Hi, ive decided to post the setting and cultures here so that people can get some idea of where Im coming from with two other threads about Bronze RPG.

also I am having a crisis of confidence that I am wasting my time on a setting ofa game that nobody will be interested in playing.  So I mean, really, would you be interested in playing in this setting?

Forgive the state of the documents, they are meant only as my notes to myself, full of plagerised stuff and spelling mistakes.  The format of the setting particularly is not what the players would actually see.  What I hope to do is present the sort of material that is in the setting document distributed amongst the various culture writeups each with their own slant on what things happened and why - there will be a lot of points in the this mixture of views that do not match, and as such will be completely up to the players to decide on what really happened for the purposes of their own scenarios.

Just two cultuers so far, and I am working on a third now.  Its slow going.  My aim is to do the cultures from the most marginal first, which for this setting is the more isolated barbarian cultures, and hone in on the more central, complex cultures later.

The main aim of the game is to present really live, breathing cultures that players can engage the players imaginations. 

http://www.geocities.com/stevenmathers/SETTING.zip

http://www.geocities.com/stevenmathers/Cultures.zip

thanks.

Make those cultures interact with stuff that the players care about and give them power to say what they care about with the rules, and the game will fly.

Do anything less and it won't.

I think you have some interesting stuff here. But games are for players, not fictional characters. Give players the power to make stuff happen that really matters.

I've read some of the setting and I think it's interesting stuff. But if I can tell you that if I can't take ownership of it during my game — forming a new Empire, or conquering it with my Barbarians, I'm not interested. Give me rules that help me do that and I'm in. But you have to figure out what the game's about first.

What you're saying is that your interest is in "Telling stories" but your rules are all about keeping all control in the hands of the GM — presumably because your other goal, showing off your world, is endangered by giving story power over to the rest of the players.

You gotta decide between these. Your assertions notwithstanding, design compromise weakens a design. If you figure out a way  to accomplish more than one goal, mazal tov, but I suggest that it will take you several designs before you're able to confront such a beast.

What you're saying is that your interest is in "Telling stories" but your rules are all about keeping all control in the hands of the GM — presumably because your other goal, showing off your world, is endangered by giving story power over to the rest of the players.

Hi!
  OK, the setting is very DEEP. And it has a lot of basis in reality. It is obvious, you have already decidede a role for Magic and other design concerns.
  You have already mentioned that you want the game to be about the setting, so these is my suggestions to you:
1) Don't give up, you seem very creative and this is a genre that has not been tapped too deeply
2) Since your game is supposed to be about the setting, don't worry about rules, systems or mechanics until your setting is where you want it to be at
3) This is merely a notion, try not to put any negative/judgemental comments into the descriptions of other cultures. and try to come up with a theme for that culture and stick to it. The first culture seems to be a combination of Gypsies and Dervishes. The description starts out nice and fairly neutral. But it quickly devolves into a portrayal of this culture as thuggish, faithless and chauvinistic. And while that may be alright, who would want to play these guys as a character? Another way to approach this, is to write it from the perspective of a member of this culture. What wold they say?
4) Once you have the setting the way you like it and the metaphysical, political and military issues are laid bare, you can come back and make some mechanics/rules/etc.
  I think you have a good foundation. You know what you want, you know what you don't want and you are very creative. That really is all you need to succeed.
  Hang in there, this will be a good game once you get a handle on your setting!

stefoid wrote:
Just two cultuers so far, and I am working on a third now.  Its slow going.  My aim is to do the cultures from the most marginal first, which for this setting is the more isolated barbarian cultures, and hone in on the more central, complex cultures later.

The main aim of the game is to present really live, breathing cultures that players can engage the players imaginations. 

dindenver wrote:
Hi!
  OK, the setting is very DEEP. And it has a lot of basis in reality. It is obvious, you have already decidede a role for Magic and other design concerns.

You have already mentioned that you want the game to be about the setting, so these is my suggestions to you:
1) Don't give up, you seem very creative and this is a genre that has not been tapped too deeply

2) Since your game is supposed to be about the setting, don't worry about rules, systems or mechanics until your setting is where you want it to be at

3) This is merely a notion, try not to put any negative/judgemental comments into the descriptions of other cultures. and try to come up with a theme for that culture and stick to it. The first culture seems to be a combination of Gypsies and Dervishes. The description starts out nice and fairly neutral. But it quickly devolves into a portrayal of this culture as thuggish, faithless and chauvinistic. And while that may be alright, who would want to play these guys as a character? Another way to approach this, is to write it from the perspective of a member of this culture. What wold they say?

