Are you put off by "Creative" Campaign Settings?

[barsoomcore]

If somebody offers to run, I'll play, doesn't matter what it is.

I hear this.

I've been DMing so long I nearly forget how to "roll" up a character...

 

[warlord]

I love non-traditional settings. My favoriute game I ever played in is one I'm running now set in an alternate Wild West.

 

[Aristotle]

strange settings that are strange for the sake of being strange put me off. Settings that just rename all the visible things and are otherwise "traditional" for the most part, also put me off. Any setting that isn't "traditional fantasy" has to work much harder. It has to be better, because it has to put players into a place their minds don't normally go when they sit down at the table.

 

[Psion]

The challenge with campaign settings is making them exotic enough to be fresh and exciting, yet not making it so alien that the players can't relate to it.

Are you ready to walk that line?

 

[Dirigible]

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'.

Have we met?

 

[fafhrd]

strange settings that are strange for the sake of being strange put me off. Settings that just rename all the visible things and are otherwise "traditional" for the most part, also put me off. Any setting that isn't "traditional fantasy" has to work much harder. It has to be better, because it has to put players into a place their minds don't normally go when they sit down at the table.

Agreed 100%. For me, it's subtle, nuanced changes that make for an innovative setting, not lazy, broad brush strokes that simply play "hide the wizard".

 

[Bloodstone Press]

Not at all. I like ideas that are new and different.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

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

I am, and I suspect most others are, too, regardless of what they may claim.

 

[pogre]

I like the traditional setting too.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I suspect most others are, too, regardless of what they may claim.

Fortunately, that's largely untrue - IMO, and IMXP for that matter.

I really like both ends of the spectrum - any of the standards (e.g., high-magic pseudo-medieval Tolkienesque fantasy, quasi-historical fantasy, sword & sorcery, etc.), or alternatively just about anything 'new' or different.

Most GMs and players I know and have known are willing, if not keen in fact, to experiment with a wide variety of settings, styles, systems, whatever. Not *all*, OK - but most? Certainly.

You only live once, right? Yeh yeh, arguably 'n all that. Y' know what I mean.