Ron’s TSoY actual play and the Frontier Challenge thread triggered an idea that now sits in the back of my head like an evil monkey. I’ve been saying since 2004 that I’d like to see more of what thoughtful setting design can do. I’m not talking about setting as an element of exploration here. Rather, I’m talking about setting as set fictional content created by the designer of a game.

Here’s what to do: Create a setting for an already existing game. You may leave stuff up to the players (like e.g. the supernatural dial in Dogs, or the blanks and maybes in Polaris), but for this contest, you have to establish a solid bit of canonical fiction. If you want to make references to the rules set for which you are writing, which is recommended, you should ask the owner for permission unless the rules set is free anyway. I would like to allow non-indie game systems such as d20, if that’s ok with the site rules.

Present the setting in a way that shows the reader immediately how she can use it to play the game (no “thinly disguised fiction”, please). You may include “special rules” for your setting, but the focus should be on how the fictional content you establish helps to create the kind of interesting in-game situations you want for the game.

My suggestion for the course of the Challenge is this: The setting should be uploaded before the end of this year. The text should be no more than 10,000 words. You may work together on a project. In fact, I would encourage co-authorship, or cooperation of artists and writers. After the submission period is over, the winner is determined by a voting procedure among the participants, similar to the one they used in the Games Chef.

Before we actually kick off, I’d like to gather some commitment and offer a chance to discuss the conditions, because I’m just making them up right now and might be overlooking something. If enough people commit to participate, and we settle on a modus, I will start another thread with the final conditions and where the finished entries can be posted.

Watcha say?

- Frank

Personally Frank, I think it sounds like a really cool idea.

This is a great contest idea.

I hesistate to say "I'm in" because I have so much on my plate right now, but I may be in.

yrs--
--Ben

P.S.  Oh, and anyone who wants to use the Polaris mechanics has official permission.

I am curious--but like Ben, I doubt I could commit either, given my own goals for the end of year (oh, yeah, and my employer's!):

First, by setting you mean, in essence, a game world, right? Or would situations also be included (exs: plotlines, story arcs, chronologies, event triggers).

If only the former, why must it be bound to a particular product, aside from the obvious reason that some products are heavily "genre-bound" and as such tend to dictate the appropriateness of some elements of setting? (Or, more so, products that actually build setting as a course of play.)

If the latter is permitted, how would you draw the line between your "thinly disguised fiction" works and an actual playable product? For instance, I could imagine a great setting with a tight chronology (including contingencies, because the players might derail the primary timeline) that would read much like a story, on it's own. Are you thinking more in the model of old D&D modules, with "Read This to the Players" text blocks and "GM Secret" encounters, events, traps, etc?

Second, as you allow team efforts, to what degree are you willing to weight the results, to allow for individuals and non-artists to have a level field? I know the Game Chef scoring system has different categories--aesthetics AND gameplay in contention--but it seems that a setting product is nearly ALL about aesthetics: it must inspire more than educate or merely direct (what a full game primarily must do).

Thanks for taking up this endeavor, and for any further clarifications of it that you can provide;
David

Hi David!

I defined Setting as “set fictional content designed by the author”, and I’d like to leave it at that. Why must it be bound to a particular product? Because I would like to emphasize, with this challenge, the difference that the fictional content makes in designing role-playing games. Moreover, you need some sort of constraint for this kind of contest. “Design anything you want” doesn’t work. I’m actually wondering if “use the rules of an existing games” is enough of a constraint.

Regarding the teamwork aspect, to me the quality of the results overall seems more important than fair chances. This challenge is about producing great alternate settings to good games, and winning should be only a secondary incentive in my opinion.

- Frank

I like the concept of the challenge, although I doubt I'll have the time to participate myself - have to finish my real game first. Let me put down some vague musings about it, anyway.

About the psychological effect of having to use existing rules - while it's quite possible to use many existing systems for this kind of thing, and even more so if you allow added rules and minor changes, I feel a bit bad thinking about it. I tend to pride myself on my ability to be very sensitive to appropriate fiction to fit a given system, and usually I can draw great amounts of implied setting out of very abstract rules systems. Forcing an original setting on any well-made system feels to me like it's backwards: either I simply write out things that anybody should be able to see (which is what would happen if I worked with, say, Dust Devils or the Mountain Witch), or I use the system for some suboptimal and attention-seeking endeavour (doing Wuthering Heights with Dust Devils, or something like that).

