Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Discussion - LEW 4th Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Graf" data-source="post: 4390904" data-attributes="member: 3087"><p>[sblock=To my intense annoyance, given that we're finally getting going in a positive direction, I kinda had to respond to this]</p><p>I'm assuming this shot is aimed at me. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /></p><p>This may come as a shock but I'm fairly anti-homebrew. I'd prefer to run eberron. But wizards IP policy + enthusiasm for self owned + lots of other stuff (existing LEW eberron, etc) means that's a nonstarter.</p><p></p><p>I do like story games (dogs in the vineyard, etc...) that grant players more authorial control. I'd like to see more cross polination between DnD and story games.</p><p>Heck I liked it so much I <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=224587" target="_blank">started one</a>. Structurally, basically identical to what you want. I'm here to tell you it's both awesomely fun and, at times, a lot of work. And that's with five players.</p><p></p><p>You are planning on having this be a larger game, right?</p><p></p><p></p><p>The imperium = Rome + Everway (more or less)</p><p></p><p>If you're saying dnd begins and ends with Tolkien +/- a bit of greyhawk? </p><p>I'm not really sure what to say.</p><p></p><p>If you're saying most people want to play in the forgotten realms so we should make forgotten realms with the serial numbers filed off? </p><p>That's... well, I think you're selling the whole thing short, but people like what they like.</p><p></p><p>Great go post that setting and beat me in a poll. </p><p>Not gonna write it for you.</p><p></p><p></p><p>In my experience the worst sorts of games are ones where the setting is written without thinking about the kind of game you want to play.</p><p>I saw a lot of games like these in high school (and college), long on idea (usually just one idea) and really short on fun for the players.</p><p></p><p>Fundamentally your proposal boils down to<p style="margin-left: 20px">I want a freeform game, where everyone else conforms to my idea of what dnd is...</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>How's that gonna work out in practice? </p><p>Are the judges supposed to reign everyone else in while you frolic about doing whatever you like?</p><p></p><p>However much you may not the setting proposal (two now) I've worked up (which is fine, they're extreme and weird in your eyes) you're also not dealing with reality.</p><p></p><p>You should look at the characters that were proposed in <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=231450" target="_blank">Rayex's lost game</a>. They're freaking awesome and <em>freaking weird (especially when they're <strong>all in the same world</strong></em>). </p><p>And you're gonna get the same characters proposed in ANY Lew game. </p><p>What're you gonna do, turn them away because you don't like them?<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm :-S" data-shortname=":-S" /></p><p></p><p>-I- think that's the wrong move. They're great characters and they come with motivated and creative players.</p><p>You build <strong>the setting you want for the game you're gonna run</strong> and <strong>the players you have</strong>.</p><p></p><p>If you want to build a setting for you and five of your best friends from LEW then <strong>do </strong>it. </p><p></p><p>But you want to have the community get involved? You're going to build a tent that lets people bring some weirdness/creativity in.</p><p></p><p>I'm not really going to respond to your cracks about whether I'll be playing or not... I think they're a bit inappropriate for EnWorld.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>I -am- sorry that my proposals fall so far outside the bounds of what you consider acceptable. But, however much you may loath them, they address points you should at least consider.</p><p>[/sblock]</p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree. That was basically what I was saying in the "elements" argument. At the same time I think we need to at least think about structure.</p><p></p><p>We're gonna have (hopefully) more than a few players, a setting that works great for five or ten PCs may struggle when you get 20 or 30 running around. Especially if they're weird and unusual, which is pretty much par for the course. (<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=231450" target="_blank">Rayex's lost game</a> is a good cross section of the sort of characters I expect people to want to play.)</p><p></p><p>With that in mind I've ginned up a second proposal (<a href="http://www.enworld.org/wiki/index.php/The_Transitive_Isles" target="_blank">the Transitive Isles</a>) that's radically different from the first. </p><p>(Or rather, it's basically the same, but it'll be different to people who don't separate fluff from structure).</p><p></p><p>Some highlights (the names are placeholders)<p style="margin-left: 20px"> Goal: To create a lightly defined starting area; it will borrow elements from various suggestions but only to the degree necessary to provide a world with enough verisimilitude for roleplaying. It's a mash-up of the current proposals and suggestions on the LEW Discussion thread, with some adjustments necessary to make it easier for judges to judge, DMs to create and players to have unusual characters without it disrupting other people's enjoyment/sense of verisimilitude.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The ''main island'' has always been known for its heroes. The greatest heroes of recent memory were ''the five''. They served as the main islands protectors for a decade growing in power and renown. Eventually their fame grew and petitioners came from far and wide pleading for assistance. Two years ago it was only the brave efforts of the five that saved ''main island'' from destruction at the cost of their lives.