A setting with no canon

[Ry]

Let publishers present whatever they like - I'll still consider it only a starting point.

Interesting. Would you prefer publishers designed stuff to be starting points, or designed along the lines of creating a setting canon?

 

[grodog]

I just thought that was cool. Has anybody else done this?

We did this in Ryan "Destan" Smalley's Valus regional sourcebook (published in in 2004 from Different Worlds). I liked the idea a lot then, and now

Wow, that's... hard-core. I think that might take it further than would be useful to a GM.

I agree that inserting disparate and contradictory POVs in the adventure would be very cool (and FWIW, I'm pretty sure that Ryan didn't do that with Valus).

 

[Tonguez]

I agree with this.

If you use a fragment of the Great Hundred that talks about City State X being ruled by overlord Y, "

Possibly but it might be possible for one faction (when writing about Overlord Y might claim "overlord Y is a tyrant and a cruel despot who suppresses the people of City State X with an iron fist" whereas another faction (writing about City State X might claim "we celebrate and honour the benevolent leadership of our overlord Y, by his firm hand City State X has grown in status and prosperity and his glory maintains our peace"

Whilst being very divergent in their persepctives the statements are not contradictory and what conclusions are drawn about City State X and Overlord Y is very much open to interpretation

 

[Ry]

Whilst being very divergent in their persepctives the statements are not contradictory and what conclusions are drawn about City State X and Overlord Y is very much open to interpretation

Yep. The Barbarians of the Waste see all the people of the cities as slaves, for example, but they agree there are cities.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Interesting. Would you prefer publishers designed stuff to be starting points, or designed along the lines of creating a setting canon?

Tough to say really. On one hand I understand and accept fully that without a single, creative vision driving the development of a particular game world you have a strong likelihood for that world to degenerate into random, lifeless, design-by-committee piffle. On the other hand, nobody can read my mind. Not even _I_ could tell you explicitly what will appeal to me but I know what I like. I have yet to find a setting that I read and say, "This is perfection. I'm going to run this EXACTLY as-is. I don't need or even WANT to change a thing." Ergo - any published setting is just a starting point, and since they can't/won't cater just to me they should go ahead and publish what THEY like. I might, or might not agree to varying degrees.

 

[Ranger REG]

Lots of DMs homebrew because they want the game to be "theirs" and find canon restrictive. I certainly do - and I like being able to drift back and forth between my game design, creative writing and my own campaigns. You don't have to feel the same way.

Damn right I don't. It's just like with my Star Wars and Star Trek games. I take what relevant canon as backstory, and start the game by adding new canon for the group (usually due to PC's actions).