What makes a D&D/d20 Campaign Setting great?

[Knightfall]

Okay,

So this question has been knocking around in my brain for quite some time. Basicially, I'm wondering what makes a D&D/d20 Campaign Setting stand out. Is it all about originality, or is there more to it than that?

Why do campaigns like the Scarred Lands and Dragonstar fail to last (even with diehard fans), while other campaigns continue to receive company support (i.e. Freeport)? Is it just about timing things right? Or is it more to do with marketing and production value?

Is there such a thing as too many d20 System campaign settings? Also, does a campaign setting being OGL-based instead of just standard d20-based make a difference (i.e. Conan RPG)?

And what would you like to see, in the future, when it comes to the d20 System and the OGL? Basically, what else is there to be done, campaign setting-wise? Is there anything else "new" to be done? And I'm not talking about new licensed games, but "new" campaigns not based on an fantasy/scifi author's IP.

Just stirring up trouble (and some debate),

Knightfall1972

 

[Nightfall]

Uhm because GR is willing to stick with it unlike White Wolf that only cares about profit? Just my theory.

 

[Imruphel]

I've been a fan of the Forgotten Realms for about 15 years for the following reasons:

1. I love its detailed history. The great thing about history is that it provides plenty of hooks for adventures plus it makes designing dungeons that much easier because it provides a reason for a ruin (or whatever) to exist. This helps with the sense of verisimilitude.
2. I love its detailed pantheon. I think in a game where clerics (and other divine spellcasters) can wield the powers of the ones they worship, it makes sense for those powers to be a little bit involved with the world even if it is through the machinations of those clerics (I avoid direct divine intervention as I believe that should be the province of the turgid dreck that is otherwise known as FR novels).

That's a long way of saying that FR provides me with stacks of plot hooks because of the detail that exists about both its history and the various deities. I would expect that I would continue to run FR games even if/when the setting is no longer supported. In fact, the lack of support wouldn't worry me: there's enough material already and I typically hate (loathe and detest) the new plotlines introduced by the novels.

While I'm not necessarily claiming that FR is great (that's a sure fire way of starting a flame war), I find it really easy to DM there because there's some sort of hook and "space" for nearly any idea I may have for a campaign that I want to explore.

Who knows why campaign settings fail? Part of the problem is that there is very little money in the RPG industry so that makes continued support for a line difficult.

As for new settings, is there really anything new under the sun (thanks Ecclesiastes)?

Nightfall,

I hope you're not implying that it's wrong for a company to care about profit.

 

[Piratecat]

Robert, I'm convinced that campaign settings need a certain amount of momentum - an "installed base" of continuing players - to survive. They need people to clamor for them, to request their DMs to run them. They need for fans to become emotionally invested in the setting once they start playing it.

There's a certain amount of nostalgia at work here that continues to power the Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk and Dark Sun. There's also a learning curve; if you've been exposed to the Forgotten Realms throughout 1e and 2e, you have a better grasp of its layout and politics than if it were a new setting. I think that learning curve has helped Green Ronin's Freeport. "Piratical city" is an easy concept to grasp, and one that really sounds fun; GR just made it easy to keep people interested by producing good quality products.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

Freeport has the advantage of being something that you can drop into another setting or your personal homebrew, unlike Scarred Lands, etc. which you need to take pretty much complete.

As for what I'd like to see, I'd like more things like Freeport - a detailed, well-written and supported portion of a world that can be easily dropped into my own games with a minimum of effort required to file off the serial numbers.

 

[Psion]

So this question has been knocking around in my brain for quite some time. Basicially, I'm wondering what makes a D&D/d20 Campaign Setting stand out. Is it all about originality, or is there more to it than that?

Why do campaigns like the Scarred Lands and Dragonstar fail to last (even with diehard fans), while other campaigns continue to receive company support (i.e. Freeport)? Is it just about timing things right? Or is it more to do with marketing and production value?

This is really a bunch of different questions rolled into one. Are great campaign settings just those that continue to receive support? Planescape is a fan favorite, yet WotC refuses to support it directly. Can there only be one reason a given setting fails or suceeded?

I can offer my reasons that I think those two particular settings "failed".