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Since then would-be heroes have streamed to the isle. Some seek to take there place, some to honor them, some to struggle to fill the massive vacuum left by their passing and some serve dark forces that seek to take advantage of their deaths. In addition to this sudden upsurge in brave warriors, cunning rogues and wise mystics the death of the five has brought other, less welcome changes. The island's interior had grown dark and dangerous, threatening the logging and other industries the town has long engaged in.</p><p>For more go see <a href="http://www.enworld.org/wiki/index.php/The_Transitive_Isles" target="_blank">the wiki</a>.</p><p></p><p>[sblock=The setting comes with it's own poll]</p><p>You will note that there is no "I hate this" option. </p><p>You can't build a setting by saying by getting a list of "everything that somebody-on-the-net doesn't like". Instead of wasting electrons grousing about how the proposal isn't what you want, propose a clear strong alternative. Try to make it flavorful, fun and interesting. </p><p></p><p>Also consider <strong>how it will work in play</strong>: "I want my character to be able to do anything with no restrictions" will put a lot of pressure on the judges and create a lot of arguments. Try to remember that you are writing for a (hopefully) a large group of players and several judges.</p><p></p><p></p><p>=== Reskining the Setting ===</p><p></p><p>* Instead of islands at sea as the fluff; I suggest re-skinning it as _________ (cities connected by magical portals, whatever)</p><p></p><p>=== Setting Overall ===</p><p></p><p>*I feel the starting area is...</p><p>*...too large</p><p>*...too small</p><p>*...around the right size</p><p>*...too restrictive</p><p>*...too open</p><p>*...strikes a good balance between permissiveness and verisimilitude</p><p>*...too/not enough ______; I suggest instead ________</p><p></p><p>* I think it should be easier/harder for characters/groups to move around because _________; I suggest _________ </p><p></p><p>=== Specific elements ===</p><p></p><p>*I have concerns/doubts about <insert setting element X>; it could <insert adverse impact here> instead I suggest _________</p><p></p><p>* I realize that <insert setting element X> provides certain features _________; however I think that it <insert adverse impact here> I believe that <new setting element> would preserve the good parts of the old element while resolving my concerns.</p><p></p><p>Example: I realize that <u>The Imperium</u> provides certain features (<u>It is a morally ambiguous actor in the world, and provides the opportunity for political games</u>; however I think that it is <u>too obviously like rome and ruins verisimilitude for be because I prefer my fantasy settings to be more like "traditional" DnD</u> I believe that My New Proposal [link] would preserve the good parts of the old element while resolving my concerns.</p><p></p><p>=== Character Creation ===</p><p>*I like having some restrictions on starting character class/race/cultural combinations</p><p> *I'd like to have some restrictions but not these restrictions; instead I suggest ______</p><p>*I'd like to have improbable combinations scrutinized more carefully but not prohibited</p><p>*Instead of negative restrictions I'd like to have positive enforcement of "probable race/class/cultural" combinations (2 extra attribute points or a plus 1 magic item or "fast tracking approval" or ________)</p><p>*No restrictions -- totally freeform</p><p></p><p></p><p>*I don't think the setting allows character type _______ which I would like to play.</p><p>[/sblock]</p><p></p><p>Everything, including the poll, is also editable on the wiki. </p><p>If you want to go write, improve, change, make new pages, add a link by writing [[Alternative proposal]] and going to your own page, whatever.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Graf, post: 4390904, member: 3087"] [sblock=To my intense annoyance, given that we're finally getting going in a positive direction, I kinda had to respond to this] I'm assuming this shot is aimed at me. :p This may come as a shock but I'm fairly anti-homebrew. I'd prefer to run eberron. But wizards IP policy + enthusiasm for self owned + lots of other stuff (existing LEW eberron, etc) means that's a nonstarter. I do like story games (dogs in the vineyard, etc...) that grant players more authorial control. I'd like to see more cross polination between DnD and story games. Heck I liked it so much I [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=224587"]started one[/URL]. Structurally, basically identical to what you want. I'm here to tell you it's both awesomely fun and, at times, a lot of work. And that's with five players. You are planning on having this be a larger game, right? The imperium = Rome + Everway (more or less) If you're saying dnd begins and ends with Tolkien +/- a bit of greyhawk? I'm not really sure what to say. If you're saying most people want to play in the forgotten realms so we should make forgotten realms with the serial numbers filed off? That's... well, I think you're selling the whole thing short, but people like what they like. Great go post that setting and beat me in a poll. Not gonna write it for you. In my experience the worst sorts of games are ones where the setting is written without thinking about the kind of game you want to play. I saw a lot of games like these in high school (and college), long on idea (usually just one idea) and really short on fun for the players. Fundamentally your proposal boils down to[INDENT]I want a freeform game, where everyone else conforms to my idea of what dnd is... [/INDENT]How's that gonna work out in practice? Are the judges supposed to reign everyone else in while you frolic about doing whatever you like? However much you may not the setting proposal (two now) I've worked up (which is fine, they're extreme and weird in your eyes) you're also not dealing with reality. You should look at the characters that were proposed in [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=231450"]Rayex's lost game[/URL]. They're freaking awesome and [I]freaking weird (especially when they're [B]all in the same world[/B][/I]). And you're gonna get the same characters proposed in ANY Lew game. What're you gonna do, turn them away because you