Now, I'm not saying that setting design is a fool's errand, because I don't think so: one of my favourite game designs, a Finnish game called Praedor, does some absolutely amazing things with setting design, while staying completely archaic in system terms. It's just that if I were to unleash my amazing powers of setting design, it would have to be in a situation where explicit system wouldn't come in the way. There are great many things in roleplaying games that can be accomplished with setting design, but a majority of those can also be done via different systems. So almost any system I'd care to choose for the setting design would have a negative impact, as I'd have to choose between doing violence to the system, or violence to my chosen setting.

All that being said, the best option is probably to pick a system with little in the way of constraints... Hmm, I know actually what I'd do: if it proves that I have the spare weekend for this, I'm going to do D20. It has such massive stratas of rules that I can drift it any which way I want. On top of that, there's plenty of unexplored territory in that game as regards it's core business, skirmish fantasy battle. Expect half of my setting to be setting-based rules design, that's something D&D excels in...

Frank, this idea is great! I'm really looking forward to see what comes up.

I might participate - since I've read again about the 7th-Sea-Fu idea over at GroFaFo, I'm fired up to write a Swashbuckling setting especially built for Wushu.
However, I consider 2 months as a too short time to do this. November is filled with exams, while December all the christmas stress (visits of relatives etc) kicks in. Maybe you should stretch the deathline to end of January or so.

There are also two questions from me:

1.) The time to write up the setting.
Will you have several weeks of time which you can all use to write, little piece by little piece, just as you find spare time? Or will you be forced to use a small chunk of time, like the 24h oder 72h contests? I would definitely prefer the first route.

2.) Co-authorship.
What about brainstorming in discussion boards? Would that be allowed? When preparing settings, I always like to get a lot of input from many people in the form of single, unrelated ideas and one-liners, and then to be the final arbiter who tinkers around with them to fit them somehow into one single unified piece.

There might arise more questions later, but now I'm too tired to think through the whole contest procedure...

- Stefan

Hello Frank,

I'm glad someone decided to look at settings instead of mechanics for a change. Thanks!

I agree with the comment that choosing a game system in advance will limit the setting. I find that creating a game based on creative prose opens up more possibilities for something unique and entertaining. The d20 system is readily available and everything written for it "feels" the same. Dressing up an existing system just doesn't appeal to me.

I choose to create a fictional setting that is--first and foremost--a resource for amazing adventures and stories. Just thinking about a fresh world puts a big smile on my face. Time to pull out the composition books and pads of ideas.

I have a few questions:
What elements must be included in the settings to make it valid?
Should we include examples of play?
How will the settings be judged?

After the settings are created and a winner is chosen, it will be necessary to find a game system worthy enough for it. Maybe d20 will fit. There is a great chance that the setting will demand a new and wonderful game system. Only at the Forge!

Troy

Stefan, I was thinking of not putting any "24 h constraint" on the participants for a change.

Troy, if you can think of a really good setting, and of the sort of play you want to see in it, and there is just no game system available that would fit, even with a little tweaking--I encourage you to write the game that setting requires. However, not in this contest. That would be sneaking a rules design focus in through the back door.

Your work qualifies if it provides a new setting for play with an already existing game system. Note that for play is the big one. Your references to the game system might be minimal, depending on the game system you use. The main thing is that the reader can see how to use the fictional content you provide for play.

- Frank

Hello Frank,

What makes this challenge different from just creating a setting for an existing system and publishing it through normal channels? What do the participants receive at the end of the contest? What do you get?

Troy

I'd imagine that the benefit would be the usual: attention and critical analysis for your work, as well as an opportunity to interact with likeminded people over the project.

Hi Troy,

The Challenge is for fun, it's an excercise, and I hope it will be inspiring. That's all. If you'd rather design a setting outside the restraints of the Challenge, again, feel free to.

- Frank

Hello Frank, Eero,

I apologize for being such a snit.

