A setting with no canon

[Ry]

The information given the players is mostly from in game characters or sources within the game itself in my campaigns. It is up to them to verify wether the information is fact or ficiton. If they ask me directly I will answer simple questions that they can perceive using their five senses. Ie The sky is blue, water is wet and apples taste like apples.

Right - contrasts with games like Forgotton Realms where sometimes the players have read books or supplements set in the Realms and expect those books to be followed. This can be even more dangerous when you're playing with other DMs.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I'm writing something like that for about a month... (it's going to be my 4E Points-of-Light setting), mainly because it leaves a lot of place for me as DM to put in rumours, that my players don't see as rumours.

However, the first reactions were... less good, not because of dislike, but because they (my players) see it as canon anyway - while they don't pin me down on that, they simply take it as "true as is" - must be years of omniscient novels and campaign settings... gotta love Kafka, eh?

I'm probably throwing in more blatant contradictions and doing it as a "traveller's journal" to get more "authenticity".

(before anybody asks... sorry, it's for my players, hence it's in German)

Cheers, LT.

 

[Ry]

I'm writing something like that for about a month... (it's going to be my 4E Points-of-Light setting), mainly because it leaves a lot of place for me as DM to put in rumours, that my players don't see as rumours.

Wow, if I could just see...

(before anybody asks... sorry, it's for my players, hence it's in German)

Well, quack.

Any chance we could do some kind of exchange via babelfish? Then again, I guess you don't need to exchange, you could just take the great hundred since it's Creative Commons anyway.

 

[prosfilaes]

At the edges, like the Set versus Cain thing, it can be interesting, but in part because it's not really relevant. But I find too much ambiguity to be very frustrating; if I'm running a game, I want to know the power structure of the city, including who's running things from the behind the scenes, not a dozen different viewpoints, including the local idiot who doesn't understand that the only reason his gang hasn't been messed with by the police is because they have real criminals to mess with.

I'm not sure how the OP's plan is going to work. Most stuff that's written non-canon has a canon behind it somewhere, unless, again like the Set versus Cain thing, it really doesn't matter. If you quote two sages as if they are reliable sources, and one says that a city has a small minority of humans, no more than 4,000 out of a quarter million inhabitants, and the other says that the same city has 200,000 humans living there and that they make up 95% of the population, it's not going to be interesting or fun; it's just going to be frustrating. Unless the sources basically agree, the DM is going to have to make it up from scratch. Unfortunately there is canon; you have to explain why the two sources disagree. If the sources disagree too much, then I don't see you having a useful basis for a campaign world; you have a bunch of quotes that you can use to make a campaign world.

 

[Ry]

The project is structured as a collection of 400-500 word entries, so they're not tiny quotes.

The focus isn't on creating a bunch of contradictory information, although there is some contradictions when it comes to some of the more mythical elements.

The focus is more on creating situations - all of the entries are designed to be in motion, with things you can't ignore if you're close to them. So in a way it's a bunch of quotes that you can use to make a campaign world, but it does double duty as a collection of hooks.

For example, when it talks about the Akavar people, it does it from the perspective of a shaman about to send boys through thier rites of manhood, and that's volatile from their perspective.

When it tells you about how coins are made, it's from the perspective of a criminal who's not too happy that another criminal slipped him some forged coins.

The information about the major region is from the perspective of a barbarian shaman interested in invading it.

and so on.

 

[Umbran]

Stuff that's taken to be the objective truth of the setting

Hmmm.

If there is no direct conflict, those folks who are interested in canon will take the words written as canon. The fact that it is from a fictional person's point of view will not stop them from taking it as such. They will tend to take the speaking characters as tour guides, who are experts and have knowledge, rather than people who state opinions which might be incorrect.

Those who don't care so much about canon will pick and choose what will be their own canon. But they do that already. I suspect most folk actually fall into this bin.

I think that the result may be far more interesting to read than many other settings, but may perhaps be somewhat more difficult to use as a reference work. I think it would be interesting in terms of the presentation, but I don't think the lack of exterior-viewpoint canon will be the defining characteristic, in terms of how it is used.

I'd think back to the Dark Matter setting for Alternity - it is not presented as your setting, but it also doesn't actually define a specific canon. It gives the GMs more elements they can shake a stick at, any number of which may or may not exist in the game world - the GM has to choose.

 

[WhatGravitas]

Well, quack.

Let me see... I have no clue if I get around to do that (so don't hope too much)... when I'm done with this semester (14th of Dec), I may get around to translate it (without Babelfish, as I don't like automated stuff). If not, I'll put it into Babelfish and share it, mkay?

(basically, it's also a good exercise to keep my written English good, and for some reason, translating is fun for me)

Cheers, LT.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Reality can get weird in strongly comic book based superhero games. For example the continuous present means the first superheroes appeared 10 years ago, no matter what the present year is. With hypertime two contradictory pasts can both be true. Gets pretty confusing. Even the future can change, based on the present. Travel to the year 2000 from 1960 and it would be a happy place. Go to 2000 from 1975 it would be an apocalyptic wasteland.

But I wouldn't say there's no canon there. Comicbook reality follows very strange rules. But there are still rules, lots of them.

 

[Ry]

I think that the result may be far more interesting to read than many other settings, but may perhaps be somewhat more difficult to use as a reference work. I think it would be interesting in terms of the presentation, but I don't think the lack of exterior-viewpoint canon will be the defining characteristic, in terms of how it is used.

That's fair. There's a hook about a revolt that is really about the perspective of lifelong slaves and is titled Rice. You're not going to find it under "Slavery" or "Slave Revolt" because it makes sense to call it rice, and the fact that rice is the major crop is important to the setting.

The success of products like the Dictionary of Mu gives me hope that this thing will turn out, and since it's all open content, I can come back later and make reference material based on it even though we have multiple contributors.

 

[Ry]

Let me see... I have no clue if I get around to do that (so don't hope too much)... when I'm done with this semester (14th of Dec), I may get around to translate it (without Babelfish, as I don't like automated stuff). If not, I'll put it into Babelfish and share it, mkay?

Sweet! More fuel for the Great Hundred!