Greetings!

I believe this is my first time to start a thread here, so forgive my nervousness. :) But I've run into a dilemma and I'd very much like your advice. In my game, I have made an effort to keep the setting content separated from my system content as much as possible. I want the setting to be interesting and fun to read without being interrupted by useless rules lingo and numbers all the time. Likewise, I want my rules section to be clear, concise, and to the point. The division that I make between the two isn't absolute, but I try to keep crossover to a minimum.

My problem arises from the fact that I would like to include a canned campaign at the end. Not anything big, just a 20 page or so campaign that can be run fresh outta the oven to help get the players'/GM's feet wet. I am not sure which section it belongs it. It deals a lot with setting, of course, but it also has a fair amount of numbers and system lingo. If you guys had to choose, where would you prefer it? In the setting or in the system? I'm open to all suggestions, and thank you in advance.

Peace,

-Ash

I would make the campaign a separate section. So you'd have three sections, not necessarily in this order - system, setting, campaign.

Unless you're planning on having two and only two book-type things, to be published separately. In which case I would say the campaign belongs with the setting info. If the campaign is supposed to take place within the setting, it makes more sense to me to include it with the setting materials than with the system.

Oh, and welcome to the Forge!

Well I am assuming that its all going to be in one book, pdf, whatever. So why not put the campaign after both. Setting info, system info, campaign info. Since it basically would be showing the two working together.

Just my opinion.

I'd agree with the three-part system, since it's what I'm doing in my own game. :) The usual place to put it, i.e. in the setting information, means that you really can't have all the players reading the setting, since a nice canned campaign/module is genuinely more fun if you don't know its contents. Similarly, you can't squish it in with the rules, because you sure want the players to read the rules!

By the way, I want to applaud your idea of having the setting information be a readable object by itself. I like reading games, of course, but I really like sitting down and simply reading straight through a setting; the rules I'll deal with when I'm actually going to play the thing, or when I want to think about how the game works. Having a little book that simply says, "Welcome to the setting, get yerself a cup of tea, here we go" is just exactly what I'd like to see a lot more of in RPGs. So, brava!

Honestly though, it really does depend on how System and Setting interact. If you intend to use the same system for different games, then I would definitely say divide them up in a logical order depending on how your going to market the game to people.

Per Example:

"Wow Potent System X! Come Play system X, powering the Y Setting! Includes Module Z!" If y our pushing system.

"Wow! Wonderful Setting Y!, Powered By System X! Includes Module Z!" If your pushing setting first.

"Wow! See the module that started it all! Then play with Setting Y, Powered by system X!" If you want use the campaign as the kicker.

All of this assumes your going to have Setting and System be entities not tied to one another. Now this is the current way to do it, I should current popular way, but even if you choose this method you will want to use examples in the system area that are relavant to the Setting the System appears with.

Now why are setting and system different? You mention wanting to avoid cluttering setting with system garbage but I was wondering how tightly are system and setting linked?

Sean
ADGBoss

Greetings!

Now why are setting and system different? You mention wanting to avoid cluttering setting with system garbage but I was wondering how tightly are system and setting linked?