Creating your world: Is it a struggle or does it just come to you?

For me, it isn't a struggle at all. My world feels real to me, and when I sit down to create it, it feels more like it's being revealed to me, rather than me making things up.

This happens whether I'm preparing ahead of time, or whether I'm free-balling it during play.

I know I'm not the only one who feels this way, I think there are others who feel this way during the creative process.

I'll tell you one story to illustrate:

The PCs were in a city called Middleton, which was a trading town half-way between the human and elven kingdoms, and run by a gnome called Nyrond the Negotiator.

I told the PCs that something was off, that things were not as they appear.

What they could see was a clean, well-kept, very wealthy town which had no crime or problems.

Nyrond's headquarters was a glamorous castle, inlaid with gold trimmings and gems of all colors and descriptions.

At this point, I did not know what the secret was.

But one of the PCs had a pair of Goggles of True Seeing, so I had to make up something quick.

They put on the goggles, and what they saw, I made up on the spot right there:

The town, in actuality, was extremely poor and rundown. There were beggars and homeless people everywhere. Nyrond's castle was a brutally efficient fortress of simple gray stone blocks.

A powerful illusion had been cast on the city, to make it appear prosperous, and to turn the beggars and homeless invisible to those not wearing Goggles of True Seeing.

Now mind you, I did not know this going in, it came to me like it was just something that had always been true.

The explanation I made up later, the elves had cut off Nyrond's exclusive trading deal and his town had suffered a deep depression as a result.

So how about you? Is it is a struggle to make things up, or do ideas just appear in your mind?

Worldbuilding is one of my favourite aspects of D&D. I can't say I struggle with it and I tend to do it pretty ad hoc, as things spring to mind. Sometimes I have built myself into a corner as I make things up on a the spot, sure, but I also take a lot of joy out of making up convoluted justifications for the more silly things I throw out.

A bit of both. I find coming up with the "big picture" stuff comes quite easily, but filling in the detail a lot harder. Plus, I tend to repeat themes a great deal, so it's some effort to make sure that that is kept to a minimum.

I work on my setting as a hobby and I'm not just talking about prep for an upcoming session. It's my way of "playing" when we're not actually playing. As a result, I have layers and layers of things going on all across my setting at any given time. The vast majority of this work will never be seen or noticed by my players and I'm okay with that. It makes running campaigns within my setting all the more rewarding for me to observe as a DM and I've had many players comment on how easy it is for them to believe in the setting. I have to restrain myself from pouring too much information on my players at the table, only giving them details when they seem actively interested or for what is essentially necessary for them to make intelligent decisions.

I'm a sucker for systems: personality types, star signs, Hogwarts houses, Avatar: The Last Airbender's four elements; anything that gives structure to the world and offers you prepackaged themes. For me, the key to reaching that state where the plot seems to write itself is working within a system of logical constraints.

For example, one of my cultures is symbolized by Orbs (analogous to the Tarot's Cups). If I were to create an Orbs character, they would be measured, noble and spiritual. Let's say... a scholar. Next, a character needs a motivation; and if I wanted it to be challenging one, I'd make it the opposite of Orbs, which is Pyres: wild and free-willed. The result would be a scholar who wants to capture and tame a wild beast of legend. But without building blocks, I would just blank.

The obvious downside of this approach is how predictable everything is, but it's still richer than anything I could ever make up on the spot. Adding layers helps too.

To good improvisers like Calithorne and Viking Bastard: are you just naturals or are there specific habits you engage in that help keep the ideas coming?

Some of both, as I am playing sci-fi, near future Earth and it's stellar environs out to ~25 light-years, there has been some definite work to it; 4/5ths it's a labor of love, and I have become good enough at designing worlds, that with a few details, I can make it fall together. Then again, translating it for players to understand can be difficult sometimes, some just get it, others do not.

Scrollcat said:

I'm a sucker for systems: personality types, star signs, Hogwarts houses, Avatar: The Last Airbender's four elements; anything that gives structure to the world and offers you prepackaged themes. For me, the key to reaching that state where the plot seems to write itself is working within a system of logical constraints.

For example, one of my cultures is symbolized by Orbs (analogous to the Tarot's Cups). If I were to create an Orbs character, they would be measured, noble and spiritual. Let's say... a scholar. Next, a character needs a motivation; and if I wanted it to be challenging one, I'd make it the opposite of Orbs, which is Pyres: wild and free-willed. The result would be a scholar who wants to capture and tame a wild beast of legend. But without building blocks, I would just blank.

The obvious downside of this approach is how predictable everything is, but it's still richer than anything I could ever make up on the spot. Adding layers helps too.

To good improvisers like Calithorne and Viking Bastard: are you just naturals or are there specific habits you engage in that help keep the ideas coming?

Click to expand...

The key to good improvisation is to have a core set of material around which to build. For example, in my science fiction campaign, I have made the core information of 35 planets, which are on index cards. These cards have a drawing of the planet, their population, government type, economic type, their imports, exports and what goods are contraband. So when characters go there, I have enough core information to "wing it" on the details.

delericho said:

A bit of both. I find coming up with the "big picture" stuff comes quite easily, but filling in the detail a lot harder. Plus, I tend to repeat themes a great deal, so it's some effort to make sure that that is kept to a minimum.

Click to expand...

This.

delericho said:

A bit of both. I find coming up with the "big picture" stuff comes quite easily, but filling in the detail a lot harder. Plus, I tend to repeat themes a great deal, so it's some effort to make sure that that is kept to a minimum.

Click to expand...

Sometimes, the process is as easy as jumping in a pool on a hot summer day. Sometimes it’s as difficult as cleaning out the cooler you forgot in the garage last summer- the lair of The Smell.

Scrollcat said:

To good improvisers like Calithorne and Viking Bastard: are you just naturals or are there specific habits you engage in that help keep the ideas coming?

Click to expand...

I just keep asking myself "why?" until I drill down to the level of detail I need. To use your example above:

What legendary beast are we taming? I start with...

Why is our Pyres character a scholar of Orbs? - Family tradition, changed his mind...

I like that one. People often admire what they themselves lack. So our wild and free scholar joined an Orbs institution because he romanticized its virtues. Later in life he has realized what a poor fit he is. While he might excel at his profession, he doesn't fit in with his colleagues.

Why tame a legendary beast? - Stick it to the stuffy Orbs folks, journey of self-discovery...

Again, I like my second idea. Subconsciously, he knows taming the beast is an opportunity to get out of the halls of learning and see the world; he'll get to experience some freedom. More than that, he hopes he'll find in the legendary beast some answers to questions about himself. The beast embodies attributes he has always disliked about himself - unpredictability, short attention span, and spontaneity. Perhaps by conquering the beast he will conquer himself, or perhaps he will learn to appreciate his own wild qualities. That gives us enough information to answer...

What legendary beast are we taming?

A paragon of freedom and unpredictability seems appropriate - a noble exemplar of chaos. My first thought is a Couatl. Though they are always LG, they are based heavily on the Mesoamerican deity named Quetzalcoatl, the Aztec god of wind, air, and learning. It's a perfect embodiment of our scholar's own dichotomy.

That's enough to begin play, so I'd stop there and let the rest evolve organically.