I honestly agree that this site motivates and inspires. The ideas that fly around here are amazing. Plus, I've had a few of my own due to the interaction here.

The game system choice is bugging me. I personally feel that I will limit myself by choosing a system first. I'll dismiss that thought and continue.

I like the d6 system from WEG's Star Wars RPG because it's quick, easy and very cinematic. That Star Wars game is no longer on the market but there are still fans of those products (raises hand). It is replaced by the d6 System in three versions: Adventure, Fantasy and Space. The new World of Darkness system is good and is somewhat tweakable. d20 is a system that will work, but I just don't like it. I know the d6 System will work for what I have in mind. Let me describe the kind of setting I'm thinking about and maybe you can suggest something...

Lum, Noc, Pyr, Acq, Aer and Sil are the everlasting aspects of the universe. All of these aspects played in the infinite heaven of black velvet and twinkle-eyed watchers. They devised clever and complex games of movement and strategy among the watchers. The watchers were intrigued with the aspects and moved closer for a better vantage point. The aspects became crowded and agitated, touching each other in their attempt to keep their distance. The result was astounding.

The intimacy was too tempting and over many eons the aspects reveled in their mutual embrace. Then something unexpected happened. A new realm appeared within them, a unique combination of all their qualities. Creatures appeared with respective likenesses and they each wanted control of this new realm. Wars broke out on the borders with each aspect mustering power into their creatures. The realm churned with the ever-growing forces of the six aspects, twisting and rolling in the heaven. The threatening cataclysm was too great for the world to endure. The watchers fled to the edges of heaven. Each aspect pulled their creations away and receded, leaving it to its doom.

However, it survived in the aftermath of the war. Ignored and discounted by the aspects, the realm was free from control and the residing forces became elements of a new world. It is aware and calls itself Ter. In their haste, the aspects left countless creatures to make Ter their home. Through time, a world of life evolved, with amazing diversity, civilization, technology and magic. But one very jealous aspect noticed all this and malice formed. Noc plunged into Ter with terrible fury, killing and destroying what it could with death and cold. Lum responded with protection and warmth. Eventually they retreated, circling Ter in a stalemate, neither one dominating nor submitting. Ter was left in ruin, its cities destroyed and creatures scattered. The other aspects watched, playing with the new world, testing their control. They had minimal overall affect on this new realm, but concentration proved useful. They also learned of innate opposition within Ter. Hence, Pyr opposed Acq and Aer opposed Sil. Obviously, Lum and Noc are eternal enemies.

Ter is the world of life and infinite variety. Lum is the aspect of light, warmth and spirit above. Pyr brings fire, war and passion. Acq confers water, peace and time. Aer brings wind, freedom and knowledge. Sil holds earth, prosperity and nature. Noc is the aspect of darkness, cold and death below. Each contributed to Ter in their pure form to be merged into something new. The life of Ter is the perfect union of all the aspects and is cherished by all the heavenly children, except for Noc.

From the heavens, Ter appears as an earth-like world with great continents and oceans. All types of our climates exist, along with a few unique ones. Where the aspects hold sway over Ter, their qualities are enhanced to extreme. There are roaring volcanoes feeding fiery magma lakes with basalt islands, swirling maelstroms in vast oceans, ever-present thermals playing on mile-high cliffs and great mountains of towering forests. Floating islands lazily travel the atmospheric streams and collossal fauna carry entire villages on their backs. The ring city circumscribes the world, glinting in the day and glittering at night.

The aspects orbit Ter, fascinated by the world and its life. Lum and Noc take opposite positions, slowly circling Ter, creating day and night, maintaining a balance that completely unnerves the others. Aer and Sil orbit in a slow and deliberate way, causing little mischief, content with their mutual boundary of the horizon. Pyr and Acq, are playful and violent, causing great distress and worry to Ter. However, without fire and water, life would cease to exist. Lum relies on the others to tell about Noc. Aer does its best to relay the plans to Lum, but cannot deny the same to Noc. Sil gathers its resources in preparation for a definite future conflict. Acq attempts to cleanse Ter of all that is impure and make the flow of time easier for Ter. On occasion, Pyr teases Lum, distracting it while Noc gets its chance to deal death and destruction. This heavenly dance creates harmony and havoc alike.