4) Once you have the setting the way you like it and the metaphysical, political and military issues are laid bare, you can come back and make some mechanics/rules/etc.

I think you have a good foundation. You know what you want, you know what you don't want and you are very creative.

Hi!

Still, settings aren't what turn people on.

The WoD games sell a mood, a theme. The games don't deliver, but that's not the point. They have an unkept promise about stories that are interesting. About politics between vampires, about the struggle for freedom among mages, about the fight against industrial entropy among werewolves, &c. Players want to do that cool stuff, not just get a chance to meet a character who was mentioned in a sidebar.

The books are novels about cool stuff that's done for personal reasons. The rules aren't, nor are the guidelines.

3) This is merely a notion, try not to put any negative/judgemental comments into the descriptions of other cultures. and try to come up with a theme for that culture and stick to it. The first culture seems to be a combination of Gypsies and Dervishes. The description starts out nice and fairly neutral. But it quickly devolves into a portrayal of this culture as thuggish, faithless and chauvinistic. And while that may be alright, who would want to play these guys as a character? Another way to approach this, is to write it from the perspective of a member of this culture. What wold they say?

Paka wrote:

stefoid wrote:
Just two cultuers so far, and I am working on a third now.  Its slow going.  My aim is to do the cultures from the most marginal first, which for this setting is the more isolated barbarian cultures, and hone in on the more central, complex cultures later.

The main aim of the game is to present really live, breathing cultures that players can engage the players imaginations. 

Do you want to create every culture in the game or have rules and a toolbox with which the players can create their own cultures?

Giving real thought to the process of culture creation in your game might also help you figure out what is important to you about the process and bring about mechanics that mean something to the setting.

Hope that helps and good luck.

Hi!
  Well, you don;t have to go so far as to add poetry or anything that taxing. But you do use the actual term "chauvanist" so it forces the reader to look at them through that lens.
  Your writing is good, but it has a "Stream of consciousness" feel to it. Like you sat down in a session or two and pounded it out. this is good, but it adds a certain rambling quality. A quick decision about what you want them to be and a subsequent edit will have you back on track.
  For instance, at one point you explain how outsiders call them faithless and that they do not consider themselves faithless, but then you continue to reinforce the fact that they are faithless and that they only pay lip service to all except their Ancestors. Then you go into a little about Ancestor worship and follow it up with more details on how they dispise organized religions. I am not trying to discourage you, but the Gypsy/Dervish description is full of contradictions like this. They are humble and friendly to travellers, but they'll rob you if you are an outsider, etc.
  Maybe the gaff is, they are more than one culture, you have a faction of raiders, a faction of herders and a faction of refugees...

Yeah. The question is how to get someone into the game when they need to know so much to deal with it effectively. I suggest that each culture could have its own book and it be sold in a pack of six or whatever.

Still, settings aren't what turn people on: it's the ability to tell stories about cool stuff that gets them jazzed. You have to have a setting that you can understand prima fascia (which I think you can do) enough to make someone want the book, then read about cultures, then read the rules. Then they have to feel that the rules support the interesting stuff in the world.

You have already mentioned that you want the game to be about the setting, so these is my suggestions to you:
1) Don't give up, you seem very creative and this is a genre that has not been tapped too deeply

Definitely don't give up. You've got interesting stuff here. You have to figure out how the game works and what you want from it.

As for the genre not being tapped, I don't think that's the issue. There are plenty of games that give lots of setting material with ineffective rules. If you make effective rules for a Sim game, that would be a breakthrough. Mind you, it's one I would likely not enjoy overmuch; it's the ability to tell a story, which is a process of changing the setting, that makes me psyched to play.

3) This is merely a notion, try not to put any negative/judgemental comments into the descriptions of other cultures. and try to come up with a theme for that culture and stick to it. The first culture seems to be a combination of Gypsies and Dervishes. The description starts out nice and fairly neutral. But it quickly devolves into a portrayal of this culture as thuggish, faithless and chauvinistic. And while that may be alright, who would want to play these guys as a character? Another way to approach this, is to write it from the perspective of a member of this culture. What wold they say?

I don't agree with this either, at least not completely. True, every culture thinks that they're cool and other cultures are broken. But this is fiction. You can have people who are bad. You're making judgments on these people, and that's cool. That's a moral structure you're building into the rules. But if you only build it into the setting, it won't have the desired effect.

Luke Crane is fond of saying that the setting is rules. But that might mean the opposite of what you hope it means. It means that you can't have a setting where the rules contradict stuff the setting lays out.

So, if your chauvanistic, faithless, thuggish jerk tribe gains resources from those traits that others don't have, if they have special features like "not tied to my word" that gain them points, players will want to play your villains instead of your heroes.

