Forked from "An Epiphany" thread: Is World Building "Necessary"?

[billd91]

Y'know what? I'm not going to apologize for this one. The Nazi Zombie Bugbear encounter that you drop into the campaign for no reason other than you happened to roll on the random encounter table is bad gaming. It serves absolutely no purpose.

To me, if that's good gaming, then so is any MMO or CRPG you care to name where you have exactly this sort of thing.

Explain to me how a "role" playing game is well served by having pointless, meaningless combat parachuted into the campaign and how does it not turn tabletop RPG's into a PnP version of Diablo?

It's good because the combat isn't actually pointless or meaningless. Random encounters serve to keep the PCs mindful that they are in a dangerous area even if they have already killed all the creatures in the encounter space, that not all fights are initiated by them, that they can't play by going nova for all encounters, that they have to conserve resources against unknown dangers, and, because the encounter tables are keyed to the location (perhaps more general, perhaps more specific) they serve as potential sources of information about the surroundings assuming the PCs don't just hack the creatures to death.

Random encounters are a tool to use in promoting good gaming. They can be poorly used or well used, but in and of themselves they are not any sort of hallmark of bad gaming.

 

[GnomeWorks]

Really? Not everything in a role play game needs to serve a story? Honestly? THAT'S the point you want to make. That a collection of random fights with absolutely no connection makes a GOOD role playing game? Is this really what you want to say?

Oh yes, because clearly that's all a game is going to consist. Your hyperbole sucks, and so does your position.

Just because there is a story going on does not mean that everything needs to cater to it, not everything needs to be relevant to it. Multiple stories can go on, and there can be random events that occur that have absolutely nothing to do with them!

That's how life works, and a game that fails to acknowledge such a thing is meaningless.

And a game where events occur that don't revolve around the PC's? Why would you as the DM bother and why would I as the player care? If something happens that has no relation to my character, then what purpose does it serve? If the dragon kidnaps a princess in a land I've never heard of and cannot get to, who cares?

You - as a player - would probably not care about things happening elsewhere, mainly because you seem fixated on the idea that the DM is going to hand-feed you a plot and you seem utterly unwilling to deviate from the idea that there is a central story going on.

The dragon kidnapping a princess in another land might not matter, but it also might. The players should be able to decide for themselves what they're going to deal with, rather than have me, as DM, decide for them. Because at that point, they might as well go play WoW or Diablo, because I have removed meaningful choice from the game.

Sorry, but I do believe that the campaign DOES revolve around the PC's. It would be like spending twenty minutes of Star Wars watching random Storm Trooper talk to his captain about the price of new blaster parts. WHO CARES?

Your hyperbole sucks again.

Just because there are things going on above and beyond the PCs does not mean that the camera leaves them. They learn of other events from their perspective; it's not like we do cut-scenes or some crap like that. If they have no interest in events not immediately pertaining to their yellow brick road, then - unless those events happen right on it - they're not going to hear about them.

I'm talking about the DM who attacks the party for no reason, other than he rolled a 1 on some arbitrary die and then rolled 15 on the "Wilderness encounter" table. It has no story, no reason to be there. It's totally disconnected from everything. That the DM now has to flail around trying to retcon his setting to fit in with this random event pretty much blows any idea of continuity out of the water.

Random crap happens all the time. Why does everything have to make sense? It doesn't. The world doesn't have a story. Stories happen within the setting, but the setting itself doesn't freaking care.

And I really seriously doubt that trying to establish where a random monster came from - a truly random monster - would seriously deal a deathblow to my setting's continuity. That's just... ridiculous.

Or, to put it another way, if the dragon shows up in the town out of the blue, one would reasonably ask, "How come no one's ever heard stories about a great big dragon that lives around here?"

If you are so unimaginative as to be unable to come up with a vaguely-reasonable answer to that question in ten seconds, I feel sorry for you and your players.

 

[Ourph]

Will everything about the City of Gulmenghast be detailed before play? No. Will more than enough be detailed that the PC's will be able to run in almost any direction they want to, and I'll be bale to handle it with ease... I believe so since this is how I tend to world build, but we'll see.

