I am most certainly a GM who is a frustrated writer and enjoys creating worlds in order to creatively stretch my toes in the sand.

However, I find that the best world-building with RPG's is done slowly, not with a world that is entirely realized but a world that the GM and the players realize together.

Has anyone had a first game of a campaign be with Universalis and then used and expanded on the world you all created together?

I have more to say on this but this will be a good starting point.

Hi Judd.

I don't quite understand your question. Could you rephrase it?

Hi Judd,

No, but I've been wanting to do exactly what you describe: create a world with my group using Universalis, then jump into it using Hero Wars or Sorcerer or Story Engine, fleshing out the details via play. It's a wonderful way to get group buy-in, I think.

Best,

Blake

Oh. I think I get it now. Would this be better suited to the Universalis forum? Or qualified by "using Universalis or some other method to creat the setting" That was what confused me.

I think we can expand this a bit and make it suitable.

For one, Aria was an influcence on our design in some small, mostly theoretical, ways. In that game, you do exactly what you describe, making the world and legends and then playing in it. Similarly, I think that COTEC is going to do this to an extent with it's Genesis session.

So, I guess the answer is yes, seems totally plausible to use one system to create a world and another to play in it. Primeval anyone?

So what are you waiting for? Be the first on the block to try out this technique and let us all know how it goes.

Mike

Multiverser actually recommends the technique (one of several) of bringing a player into an undefined world and building it around him as he moves; however, it's not assumed that you would then use the world for another game--although I'm sure you could.

I've done it a few times, and had it done to me when I was playing.

--M. J. Young

Hi Judd,

Perhaps the topic twisted as you typed, but what is the significance of the term overbrewing, in your title? Is there a concern that you have about the process which didn't happen to get articulated in your post?

Best,
Ron

I'm sorry, folks, I have this idea that is all foggy in my head but I'm groping for it.

By overbrewing I mean over-thinking a world so that there aren't enough spaces for the players to fill. I think I have over-made worlds so that the players aren't a part of the process and they feel like tourists rather than rip-roaring heroes.

I was just thinking of ways to include PC's in the world-building process. Certainly inspired by Mithras' Sword and Sorcery - Collaboration in Action thread.

Universalis seemed like a ready-made system for collaborative storytelling and I think it would be neat to use a blank map as the record keeping.

Thanks for your patience,

Judd

I run an after-school program and might use a version of this with the students but I am also interested in using it with my more regular groups.

Hi Judd,

You've probably seen this already, but the current really twisted mean idea thread in the Riddle of Steel forum offers some good ideas about these issues. As a Sorcerer & Sword veteran, as well, you've considered how GM-context, player-input during prep can be combined. Do any of these ideas seem to shake out into usable version for you?

Best,
Ron

Paka wrote: By overbrewing I mean over-thinking a world so that there aren't enough spaces for the players to fill. I think I have over-made worlds so that the players aren't a part of the process and they feel like tourists rather than rip-roaring heroes.

I think what I am also wrestling with is the difference between a good imaginative idea and a good gaming idea.

It is beginning to come together for me, yeah.

Paka wrote: I think what I am also wrestling with is the difference between a good imaginative idea and a good gaming idea.