizes the wounded person, but causes the wound to heal quicker and leave no scar. The one forging a sword may create a sword that can never be dulled, or never be broken, or always seeks the heart of its foes.

Hmm.. I see what you're getting at. As it is I have given "innate abilities" for the races which they may or may have been born with. Not all witchpeople will have the power to heal, but some will, and if they have it they will be born with it. But they can still train to make it better by learning more of how to use what they have.

You coincidental magic is a different approach. For now I'll keep my original stuff, but I'll keep your suggestions in mind.

Again, this is a personal opinion - but fate points blow goats in Tijuana back-alleys. They convert a complete fuck-up into a marginal "whew-just-got-away" success. That's not the stuff of heroes. You want an "anti-fate-point," a way for the player to know that this time, I'm going to lay the smack down. You want a way to kick-ass and chew bubblegum at the same time.

I want a way to keep the heroes (and bad guys) to get killed by a lucky shot in the first round of combat. On the other hand it might reduce the drama when the character tries to heroically jump that cliff. But I don't know if it's that bad. You have to work harder to convince me ;)

I feel it beats the hell out of other ways to keep the characters alive long enough to know it's time to escape (like making daggers only slightly more dangerous than a toothpick, or letting the characters withstand punishment that could take out a tank).

[Valamir]

Yeah, I know you wrote about this in another thread which is why Ron and I are both having trouble fitting the concepts you espoused there with what you're saying about Ygg.

And no, "Empire" isn't really a problem.  Its been done a zillion times, but I don't think it really matters much.

What I would do (and this is just me mind you) is take everything you've written about Ygg and write it up in a nice set of bullet points.  Refer to those bullet points as you write the game, but never ever publish them.  In other words no sweeping "history of Ygg" chapter which reads like an old social studies text book.   Reading history is cool, I love it.  I have a sizeable liabrary of nonfiction history at home...but there is no wonder to it.

What you want to include (again IMO), is just a small piece of Ygg, as I mentioned before.  Refer to things from your history, but do so subtly and without alot of detail.  For example:  in the nearby market town of Tryre there is an Old Quarter...say something like "The walls of Tryre were laid down in your grandfathers time by Baron Sergio the Bald as defense against Hobgoblin raiders.  But the walls of the Old Quarter are much older.  It is said they date from the time of the Empire, from before the sundering."

Ok, now this isn't the best written thing ever but what it accomplishes is this:  It establishes Baron Sergio as part of the local pantheon of old heroes important to that area.  It focuses on a town that is impressive to the locals (the biggest town the vast majority will ever see) but doesn't involve some "far away elven capital" or other such stuff.  It mentions Hobgoblin raiders in the context of their impact on the locals.  Sure this is probably part of some massive Hobgoblin wars, but you don't need to give a history of the whole war.  Just what the locals know about it.  They may know that the main Hobgoblin army was defeated at Bork's Cleft by Vangern the Mighty, but most of them probably don't know where Bork's Cleft is, or where Vangern the Mighty was from.  But they can probably tell you the exact spot on the wall their grandfather stood swinging his rusty woodsmans axe.  They can probably list off the names of Baron Sergio's knights who fell in the battle like a litany.

Thats what I'd like to see anyway.  Make that little corner of the world really sing.  Plant a few seeds of places the locals have heard about but don't detail those.  Leave those to the GM and players to fill in.  

When the characters wind up joining up with a warband heading off to fight with the king's army, all the places they march through and fight at will be all new.  It will be new to the players just as its new to the characters.  Its really hard to get a sense of the wonder of your character who's just seen the capital metropolis for the first time when you as the player have read all about the city in the latest sourcebook and even know the name of the secret king of the underworld.

Your mileage my vary, of course.  But that's what I'd want out of Ygg.

[Christoffer Lernö]

D&D has one of the most detailed filled in settings of any fantasy game out there.

I only ever had the first basic box. I didn't have any adventures or anything else. Not even the expert box :)

What you want is to provide a skeleton of a fantasy world and then let the GM invent everything else...

So what.

*Sigh* maybe you're right. Maybe there is no answer to that question.  I mean ok, I'm gonna try to provide magic of a type which hasn't been dared in any "non-magic focused" fantasy settings I've seen. I'm gonna try to offer a combat system that doesn't suck terribly and which facilitates transitions between soliloquy and game theory. I'm gonna whip up some new takes on conventional fantasy races and monsters, many actually going back to pre Tolkien basics. And I'm gonna try to make it all cinematic. And the GM is gonna have plenty of space to run his adventures without having to dodge between vaguely sketched (but sometime later heavily detailed) cities and countries. And making it basic enough for 10 year olds to learn.

But I don't pretend any of this is new stuff. It's been done, but not really all at once. So that's all what I'm trying to do: compile good stuff. Because there is no mainstream type of fantasy rpg out there I know I like to play because they are irrevocably messed up one way or the other.

Now if you know a neat game which would satisfy me or which I could easily customize into fullfilling my requirements, then I would stop working on Ygg. There is no need to write something that has been done already.

The problem I find with the "fantasy heartbreakers" which Ron and others express concerns that Ygg is, are that they rely on flawed basics from which they journey out and make patches. They start with the "great known" - which happens to be AD&D - and make journeys into uncharted territories from there (with magic systems and other things parts).

But because of the land of origin is the same (AD&D) they become rehashes of that theme. Is this what you are afraid that I am doing here?

[Christoffer Lernö]

When the characters wind up joining up with a warband heading off to fight with the king's army, all the places they march through and fight at will be all new.  It will be new to the players just as its new to the characters.  Its really hard to get a sense of the wonder of your character who's just seen the capital metropolis for the first time when you as the player have read all about the city in the latest sourcebook and even know the name of the secret king of the underworld.

Your mileage my vary, of course.  But that's what I'd want out of Ygg.

That is, sincerely, what I want out of Ygg too. :)

[Valamir]

That is, sincerely, what I want out of Ygg too. :)

And thats why I keep coming back to these threads, because I think there is some really great stuff there struggling to get out.

I don't know how to say this without sounding all condescending or fatherly or something, but I think you need to spend alot of time thinking about what YOU want, and less time (i.e. zero time) worrying about "conventional wisdom".  

Like your recent mechanics thread.  I know its just thinking out loud at this point, but that kind of breaking things down is a great place to start.  Every piece of "combat mechanics" or magic or what have you should be put to this test:

"would I be heartbroken if this <thing> never came up in the game?"  If the answer is no, then scrap it.  IOW if you don't care whether or not there are rules for characters bleeding to death, don't have any.  If you do care whether there are rules for a character getting his arm chopped off, than include those.  Don't worry about what "players might expect".  You'll never be able to meet all of those myriad expectations anyway.

[Christoffer Lernö]

I don't know how to say this without sounding all condescending or fatherly or something, but I think you need to spend alot of time thinking about what YOU want, and less time (i.e. zero time) worrying about "conventional wisdom".  

You mean like established rules for creating worlds, magic, races and so on? Or are you thinking of the mechanics? Or both?

Every piece of "combat mechanics" or magic or what have you should be put to this test:

"would I be heartbroken if this <thing> never came up in the game?"  If the answer is no, then scrap it.

I'm trying to. Maybe my problem is that I start with putting everything in and then try to take things out until I get to the point I feel I'm actually sacrificing feel. This lends to a lot of extra work since I first have to fit things in before I remove them. But I'm worried about the outcome doing it any other way.