don't like them?:-S -I- think that's the wrong move. They're great characters and they come with motivated and creative players. You build [B]the setting you want for the game you're gonna run[/B] and [B]the players you have[/B]. If you want to build a setting for you and five of your best friends from LEW then [B]do [/B]it. But you want to have the community get involved? You're going to build a tent that lets people bring some weirdness/creativity in. I'm not really going to respond to your cracks about whether I'll be playing or not... I think they're a bit inappropriate for EnWorld.:hmm: I -am- sorry that my proposals fall so far outside the bounds of what you consider acceptable. But, however much you may loath them, they address points you should at least consider. [/sblock] I agree. That was basically what I was saying in the "elements" argument. At the same time I think we need to at least think about structure. We're gonna have (hopefully) more than a few players, a setting that works great for five or ten PCs may struggle when you get 20 or 30 running around. Especially if they're weird and unusual, which is pretty much par for the course. ([URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=231450"]Rayex's lost game[/URL] is a good cross section of the sort of characters I expect people to want to play.) With that in mind I've ginned up a second proposal ([URL="http://www.enworld.org/wiki/index.php/The_Transitive_Isles"]the Transitive Isles[/URL]) that's radically different from the first. (Or rather, it's basically the same, but it'll be different to people who don't separate fluff from structure). Some highlights (the names are placeholders)[INDENT] Goal: To create a lightly defined starting area; it will borrow elements from various suggestions but only to the degree necessary to provide a world with enough verisimilitude for roleplaying. It's a mash-up of the current proposals and suggestions on the LEW Discussion thread, with some adjustments necessary to make it easier for judges to judge, DMs to create and players to have unusual characters without it disrupting other people's enjoyment/sense of verisimilitude. The ''main island'' has always been known for its heroes. The greatest heroes of recent memory were ''the five''. They served as the main islands protectors for a decade growing in power and renown. Eventually their fame grew and petitioners came from far and wide pleading for assistance. Two years ago it was only the brave efforts of the five that saved ''main island'' from destruction at the cost of their lives. Since then would-be heroes have streamed to the isle. Some seek to take there place, some to honor them, some to struggle to fill the massive vacuum left by their passing and some serve dark forces that seek to take advantage of their deaths. In addition to this sudden upsurge in brave warriors, cunning rogues and wise mystics the death of the five has brought other, less welcome changes. The island's interior had grown dark and dangerous, threatening the logging and other industries the town has long engaged in.[/INDENT]For more go see [URL="http://www.enworld.org/wiki/index.php/The_Transitive_Isles"]the wiki[/URL]. [sblock=The setting comes with it's own poll] You will note that there is no "I hate this" option. You can't build a setting by saying by getting a list of "everything that somebody-on-the-net doesn't like". Instead of wasting electrons grousing about how the proposal isn't what you want, propose a clear strong alternative. Try to make it flavorful, fun and interesting. Also consider [B]how it will work in play[/B]: "I want my character to be able to do anything with no restrictions" will put a lot of pressure on the judges and create a lot of arguments. Try to remember that you are writing for a (hopefully) a large group of players and several judges. === Reskining the Setting === * Instead of islands at sea as the fluff; I suggest re-skinning it as _________ (cities connected by magical portals, whatever) === Setting Overall === *I feel the starting area is... *...too large *...too small *...around the right size *...too restrictive *...too open *...strikes a good balance between permissiveness and verisimilitude *...too/not enough ______; I suggest instead ________ * I think it should be easier/harder for characters/groups to move around because _________; I suggest _________ === Specific elements === *I have concerns/doubts about <insert setting element X>; it could <insert adverse impact here> instead I suggest _________ * I realize that <insert setting element X> provides certain features _________; however I think that it <insert adverse impact here> I believe that <new setting element> would preserve the good parts of the old element while resolving my concerns. Example: I realize that [U]The Imperium[/U] provides certain features ([U]It is a morally ambiguous actor in the world, and provides the opportunity for political games[/U]; however I think that it is [U]too obviously like rome and ruins verisimilitude for be because I prefer my fantasy settings to be more like "traditional" DnD[/U] I believe that My New Proposal [link] would preserve the good parts of the old element while resolving my concerns. === Character Creation === *I like having some restrictions on starting character class/race/cultural combinations *I'd like to have some restrictions but not these restrictions; instead I suggest ______ *I'd like to have improbable combinations scrutinized more carefully but not prohibited *Instead of negative restrictions I'd like to have positive enforcement of "probable race/class/cultural" combinations (2 extra attribute points or a plus 1 magic item or "fast tracking approval" or ________) *No restrictions -- totally freeform *I don't think the setting allows character type _______ which I would like to play. [/sblock] Everything, including the poll, is also editable on the wiki. If you want to go write, improve, change, make new pages, add a link by writing [[Alternative proposal]] and going to your own page, whatever. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Discussion - LEW 4th Edition
Top