Should I continue?

Troy

Well, there we are in the nexus of traditional setting design, the world mythos. All fantasy and scifi settings seem to have one.

I find it interesting, Troy, that you'd begin your setting design from the myth down, instead of trying to figure something concrete about the parameters of play. Care to discuss the design choice? How do you view the relevancy of the world myth to the actual setting? Will the PCs be able to commune with the elements as gods?

The difficult part of setting design, I think, is to get past the initial poetic images and create a concrete setting that supports play with character- and situation-creation tools.

Hey guys,

I figure this kind of discussion is exactly the interesting part in the challenge, which should be taken to threads of their own. As I understand it, this kind of discourse is exactly the purpose of the endeavor forum, so here we are. Let's, however, stay with discussion of the mode of the contest here. Some things that I can't quite make up my mind on:

Should people be allowed to use stuff they have written up in the past?
Should voting be secret or open? Anonymous or not?

- Frank

Speaking for myself (remember, it's 70% certain that I won't find the time to participate as a contestant), I'd prefer an expectation of not lifting previous work wholesale. I know I've made lots and lots of settings in my time, and just translating some of that wouldn't do me any good as a designer, even if they're better than anything I'd mix together on the run. So even if the choice were mine, I'd prefer it if you didn't tempt me. No need to be stickly about it, if you have some vague ideas in your head that you want to use, but it's a bit too constraining for anybody's genius if he decides in a moment of weakness to dumb pages of prewritten prose into the competition. Hard to do any significant further work when you start with pre-existing strata tying your imagination.

For voting, I suggest completely public. Does good to our conflict-avoiding pansy generation to have to stand for their opinions for a change. Anonymous voting is for when you fear a mob-hit on dissenters, not for an artistic competition.

May opinion about pre-written stuff: It's completely OK to mix in ideas you have used earlier, but I don't want to see how someone submits a completely old setting.

I'd prefer open, non-anonymous voting, with at least a short explanation when voting. This way at least a bit of feedback is ensured, and it's possible to interpret this feedback based on the commentators background. I suppose this contest is not such a serious matter that anyone has to hide his opinion in regard of this, so this should be OK for everyone.

Hello Eero,

I prefer to start with the overall picture instead of fiddling with stats and specific maneuvers. I like stories and the backgrounds that support them. The setting I have in mind begins with its creation, instead of using bogus logic for post-justification. BTW, that little bit of prose about the world of Ter came off the top of my head in about 30 minutes. I just had a gut feeling that someone would cry foul about previous works. The notebooks stay on the shelf.

Casting one vote is unpredictable and too subjective. I suggest defining requirements and categories to critique the works. That will also provide direction for creating the setting. It's ok to travel along a tangent; however, it is important that the judging mechanism has objectives for qualification. Here are some areas of judging I think are important:

The submitted work must meet the following requirements before it can be judged:
* Must submit 10,000 to 11,000 words in a common file type. All parts contribute to the word count.
* The chosen game system must be one that is still published, readily available, supported by the author and accepts or allows third party submissions.
* Introduction: a 500-word overview of the setting.
* Outline: shows the major chapters and topics.
* Exposition: minimum 6000 words of prose elaborating on the outline
* Rules Integration: minimum 500 words showing how the setting makes use of the chosen game system.
* Story: provide at least one 500-word, fictional work from an in-game viewpoint that sets the style.
* Game Play: give a 500-word, example of play that best represents the style.
* Glossary: define proper names, unique terms and redefined words.

The setting is judged in three categories:
* Originality: the setting is unique or at least has a majority of unique elements developed during this contest.
* Presentation: make good and clever use of layout, prose, art, continuity and delivery methods to expain it clearly and enhance the feel of the setting.
* Compatibility: uses the majority of rules of an existing game system as-is. Enhancements support the unique elements of the setting without undermining or contradicting the basic game system.

Ideally, each participant would judge all of the other submissions, but that may not happen due to time constraints. The contest will require at least three judges who do not participate in the contest. They must review each submission and judge it. Participants may not judge their own work and must judge at least two other settings.