Scarred Lands

• S&SS dove into it before any authors had developed any real proficiency with the system. This was a bit of a gambit that had the opportunity to earn them some early market share, but it didn't pay off.
• Overpublished. You mention freeport as "successful"; I think you will find that there are several times as many books published for it. For a third party setting, that was too many books for a setting. That made it too hard for fans to absorb. (I was stunned they went on to make other continents before Ghelspad was really fleshed out.) When asking some fellows why they didn't get into the setting, they relayed that they felt like the setting was too much to buy into. And I can understand why. I'm probably the second most rabid SL fan on this board, but I still have 3 books to get.
• The fact that there was so much material for it meant they were in a position to be hurt real bad by the 3.5 transition. Too much 3.0 material was left untranslated because there is no way they could update all that.
• The breadth of the setting also meant that they had to tap a lot of authors. The setting has a dizzying array of neat details, but it does sort of have a bit of a "too many cooks" feel, and many of the authors tapped weren't up to the design task (and/or the editors didn't do a good enough job catching some unbalanced stuff.)
• The adventures were too long coming, and when they did come, had some painfully bad editorial blunders. Freeport LAUNCHED on an adventure. This made Freeport a far easier setting to get into, by way of comparison.
• On a totally different note, the S&SS forums sucked. I think this presented a real barrier to a strong fan community forming.

Dragonstar

• The game took too long to get to market. The therefore failed to capitalize on initial excitement for the setting.
• After a strong first book, the Guide to the Galaxy was a bit weak. The setting behind Dragonstar begged more extensive treatment so groups could explore the nuances of the Dragon Empire and the brewing rebellion. Instead, they gave us a book with a lot of micro details. That's not what it took to get the setting to the next level.
• D20 Modern hurt the game... it drew away much of the gun-bunny excitement for Dragonstar, and many people thought that the modern classes made more sense for Dragonstar.

Is there such a thing as too many d20 System campaign settings?

I think we are there.

Also, does a campaign setting being OGL-based instead of just standard d20-based make a difference (i.e. Conan RPG)?

I think Conan has an advantage because Conan fans want it, not so much because of OGL. OGL just helped grease the skids to a) make some basic changes to make it more like the setting it emulates, b) made it more possible to appeal to non-d20/D&D fans.

 

[Psion]

Freeport has the advantage of being something that you can drop into another setting or your personal homebrew, unlike Scarred Lands, etc. which you need to take pretty much complete.

That's a pretty good point too. But then, Bluffside was similar, but failed. I think that this is in large part due to the fact that there was a lot more professional experience behind Freeport, and it shows in the quality of the product.

But still, there's something... nifty... about Bluffside.

 

[Eosin the Red]

First, I think PC is spot on.

Now to go a little further, I think a setting needs to know what it does and it needs to do that well. Plenty of settings have failed financially but continue to live on because they "hit the sweet spot" and continued to do so. Birthright, Planescape, Dark Sun, Pendragon, Midnight, Freeport, L5R, and 7th Sea all seem to fall into this boat IMO (Disclaimer, I don't like all these games but they all "survive" even if they failed to thrive.) Obviously, making a game about albino monkeys surviving the ravages of pirate-ninja island isn't going to garner much respect nor a broad enough base to survive but if you can get the buzz, appeal to a "set," and do your thing well people will continue to play.

 

[DaveMage]

Okay,

Is there such a thing as too many d20 System campaign settings? Also, does a campaign setting being OGL-based instead of just standard d20-based make a difference (i.e. Conan RPG)?

And what would you like to see, in the future, when it comes to the d20 System and the OGL? Basically, what else is there to be done, campaign setting-wise? Is there anything else "new" to be done? And I'm not talking about new licensed games, but "new" campaigns not based on an fantasy/scifi author's IP.

I think at this point, we are saturated with settings and a new one would have to be really special to stand out.

If I want old school, I'll do Wilderlands. If I want Official D&D, I'll do Forgotten Realms or Eberron. If I want steampunk, there's the Iron Kingdoms or Dragonmech. If I want to talk like a pirate (arrrg!), there's Freeport. If I want to ride a little on the weird races side, I'll do Oathbound.

Want to play in a dark setting? Play Midnight
Want to play in a golden age? Play Dawnforge
Want to play in a living setting? Go Greyhawk or Aracnis.
Want to play in gothic semi-horror-style? Go Ravenloft or The Hunt: Rise of Evil

I have all the setting goodness I need for the rest of my gaming life (although I would like to see some of the above completed (*cough* Oathbound *cough*).

 

[wedgeski]

Nostalgia and/or support are, to me anyway, the keys. Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dragonlance... these are seminal settings that helped mould the game. All of the folks who played D&D through the 80's to the present day know these settings... trust these settings... and with FR at least, have been treated to sumptuous, headline products from all of the various caretakers of D&D (I still look at the 3rd Edition FR sourcebook with complete awe, even though I don't DM the setting myself).