I think you have a good foundation. You know what you want, you know what you don't want and you are very creative.

Well, Dave's right that you're creative, but I think you have to refine what you want and how to get it.

I recommend that you read the Articles (linked at the top of every page), particularly the Narrativism, Gamism, and Simulationism essays, plus the two Fantasy Heartbreaker ones.

Hi!
  Well, you don;t have to go so far as to add poetry or anything that taxing. But you do use the actual term "chauvanist" so it forces the reader to look at them through that lens.
  Your writing is good, but it has a "Stream of consciousness" feel to it. Like you sat down in a session or two and pounded it out. this is good, but it adds a certain rambling quality. A quick decision about what you want them to be and a subsequent edit will have you back on track.

For instance, at one point you explain how outsiders call them faithless and that they do not consider themselves faithless, but then you continue to reinforce the fact that they are faithless and that they only pay lip service to all except their Ancestors. Then you go into a little about Ancestor worship and follow it up with more details on how they dispise organized religions. I am not trying to discourage you, but the Gypsy/Dervish description is full of contradictions like this. They are humble and friendly to travellers, but they'll rob you if you are an outsider, etc.
  Maybe the gaff is, they are more than one culture, you have a faction of raiders, a faction of herders and a faction of refugees...

Hi!

Heres a question for you - is the concept of faith even relevent in a world where the gods are demonstrably real?

dindenver wrote:
Hi!

Heres a question for you - is the concept of faith even relevent in a world where the gods are demonstrably real?

  Well, that answer depends on you..Do you wish to portray the epic battle between polytheistic and monotheistic religions? Do you want the everyday peasant to have access the power of the gods? Will Shamans and Priests be putting on Demonstrations for the masses? Will not a religious leader question the faith of a follower who is not devout enough? Will magic talismans made by shamans and witches provide real power or small bonuses or just be bogus or..?
  But no, I mean, I don't think there will bre any aetheists in this setting, but I can see characters forsaking oe deity in favor of another, can't you?

Hi!
  Well, proof is ephimeral. Unless the deity speaks to you or appears before you, where is the proof. If I get a charm from a Priest and have bad luck, does that bolster your faith or weaken it?
  In a world with spirits and monsters, who is to say what a god is?
  I THINK there is room for questions of faith. But I guess that is for you to decide, lol

dindenver wrote:
Hi!
  Well, proof is ephimeral. Unless the deity speaks to you or appears before you, where is the proof. If I get a charm from a Priest and have bad luck, does that bolster your faith or weaken it?
  In a world with spirits and monsters, who is to say what a god is?
  I THINK there is room for questions of faith. But I guess that is for you to decide, lol

Hi!
  Well, the spelling and grammar are atrocious. There were less contradictions. But there was also a vague sense that you were unwilling or unable to characterize the nature of these people. Also, the religious section is TOO shallow. The Spriit Quest is described, but daily religion has almost no detail.
  I think part of the issue is that you are falling for the myth that cultures that were called barbaric were in fact barbaric. Even Vikings had complex societal mores and were more than willing to engage in trade with other cultures when they felt that raids and wars would not be productive.

dindenver wrote:
Hi!
  Well, the spelling and grammar are atrocious. There were less contradictions. But there was also a vague sense that you were unwilling or unable to characterize the nature of these people. Also, the religious section is TOO shallow. The Spriit Quest is described, but daily religion has almost no detail.
  I think part of the issue is that you are falling for the myth that cultures that were called barbaric were in fact barbaric. Even Vikings had complex societal mores and were more than willing to engage in trade with other cultures when they felt that raids and wars would not be productive.

Steve, you can go two directions here: you can give players the tools to make the stuff up themselves, of you can write a world so compelling that the players will want to use the tremendous, coherent detail you've given.

Guess which one I think is the better choice.

Joshua wrote:
Steve, you can go two directions here: you can give players the tools to make the stuff up themselves, of you can write a world so compelling that the players will want to use the tremendous, coherent detail you've given.

Guess which one I think is the better choice.

stefoid wrote:

Joshua wrote:
Steve, you can go two directions here: you can give players the tools to make the stuff up themselves, of you can write a world so compelling that the players will want to use the tremendous, coherent detail you've given.

Guess which one I think is the better choice.

Do I win a prize? 

anyway, why are those options are mutually exclusive?