I don't think the question is "Will you be able to handle it?", the question is "Will you need to rely primarily on improvisation?". Even with a volume the size of Ptolus (plus all the supporting material) as a backdrop for my current 4e campaign, I'm still improvising quite a bit every session. Having that support material helps with the improv. and probably keeps it more cohesive, but it's still a huge part of each session (and I wouldn't say I'm running a 100% sandbox campaign either). So when someone indicates that not only a single city in their campaign world, but the entire world is so detailed that the PCs can, literally, jettison the current campaign context and do something completely unrelated and it won't mean the DM is essentially winging the entire session, I'm a little dubious.

 

[Imaro]

I don't think the question is "Will you be able to handle it?", the question is "Will you need to rely primarily on improvisation?". Even with a volume the size of Ptolus (plus all the supporting material) as a backdrop for my current 4e campaign, I'm still improvising quite a bit every session. Having that support material helps with the improv. and probably keeps it more cohesive, but it's still a huge part of each session (and I wouldn't say I'm running a 100% sandbox campaign either). So when someone indicates that not only a single city in their campaign world, but the entire world is so detailed that the PCs can, literally, jettison the current campaign context and do something completely unrelated and it won't mean the DM is essentially winging the entire session, I'm a little dubious.

Well first the city is basically my entire "world" for the campaign (It drifts in the dark aether between portals to other worlds known as "stars"), it's something I've wanted to do in the vein of games like GTA and Saint's Row for awhile. Secondly I am right now detailing the different sections, power structures within, adventuring sites, how they are connected, random encounters(using customized tables) within the different wards, Major and minor NPC's of note and relationship maps for them where applicable, as well as goals and motivations of NPC's, etc.... Again I have about 6 months to slowly construct this so I'm not pressed for time.

I'm sorry you've never encountered someone who was able to do this beforehand, but my group and I have been playing together for years and it's just how I construct my worlds. I give myself ample time to fully flesh it out... I don't try to run a campaign on a weeks prep, but that's just me... some may prefer their method to mine, but the experience my group has with my games... as well as the fact that we've stayed together so long... seems to indicate, at least for me, this is a valid and beneficial method. YMMV and all that, but all I'm really saying is... don't tell me your opinions are objective fact when it comes to differing methodologies on campaign design.

 

[rounser]

See, this is why I asked the Keep on the Borderlands quesstions, because you guys have failed to define terms and are filtering what Hussar says through your own assumptions.

A lot of what I'm reading here doesn't even get the basic idea of what he's saying, and is just extrapolating it into complete straw men. Just like the 56 page thread.

 

[Ourph]

Well first the city is basically my entire "world" for the campaign (It drifts in the dark aether between portals to other worlds known as "stars"), it's something I've wanted to do in the vein of games like GTA and Saint's Row for awhile. Secondly I am right now detailing the different sections, power structures within, adventuring sites, how they are connected, random encounters(using customized tables) within the different wards, Major and minor NPC's of note and relationship maps for them where applicable, as well as goals and motivations of NPC's, etc.... Again I have about 6 months to slowly construct this so I'm not pressed for time.

I'm still dubious that, even with 6 months time, you're going to have notes on this city that are as detailed as the Ptolus campaign setting (including all the additional supplemental material for that product). As I said, even with the voluminous amounts of information Ptolus and its supplements contain, conducting the campaign requires that for each session either 1) the PCs pretty much stick to the adventure that they're currently occupied with, and that I have detailed notes for; or 2) I improvise a lot, with the aid of the background information I have available.

It sounds to me like your extensive work on the campaign might make #2 a lot easier for you, but it won't change #2 into #1.

I'm sorry you've never encountered someone who was able to do this beforehand, but my group and I have been playing together for years and it's just how I construct my worlds. I give myself ample time to fully flesh it out... I don't try to run a campaign on a weeks prep, but that's just me...

I think you're vastly overextending what I said in my previous post.

some may prefer their method to mine, but the experience my group has with my games... as well as the fact that we've stayed together so long... seems to indicate, at least for me, this is a valid and beneficial method. YMMV and all that, but all I'm really saying is... don't tell me your opinions are objective fact when it comes to differing methodologies on campaign design.