Each setting is submitted and checked for requirement qualification before the deadline. Incomplete submissions are returned with a simple explanation. All participants and judges review the submissions and assign points to each category along with commentary. Each category can have from 1 to 5 points where 1 is the worst judgment and 5 is the best. The total of 3 to 15 becomes one of the scores for that submission. When each setting has been judged the same number of times, the scores are tallied and the submissions are ranked. In case of ties, the judges each cast one vote to break the tie. After the contest is closed, the judges' and participants critiques are published.

Troy

Troy,

I love to see your enthusiasm about this contest idea, but let's stay down on the earth.
Three judges seem to me like overkill, considering that we've just got six people who announced that they might participate (if I count Frank, too). If we find volunteers for this job, than this would be great. However, as long as it seems that this contest will run on a pretty small scale, we should stay humble in regard of administration effort and simply count on the participants themselves for voting, as long as no volunteers show up.

In regard of your contribution requirements, I'd like as first to point out that Frank used 10,000 words as maximum without telling anything about a minimum, not as an expected guideline around which your setting has to hover.
I'd like to keep the contributions that small, so that a.) you have to focus on the essential points without bloating around here and there and b.) reading all contributions keeps a low entry barrier - to read a 2,000 or a 6,000 word setting is a less demanding and daunting task than a 10,000 or 11,000 word setting.

Also, I don't know if such a rigid structure would serve us well. I'd prefer to let the participants decide which parts they wish to leave out and how much room they want to give to each part.
I, for example, have a dislike for in-game stories and similar fluff, and including such a thing would be a chore and a hyperfluid distraction for me.
You should also keep in mind that not every system needs a lot of words about rule-tweaking. For instance, I wouldn't know how to come up with 500 explanatory words if I were going to use The Pool, no matter how strange my setting would be.

However, several distinct categories to vote seems like a good idea. That would allow more differentiation without loading up too much administration effort.

- Stefan

Hey Stefan,

You're right. Let's keep it relaxed and friendly. No contest. Just a challenge: make the best setting you can!

Submit a setting design of at least 2,000 words and no more than 5,000. It must incorporate the game system you want to use. Be creative and have fun. Keep these three criteria in mind when writing:

Originality -- get exciting and new, come aboard, we're expecting you. Brainstorm and never throw out an idea, no matter how ridiculous and fantastic it may be.
Presentation -- be clear and concise with style and substance. Get your point across to the audience any way you can.
Integration -- show how the game system works with your setting.

Post your draft so others can see. Use a link if you want to include a formatted document.

Troy

I suggest the game chef rules are a good place to start with. Given the fact that we don’t have a time limit, we should definitely include a bar on word count. Are 5,000 enough? In German, I would aim for 10,000, but then again, German needs more words to transport the same amount of content.

Regarding judging directives, I would propose the following:
- How well do you think the game system got integrated? How well do you think it fits?
- How well do you think the game will work in play, especially with regard to how the setting facilitates a certain kind of play?
- How complete, accessible and well presented do you find the material?
- How interesting, original, stylish and “juicy” do you find the setting?

Regarding judging procedure, it would of course be cool to have a jury with some celebrity indie-rpg-design rock-stars for the contest, but I don’t expect us to get one, so let’s go for voting for each others’ settings. Something along the lines of: Everybody gets four settings he should read and appoint a score between 1 and 10. The four best ones then get judged by everybody.

- Frank

In regard of length, I did a quick research on the Wushu-Saberpunk-Wiki and the Risusiverse-Wiki (two wikis which offer short settings in English language for Wushu and Risus). Most are pretty sketchy, but Arcadomai for Risus seems to have the right length for the average setting that I would expect as the result of this challenge, hovering around 8,000 words. So 10,000 words seem like a good upper limit to me.

Regarding voting, the 4 categories from Frank seem perfectly fitting for me, and it would be fully OK for me to get four settings assigned for evaluating purposes.

- Stefan

Hello,

Yaaaaay! 10,000 words! Actually, the rules of the contest have become unimportant to me. I haven't been this creative in a long time! I started writing and I just can't stop.