There is scope for many, many other cultures that will hinted at merely existing - the area Im covering is kind of an island unto itself, like china or india.  People turn up to the tent city market place by caravan, for instance....  from where, what are they like?  others turn up in boats to trade with port cities... again, from where, what are they like?

however, give players the tools to create their own cultues?  By all means if they want to get stuck in -- hell Id hope theyd be intersted enough to try.  But I cant think of any 'tools'  other than some guidelines as to what areas to concentrate on when doing a writeup/  is that what youre talking about?

creating the setting for the game = fun

creating rules = not as much fun

Tell me about it.

But that's what you gotta do. Making bad rules is a bad thing to do. Not bad, as in sloppy or "aw, rats", but bad, as in it strains friendships, drives people away from games, alienates people. It's cruel to write bad rules, either on purpose, or because you weren't paying attention.

Good rules make it so that friends get to know, understand, and appreciate each other more. You find yourself hanging on every word your friends say because it totally matters to what's happening.

If you're going to write a game, it's your ethical obligation to make it good.

Fortunately, you strike me as someone who wants to do good, and your ideas are interesting. So you're off to a flying start.

stefoid wrote:
creating the setting for the game = fun

I can't remember if anyone already suggested this or not, but why not just write a setting? If writing rules isn't fun for you, use someone else's rules, perhaps tweak them for your setting, and publish the setting as a supplement for those rules.

Or write a novel. Or make a giant web page full of setting information.

I suspect the answer is that you want to show off your setting to your player group in particular, and you need a vehicle for doing so, and that means a game. Right?

Adam's so very right. I suggest The Shadow of Yesterday for the rules set, by the way. Full support for heroic fantasy, including cultural differences of all kinds. It's free, too, and integrates rules and setting very solidly.

Adam wrote:
I can't remember if anyone already suggested this or not, but why not just write a setting? If writing rules isn't fun for you, use someone else's rules, perhaps tweak them for your setting, and publish the setting as a supplement for those rules.

Or write a novel. Or make a giant web page full of setting information.

I suspect the answer is that you want to show off your setting to your player group in particular, and you need a vehicle for doing so, and that means a game. Right?

whats peoples thoughts about 'canonical settings' here?  seems to me like it is the crazy uncle nobody likes to acknowledge publicly.

but its settings that sell games. hell, unless youre going into a store specifically to buy something that you know you want, it could even be illustrations and cool blurbs that sell games.

hmmm, front cover looks nice.... whats on the back?  OK, this concept seems pretty cool, have a quick leaf through it - ooh, theres a nice picture, what does the caption say?  hmmm, thats interesting, what else does it say on this page....

If that's the case, Steve, here's what I'd do:

Use The Shadow of Yesterday for the "game" part of the game. Play with the cultures "on the table", that is, tell the players about all of them so they can make informed choices. I wouldn't bother with the "secrets" thing; for the most part, it just pushes toward disappointment.

When I'd played for a while, I'd start to notice things that are different than I'd like them. Once I started changing them to reflect what I really wanted, I'd be on my way to creating a new game.

By no means give up on your vision: you have an idea for a setting that is compelling to you and presumably your group. Run it, pay close attention to the processes you use in play (when we make up a new culture, what exactly do we do? How do we come to agreement? Are there more effective ways of coming to agreement?) and write them down. If someone else wouldn't get as good results following the process you've written down, you haven't discovered the rule in the behavior yet. So keep writing down your observations.

In the meantime, play a lot. Use games that are really different from what you know. TSoy is great (and free). Dogs in the Vineyard is great and not free. Burning Wheel is great and cheap. Pirate them mercilessly for ideas. When you use one and the people around the table are all smiling and throwing in ideas, take note of it.

Also, design lots of little games. Every one isn't your magnum opus. Don't bother making them all with that in mind. Some will start to feel really refined. Some of them will seem hopelessly flawed until you realize you used the same idea in a later game to better effect.

wrote: whats peoples thoughts about 'canonical settings' here?  seems to me like it is the crazy uncle nobody likes to acknowledge publicly.

but its settings that sell games. hell, unless youre going into a store specifically to buy something that you know you want, it could even be illustrations and cool blurbs that sell games.

hmmm, front cover looks nice.... whats on the back?  OK, this concept seems pretty cool, have a quick leaf through it - ooh, theres a nice picture, what does the caption say?  hmmm, thats interesting, what else does it say on this page....

It's not the setting that makes these sell. It's that they're good games. That's why people create such cool alternate settings for them.

Its pretty easy to do what your suggesting that I do, which is to go 'wow, this system works' and rip it off blind, and release it tweaked to my own setting.

Well, here's the thing: The Shadow of Yesterday is under the Creative Commons license. That means:

Clinton wrote: ]I meant it earlier when I told Keith Senkowski that you could get all new art, re-format it, and publish it yourself. Better though - this means you can make your own supplements and sell them.