I think you must be confusing me with someone else, because I didn't make any value judgements about your methods in my post, or anywhere else in this thread for that matter. The fact is, the methods I'm using for my Ptolus campaign are almost exactly the methods you are using for your upcoming one (except for the fact that I let Monte Cook do the majority of the work for me). I'm just saying, even with a setting like Ptolus, where the DM has immense amounts of background information at his disposal, players jettisoning from the current campaign focus and doing something completely off-beat is going to require a lot of DM improv.

Lots of background information can make the improv easier, but it's still improv. That is the only thing that I'm asserting as fact.

 

[Imaro]

I'm still dubious that, even with 6 months time, you're going to have notes on this city that are as detailed as the Ptolus campaign setting (including all the additional supplemental material for that product). As I said, even with the voluminous amounts of information Ptolus and its supplements contain, conducting the campaign requires that for each session either 1) the PCs pretty much stick to the adventure that they're currently occupied with, and that I have detailed notes for; or 2) I improvise a lot, with the aid of the background information I have available.

It sounds to me like your extensive work on the campaign might make #2 a lot easier for you, but it won't change #2 into #1.

I will disagree here, the more work I put into worldbuilding the better my chances are that #2 becomes #1. As an example, let's say in Gulmenghast the PC's are investigating a rash of kidnappings, now somehow they get it in to their head that one of the Hundred Gods Cults is responsible... perhaps some of the Gray Man's followers. Now if I've detailed the ward of Godshome and the temples within it (including the Grey Man's) then #2 is #1. Of course their is the possibility that I haven't detailed the Gray Man yet, and #2 it stays... however my point remains, the more I detail the better chances are I end up with a number 1.

I think you're vastly overextending what I said in my previous post.

Perhaps I am, if so I apologize.

I think you must be confusing me with someone else, because I didn't make any value judgements about your methods in my post, or anywhere else in this thread for that matter. The fact is, the methods I'm using for my Ptolus campaign are almost exactly the methods you are using for your upcoming one (except for the fact that I let Monte Cook do the majority of the work for me). I'm just saying, even with a setting like Ptolus, where the DM has immense amounts of background information at his disposal, players jettisoning from the current campaign focus and doing something completely off-beat is going to require a lot of DM improv.

Actually it was a general statement about the tenor which this thread took on with it's earlies posts and comments certain posters made.

Lots of background information can make the improv easier, but it's still improv. That is the only thing that I'm asserting as fact.

And again... with a caveat firmly in place, I disagree to a point... but that's cool because if we all agreed and ran our games the same way it would make for booring conversation.

 

[Imaro]

See, this is why I asked the Keep on the Borderlands quesstions, because you guys have failed to define terms and are filtering what Hussar says through your own assumptions.

A lot of what I'm reading here doesn't even get the basic idea of what he's saying, and is just extrapolating it into complete straw men. Just like the 56 page thread.

I think the problem with your question is that it pre-supposes intimate knowledge or memory of the Keep on the Borderlands. I had the module and ran it... but that was years ago, thus I can't even begin to go into any depth in regards to it. Why don't you just ask whatever question(s) you want answered.

First, as even some of Hussar's supporters have said... it ain't always what you say but also how you choose to say it.

Second the strawmen came out when Hussar decided to start using the worst possible examples of world-building and an extra side of hyperbole to argue for "Story"-building. So proponents responded in the same manner. At least that's why I did.

 

[Lanefan]

tangent

Is this a railroad:

"You are starting in Chicago. You WILL go to New Orleans, and you WILL pass through St. Louis on the way. You can take the train, or drive, or fly, or walk for all I care; and you don't even have to go in a straight line, but those cities are where you're going."

/tangent

Lan-"I'm the train they call the City of New Orleans"-efan

 

[Woas]

I would say yes. It's the equivalent to a DM saying, "You WILL face my totally tricked out Boss enemy and you WILL face his also totally awesome Lieutenant Mid-Boss. I don't care how you deal with getting to them, but those are the prescribed enemies that you will face."

tangent

Is this a railroad:

"You are starting in Chicago. You WILL go to New Orleans, and you WILL pass through St. Louis on the way. You can take the train, or drive, or fly, or walk for all I care; and you don't even have to go in a straight line, but those cities are where you're going."

/tangent

Lan-"I'm the train they call the City of New Orleans"-efan