4E Setting Design: Using Supplements

[Jürgen Hubert]

I'd go for option "A", and then offer a free yearly .pdf with a few details as to how to add in PHB 3...4...5...etc as they're published.

I'm not quite sure if I could actually do that under the GSL:

3. Licensed Products. The license granted in Section 4 is for use solely in connection with Licensee’s publication, distribution, and sale of roleplaying games and roleplaying game supplements that contain the Licensed Materials and are published in a hardcover or soft-cover printed book format or in a single-download electronic book format (such as .pdf), and accessory products to the foregoing roleplaying games and roleplaying game supplements that are not otherwise listed as excluded in Section 5.5 (“Licensed Products”).

What does "single-download electronic book" mean here, precisely? Does it mean that it's not permissible to download the same PDF multiple times for free? (And how does this affect selling PDFs at stores like e23, where it is possible to download a single PDF as often as you want once you have bought it?)

Though I could make the update PDFs reasonably cheap. And charging a bit of extra money for them would be appropriate, since this represents extra work.

 

[TerraDave]

I think what is being suggested are expansions (ie new, if small, products) that add to the setting as new rules are released.

If you want to anticipate core II up front--which I think is fine--I would still give more weight to core I. More people will have it and use it.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I think what is being suggested are expansions (ie new, if small, products) that add to the setting as new rules are released.

That's what my original intention was as well - build the initial release of Urbis on the Core Rules I, and then release supplements that explain how to incorporate those additional rules into the setting. But now I am not so sure.

 

[howandwhy99]

As long as all other things are equal, which approach to designing the setting would be preferable to you:

b) Fully integrate the additional rules material from the PHB II/DMG II/MM II into the setting from the start, and leave it to the DM to drop any material he doesn't use.

"All other things equial" then B, but I rarely use settings as published. I see them as toolboxes to steal from for my own settings. So the greater diversity of material you include, the more for me to steal. Saying that, quality comes first.

If you really are trying to sell the setting though, to players who will say "we want to play in XYZ-world", then I think you should ignore anything that WotC publishes and adhere strictly to the best world you can possibly create.

I like the kitchen sink approach with the DM tying in to the world whatever folks want to add. But I still have a "Carebearing the Setting" rule. If you want to play a Carebear or something equally disagreeable to the rest of the group, they are the ones who are going to say no. And the group saying no is perfectly legit. I prefer playing together rather than playing a character I knew got on others' nerves.

So including all WotC races and classes simply to be completist I find unnecessary and potentially aggravating. For instance, I like hero-based games and dislike tieflings for this reason specifically. They are a race of evil demon-men where, instead of one case like Drizzt being an anti-social anti-hero, you have an entire race coloring the setting.

 

[Mercule]

I don't think all other things can be equal. I'd buy a setting based on fluff, not crunch. You may also be screwed either way. If you require PHB2, there will be people who resent having to buy more books. On the other hand, I'd put money on a future class that has the popularity that the 3.5 warlock had -- enough to be made baseline core in the next edition. If you end up not having support for that class, people won't be happy.

I think the best approach (without regard for legality, as IANAL) is to do as suggested above and include notes for available classes/races at the time of publication, then provide update notes later.

 

[Mercule]

I don't think all other things can be equal. I'd buy a setting based on fluff, not crunch. You may also be screwed either way. If you require PHB2, there will be people who resent having to buy more books. On the other hand, I'd put money on a future class that has the popularity that the 3.5 warlock had -- enough to be made baseline core in the next edition. If you end up not having support for that class, people won't be happy.

I think the best approach (without regard for legality, as IANAL) is to do as suggested above and include notes for available classes/races at the time of publication, then provide update notes later.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

"Other" - I think a campaign world shouldn't try to define itself by races and classes. It should be defined by the history, feel and look of the world. That way when new material comes out a well written campaign setting will help a DM define what pieces of the new rules feel right for the campaign.

Things like "Exactly, if you're running a Dragonlance campaign, you will not be using the Psionic power source" are pure opinion to me. It is certainly justifiable for Steely Dan to feel that psionics are not a good fit for a Dragonlance campaign, whereas other DMs may find a way to make it fit within the mileau.

Continuing to use Draginlance as an example, the campaign sourcebook should not have been writen as "no clerics." All the campaign sourcebook really needed to say was that the gods abandoned the people of Krynn and the people now worshipped false gods. The DM can then decide how the divine power source fits into his campaign. A DM could decide to allow a cleric for his own reasons, ala Crysania or some other reason altogether.

The less you tie the campaign setting to the specific rules, the more adaptable the setting becomes.

Edit: I don't mean to say that a campaign setting shouldn't have its own races and classes, just avoid the outright ruling out or outright requirement of other people's material.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

"Other" - I think a campaign world shouldn't try to define itself by races and classes. It should be defined by the history, feel and look of the world.

The thing is, as long as the setting is still in development, all these things are adjustable. I mean, I started working on Urbis even before D&D 3.5 came out, so for most of its development life it didn't have any eladrins, dragonborn, or tieflings.

But now that D&D 4E came out, I've adjusted the setting to make them fit - and especially in the case of eladrins and dragonborn, the fit is as natural as if they had been in there from the beginning!

Besides, one of my design goals for Urbis always had been: "Create a setting that fits the Core Rules". But what does "Core Rules" mean, exactly? That's what I have recently been wrestling with.

 

[MightyTev]

I'm not quite sure if I could actually do that under the GSL:



What does "single-download electronic book" mean here, precisely? Does it mean that it's not permissible to download the same PDF multiple times for free? (And how does this affect selling PDFs at stores like e23, where it is possible to download a single PDF as often as you want once you have bought it?)

Though I could make the update PDFs reasonably cheap. And charging a bit of extra money for them would be appropriate, since this represents extra work.

You need to be looking at the next bit - and accessory products to the foregoing roleplaying games and roleplaying game supplements that are not otherwise listed as excluded in Section 5.5 - because the new additions will be accessory products to the main setting. What does 5.5 say?

 

[Dykstrav]

Should I stick to the Core Rules I, and make the Core Rules II an option that can be easily added or removed from the setting as the DM chooses? Or should I integrate the full range of options from the Core Rules II from the start, therefore making it pretty much mandatory to buy these books to use the setting fully?

I'd advise you to incorporate PHBII and similar sources from the ground up. Consider psionics for Dark Sun and Eberron. Dark Sun actually told you on the back of the box that the Psionics Handbook was required, and Eberron included several psionic elements right from the get-go. I never heard anyone griping about having to pick up an extra book beyond the core about those products. Later 3.5 products even supplemented psionics with tidbit powers and prestige classes here and there in sourcebooks.

I also think that there will be more people with the new material that would appreciate it being incorporated than holdhouts that may resent it. After all, how many people do you know that are holding out to convert to 4E until the druid is in? I know of six myself...