Are you put off by "Creative" Campaign Settings?

[Sushi]

Hi!

I was thinking over creating a homebrew D&D game but I don't know if and when I would ever get a chance to run such homebrew because I have not recieved much positive feedback from the others in my normal gaming group.

To clarify, I want to build a setting without the normal 'medieval' trappings but with Aztec, Mayan, and Incan influences. I am very interested in an mesoamerican type D&D game but I fear that I will only be creating it for my own amusement.

Are most players (D&D) to set in their ways to try something off the beaten path?


Thanks
S.

 

[Zappo]

Personally, I am put off by traditional settings. I've had way, way more than enough of dwarves and elves killing orcs and goblins.

 

[loki44]

To clarify, I want to build a setting without the normal 'medieval' trappings but with Aztec, Mayan, and Incan influences. I am very interested in mesoamerican type D&D game but I fear that I will only be creating it for my own amusement.

Personally I am not turned off by "non-traditional" settings. However, I think it is difficult to find a group that is willing to sustain a long-tern campaign in such a setting. In the past I've unsuccessfully tried Mesoamerican and African based campaigns, and had a little more success with an Arabian Nights influenced setting (mostly because I pushed hard for it). There doesn't seem to be much of a problem initially because of the novelty of it. Most players like a little variety. The problems come later when you try to get people to think outside the box and play their characters within the cultural framework you've established. It's hard to sustain. Let's face it, most D&D players just don't possess the context or knowledge to effectively play an Aztec priest for a long period of time. I think Asian flavored campaigns fare a little better simply because most people have more exposure to those cultures through film and television (i.e. players have a context to build upon). You might want to consider having the characters be from a more "standard" background that the players may be more familiar and comfortable with, and have them integrate into your setting as outsiders (e.g. explorers, conquerors, shipwrecked, diplomatic mission, etc...).

 

[Tonguez]

Most players I find want easy reference points - they want to be able to jump into an adventure knowing that certain assumptions about the world (and thus their characters worldview) are intact. With DnD 'pseudo-Medieval faux-Europe' those assumptions are all present and thus easy. Any variation needs to be signalled and then developed, the more 'different' the setting the more difficult.

The trick then is to identify the similarities between the base assumptions of your players and the 'creative culture' you want to explore. Use these assumptions to introduce the more unusually elements of the culture

eg when exploring a homebrewed 'Africa-inspired setting (named Tu-Anziko) I started in the Sahel/Sudan region (the southern border of the Sahara) with cultures inspired by the Hausa and Kingdom of Mali. Those cultures had contact across the Sahara and were influenced by Islam (thus allowing elements of Arabian Adventures to be used) they also included mounted knights dressed in chainmail, priests, bards, scorcerers and shaman (as well as thieves, pirates, wizards and even barbarians).

The Empire of Anziko was the largest nation in the known world and sat on a plateau area over looking the Great Inland Sea. Tu-Anziko was the capital city and featured a huge market bizaar, temples, universities, open gardens, huge royal grain silo's and a royal palace.
The PCs met at a Caravanserai (ie in the corner of a tavern) and were hired by Banur Agadombe Sekh (Sekh being a title of Knights) to be bodyguards for the Ras Benari (Ras = Lord) as he went on his pilgrimage.

Exploring the city gave the PCs their first exposure to the 'differences' in the setting and the figure of Banur Agadombe provided them with a mentor on proper conduct in Anziko society. The Pilgrimage then became an excuse for the PCs to travel and become involved in various adventures along the way

 

[lukelightning]

I don't mind non-traditional settings as long as they don't muck around with the game mechanics too much. I'm not big on alternate classes either; for example in Oriental Adventures I think they need to get rid of the Wu-jen; what's wrong with wizard? Just have different spells available. Samurai? Make it a fighter. Aztec Spirit Shifter? Druid.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I was thinking over creating a homebrew D&D game but I don't know if and when I would ever get a chance to run such homebrew because I have not recieved much positive feedback from the others in my normal gaming group.

To clarify, I want to build a setting without the normal 'medieval' trappings but with Aztec, Mayan, and Incan influences. I am very interested in an mesoamerican type D&D game but I fear that I will only be creating it for my own amusement.

To answer your question: it depends.

Out of my gaming group, I'd say we have at least two or three out of the six who would prefer a Tolkien-esque setting simply because it's easiest for them to understand. If I asked them to play in a mesoamerican setting (very cool, by the way) they'd feel like they wouldn't understand what was going on. Others would love the opportunity to ditch traditional D&D.

One way to approch this is say that the gaming group gets to play exploerers. That way, they still get to keep their elves and dwarves and they can be introduced to the setting slowly. As they explore the area, you give them the details they need.

Finally to re-quote you:

I am very interested in an mesoamerican type D&D game but I fear that I will only be creating it for my own amusement.

What's wrong with that? Have some fun!

 

[The_Gneech]

I'm not put off by them -- I'll try anything! Whether it's sustainable or not is another issue all together. But usually, if somebody offers to run, I'll play, doesn't matter what it is.

-The Gneech

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

My limited experience with "creative" settings is that they rarely last long. Too often they are not detailed enough in their differences to sustain the feeling of being a really unique setting. They tend to be a series of cool concepts that are not thought all the way through. Thrilling and interesting the first couple of times, but after a little time the holes really start to show and the few "new" ideas are not enough to keep it going.

 

[Chimera]

I'll second the kind of reservations that Thornir hints at. I've seen; both up close and in all too many horror stories here on the boards; stories of GMs who flit from 'cool concept' to cool concept, losing interest in campaigns just as players are hitting their stride, dumping / ending campaigns in favor of their latest 'cool concept world'.

So the minute I hear a GM say "I have a cool concept for a game", my skin starts to itch and I start looking for the exits. Especially when we're in the middle of a game already and s/he is talking about ending it in favor of the "new thing".

In fact, I just had this experience last night. The GM of my weekly Thursday game has all sorts of ideas for his next game. The part that really turns me off is that he's got so many ideas that he wants to try as far as game rule changes that it stops being D&D. Now don't get me wrong - I have plenty of House Rules in my own setting (which I haven't run in 4 years), but the problem is when the House Rules start to outnumber the RAW and a lot of it is "I think it'd be cool to try it this way", it gets to be a house built on sand and perhaps a bit too difficult for both GM and Player(s) to keep track of. Moreso when I don't expect this particular GM to have things as well thought out or written down in advance.

 

[Shemeska]

Personally, I am put off by traditional settings. I've had way, way more than enough of dwarves and elves killing orcs and goblins.

The same with me to an extent. It's one of the reasons, among many, that most of my campaigns take place out on the planes rather than on the prime material.