Campaign Settings: metaplot or frozen?

[blargney the second]

Nice one, Klaus.

 

[frankthedm]

Having seen metaplot ruin the Darksun setting, I say frozen.

Canon novels should be about the setting leading up to the start of the campaign, not calling the shots after it has started.

 

[evildmguy]

Having seen metaplot ruin the Darksun setting, I say frozen.

Canon novels should be about the setting leading up to the start of the campaign, not calling the shots after it has started.

But was that metaplot or the plan? I read recently that they intended this kind of change right away but thought the first boxed set was a good starting point.

So, should they have come out after that?

Of course, don't get me wrong, if they had not advanced the years or plot, but still released the new sets with more lands, it could be interesting.

Or maybe, publishers leave novels for "their own ideas of the setting" but leave it separate from the game books?

edg

 

[Arnwyn]

Frozen and static only.

New products should detail geography, politics, power groups, etc as of the date of the main campaign setting book.

No time advancement whatsoever, as the "living and breathing world" (the nonsensical argument used to try to justify metaplot) is to be determined by the DM and players.

 

[boerngrim]

Hi.
I'd say Frozen, mostly. Once I start a campaign I ignore any published changes made to the setting either in novels, source books, or what have you, unless I like the change then I may include it in the campaign. If a change doesn't affect my PCs directly though I won't mess with it. Most players I've known don't care much about the big metaplot.
Thanks.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Frozen.

The campaign setting is my sandbox. It defines the boundaries, and contains the sand. But I want to be the wone playing in it. I dislike it when a big bully comes in and knocks things over, pours in more sand, or kicks sand out of my sandbox without my permission.

 

[Graybeard]

I prefer campaign settings to be frozen. That way I can create my own future events as I go and not have to worry about a player saying that an event in my game doesn't match the book. If the designers want to advance the timeline with a new edition, then they should create a separate book just for the changes/updates. That way, no one has to spend the money on a new campaign setting book. If they want the new information, they just need to buy a smaller book for less money.

 

[davidschwartznz]

Having seen metaplot ruin the Darksun setting, I say frozen.

And Planescape...

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Waldorf: "Better to reign in Hell than to serve in Heaven!"
Statler: "Anything's better than this!"
Both: "AH HA HA HA HA HA HA!"

Those are two scary evil gods ...

You fail to get the point.

 

[Beginning of the End]

Having played in a game like that (several linked campaigns) in the Forgotten Realms since the early '90s (and still going on), I hate that fact. The DM will put in things in undetailed places that we can change, but they we get messed up when that locale is later detailed.

I've never understood the fetishization of "canon" material, and this is an excellent example of why. The problem here is not the advancing metaplot, it's ANY additional details of the campaign world being published (because such details might contradict what you've already developed independently).