How do you like your published settings? Static or evolving? And through what medium?

[Derren]

Having recently read the newest developments of the Shadowrun metaplot I wondered what type of settings the GMs and players prefer.
A static setting that gets described once, or at least once a edition and never changes or a setting that has ongoing plots and changes during the lifetime of an edition.

And if it is the latter one which medium do you prefer these changes to be communicated with? Novels only? Special campaign books focusing on single events? Lore in every book, even the ones about new mechanics? A web series? Something else?

 

[Shasarak]

Living campaign worlds like Forgotten Realms (pre-WotC) and Golarion are the best settings.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

A setting, to me, describes both a place and time. Shadowrun takes place in Seattle, in the early 2050s, for example. Seattle in the 2070s (or whatever they're up to) doesn't even feel like the same world.

When a setting changes over time, it just ends up invalidating the earlier stuff, or it forces people to ignore the later stuff. In the interest of avoiding both of those options, I would prefer if they fleshed out a setting through further details, rather than by changing what's already established. If any given table wants to move the timeline forward, let them handle that on their own.

 

[pemerton]

I don't care. If I'm using someone else's ideas in my RPGing, I just want them to be good ideas!

(Eg when I run GH I don't fuss very much about which maps to use - I have three or four different versions - and I include ideas from those various versions as suits me.)

 

[DragonLancer]

I prefer campaign settings, especially published ones, to remain static. If the timeline is to be moved forward it should be by the hands of the GM and players at home. Otherwise you end up with a hodgepodge setting eventually which often bares little resemblance to what you liked about it in the first place. Dragonlance and Dark Sun, two of my classic favourites, suffered heavily from this.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I’m of two minds about this. Sometimes, changes in settings can be really interesting. Like my favorite version of the Forgotten Realms is the one depicted in the 3E campaign setting. But my favorite version of Dark Sun is the one originally presented in the first boxed set.

I don’t have any problem deciding what era of a game world in which I want to run a game. And I think some settings have created very cool alternate eras that are worth exploring just as much as the default era, like the Knoghts of the Old Republic era in the Star Wars universe.

I guess that ultimately, the more material the better....give me the options and I’ll decide which I’ll use.

 

[pogre]

I prefer a setting to be a snapshot of time and place and let me develop the timeline. I prefer a setting book, or even better a chapter in the core rule book.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

On the one hand, it’s hard to argue with the classic barebones framework of, say Greyhawk. On the other hand, I still have memories of running the world-shaking Avatar trilogy. I think my vote would be “slowly evolving.” I don’t want to have to keep up with a big metaplot, but I also think a setting should evolve over time. A big adventure now and then can be exciting, but I don’t want a huge sequence I have no choice but to follow, either.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

Mostly static. I don't mind some changes, but detest heavy metaplot. If I am running a group and the Metaplot diverges severely (or the setting has a "big secret" that aren't published until years later that changes the tone (Brave new World, looking at you here)) then either the game must be changed or the usefulness of later books is lessened.

In general the adventure paths in Pathfinder assume none of the others have happened (a few are sequels), but there are some changes over time, but nothing that would derail a campaign. I can live with that.

 

[Lanefan]

Locked-in static. A published setting is nothing more than the start-point for whatever my campaign is about to do to it. If I use that same setting again later I want it to be either a) the same as when I used it the first time or b) changed only by my prior campaign(s) run in it.

If I want a different setting next time then I'll buy or design a different setting.

Put another way: if I buy a setting I only want to have to buy it once and then be able to use it forever as written without any risk of players complaining that I haven't applied the updates.