Troy

Out of curiosity, why have a word requirement at all?  I can easily imagine settings I can adequately express in a very small number of words (Polaris being one of these -- the entire book is under 30,000 and most of that is rules, examples, and reference material.)  I can also imagine settings that would require a large number of words to complete.  Why limit it?

yrs--
--Ben

If you can do it in 1,000 words, that's perfectly fine. If you do it in 100,000 words, though, that's a little tough on the people who have to score you, isn't it?

- Frank

Well, talking practice, I think it's a problem with the contestant if he writes such long-winded prose that he bores the judge with it. No judge of artistry has a duty of discounting boredom - if your setting could be done in 1,000 words but you still use 100,000, then you deserve the lower score you presumably get when the judge can't be bothered to get engaged.

In other words - being succint is always a benefit, but if you can keep the interest with your long-winded submission, more power to you.

Eero, I was talking about time expenditure. 100,000 words is, I don’t know, presumably 200 pages. I for my part am not willing to read that much on behalf of judging a single challenge entry.

- Frank

Indeed. I assume that you wouldn't be willing to give a high score to something you won't even be reading very thoroughly, right? I know I'd be quite ruthless about skimming a 200-page setting as a first priority to see if it's worth it to actually read it all. Then again, not everybody is necessarily comfortable as a judge if they have to decide for themselves when they've given a suitable amount of attention to a work. It's certainly easier if all works are so short that you can read them through once and assure yourself that you've done your duty.

But, on the larger issue of getting the competition off the ground: I suggest that getting bogged in this kind of exhange about details is counterproductive. Better to just set down the basic idea, assign an organizer and let him worry about the details. In other words, revel in your power of setting the details however you think best. Or harass me about setting it up so you can participate, and watch me decide all these details in a manner pleasing to me. Whatever, doesn't affect the participation rate.

If there is a fair and open mode of scoring all entries, I see no reason why the initiator of the Challenge should not himself participate. I do have a setting in mind I would like to contribute, if I find the time. I’ll see if I can make something up this weekend and post it here and at Story Games. I’ll also ask at 1km1kt for hosting.

- Frank

I agree with Frank on the length matter. I wouldn't be excited about reading a single 200-pages setting, let alone 4 of them.
Of course I don't want to unnecessarily constrict anyones creativity, but even less do I want to force participants to do a evaluation job that will probably outgrow them. This could probably scare away even more interested people than a length maximum.

So, if you think that your setting will need a lot of detail to work: Keep your submission on a small scale. Put your focus on a single country or a single region or what-do-I-know, describe this on the high detail level you find necessary, and only touch on the carryover of the setting with short summaries. After the contest, you can still expand and flesh out the remaining parts, but for the challenge itself, you should keep the workload for your fellow participants low.

Regarding the challenge set-up: I like to see everyone having a say in this matter. However, if things are dragging that heavily, I agree that the initiator should be allowed to lay down the law so that things get done.

- Stefan

Hello,

This whole process is becoming a chore. The subject of the thread is "Setting Design Challenge". Furthermore, we are required to pick an existing game system. Originally, it was 10,000 words to be submitted by the end of the year. Let's do it. I think the challenge is to stop quibbling over the judgment criteria and actually put the energy into creating a setting. Some power-gamers (and you've met some) put forth little effort, ride the rules, never face challenges and whine if they lose. Is that same thing happening now?

Let's just write and submit them. We'll judge them later. Get honest feedback and hopefully we'll come out of this with some really great settings. I think that's a winning situation for everyone. Since the game-system is already defined, we're not going to get bored with dice, trait and conflict resolution minutiae. Its all about original, exciting game settings.

I'll continue to read this thread; however, the next thing I post here will be my original setting for the d6 System by WEG. That's my plan and I'm sticking with it.

Good night and good luck.

Troy

I think that if we're worried about someone writing 100,000 words in a month, we're being more than a little unrealistic.

That's okay, though.

Frank, do you have a final sense of the rules, yet?  Any start date?

yrs--
--Ben

Rules: 10,000 words maximum, use an existing game system, submit till the end of this year, period.

Starting date: Um, today, I guess. I’ll start a new thread with the final rules as soon as I find the time. (Job eat life, y’know.)

- Frank

Frank,

would you mind to expand the contest period till end of January? With only 6 weeks during exam stress and christmas time, I can't promise anything (although I would try it anyway).

- Stefan