Best and Worst Settings?

[Black Omega]

Hmm..Best non-d20 setting: San Angelo for Hero System. Very much in the theme of Astro City, detailed but also very flexible.

Worst non-d20 Setting: Well, they beat me to World of Synnibar....

Best d20 Setting: Rokugan d20. Love the world, love the storyline.

Worst d20 Setting: All of them would probably be workable. But I'd not enjoy trying to do anything with Greyhawk.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'm one of those who WANTED to hate Planescape...

"What's this?! Alignments?! Those are SO outdated...and this great ring isn't like any afterlife I ever knew about...and now I have to shoehorn everything....and how the heck can 1st level people exist in the Abyss?! And this stupid lingo?"

But then I read it, and it grew on me. It was all about possibility, potentiality...re-interpreting how you saw things, allowing you do to whatever you wanted to it....so inclusive, so flexible, so philosophical...

Oathbound does that whole inclusive thing for me too, but it's got an edge to it that PS doesn't...it's like getting hit on the head with a mallet....it's not belief or faith....it's test and failure.

Nyambe is GREAT. I love settings that twist the rules in new directions.

I also enjoyed Dark Sun, Al Quadim, Maztica...things that took the worlds in a new direction.

The least favorite ones? I'd have to go with FR and Dragonlance, mostly because of the big things being done aspect. I agree 100% with the 'someone else's homebrew' feel...and I really dislike the idea that "Hey, this is EARTH, but with MAGIC!".....whoppee...I could do that campaign setting drunk.

I mean, there is the argument that "FR's a big place," but if you're going to have to go off into some unexplored corner of the world to get away from important NPC's, what's the point in having a campaign setting to begin with?

I've got nothing personal against the settings, but they're the least appealing to me for those reasons. They're easy, they've been done...

That said, I think I may actually research FR to do a postapocalyptic FR/Call of Cthulhu crossover...I think a setting with unbeatable wizards and dark elves is a perfect place to introduce the idea that these guys got NOTHIN' on the real bigwigs.

What's that Mystra? Feeling a bit squaoumus?

 

[Slomoot]

There were always two worlds I never understood…

1)Darksun: This one seems to be liked a lot or not understood. I never was really intrigued in playing a feral halfling who’s one goal in life was to get enough water to survive. Not to mention avoiding giant (!) pc’s with triple the hit points. Seemingly even if I did hit, without fail, my wooden spear would snap in half and all of a sudden three levels of hit points would disappear. [/rant off]

2)Spelljammer: Is this even a setting? Can someone explain the hippo people? I think I never tried it after a friend explained how his space ship was powered by giant space hamsters…

Other than that, I really like any homebrewed world... FR looks pretty neat but I can't convince anyone to play there.....

--Miles

 

[rounser]

Best setting: The Dungeon magazine implied setting. I've built campaigns around Dungeon mag adventures a couple of times in the past, and in each case the setting wasn't the focus, but was purely there to support - and provide a backdrop for - the adventures....the best kind of setting for D&D, IMO.

Worst setting: Most megadungeons, because they're usually either boring, or incomplete, or overrated, or a combination of the three...and I suspect that collectively they're one of the "settings" that gets played most often.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

Best D&D setting: Planescape
Great ideas, great artwork, the whole nine yards. Sigil itself was almost a setting in itself, plus the infinite planes where you could get as weird as you wanted. And if you wanted some stability, there were umpteen primes to go poking at. Plus it gave us tieflings and bariaurs! (I always thought that Planescape was an early attempt at introducing the "monsters"-as-playable-races-and-people theme.)

Worst D&D setting: Original D&D Known World / Mystara
An ungodly mishmash of radically different races/cultures in a tiny, tiny corner of the world. The entire Heldannic Knight thing (a combination of Teutonic Order and Nazis, originally from the definitely Byzantian Thyatis). Alphatia, with its million zillion 36th-level archmages. Hollow World with climate differences (a thing which even Pellucidar got right!). The only good thing in it was Glantri, and even Glantri wasn't all that good.

 

[Pramas]

If we are talking old TSR worlds, I've got to stand up for Jeff Grubb's Al-Qadim. Great setting that really succeeded in taking the best of its source material and adapting it to D&D.

I'm not going to name a worst setting. No cause to be mean in public.

 

[Alzrius]

For me, the best campaign ever was, and still is, Ravenloft. You could be anywhere, and the mists could still snatch you in to the realm of dread. Everything was stacked against you there, and if you were lucky, you'd survive. It was perfect.

I have to go on to note that, from a different perspective, I'd have to say that Planescape and Spelljammer tie for number one on the basis that it was incredibly useful and holistically grand. Those two campaigns linked all of 2E together into a single unified picture that was marvelous in scope. Needless to say, I miss that a lot in 3E, I really do.

I agree with Pramas on the idea of not posting a worst campaign setting. No need to bash something that people worked hard on here in public. Also, I never really thought of campaign settings in terms of what I did and didn't like, but rather, what I liked to a greater or lesser degree.

 

[johnsemlak]

Best Settings: Call me a traditionalist, but I'll stick iwth World of Greyhawk. Flat out great setting.

I have to agree Mystara/The Known world had problems, but I LOVED many of its products. The GAZATTEER line was the best product lines TSR ever made, IMO.

I would like to try the following settings: Kalamar, Oathboand, and Nyambe.

I am currently becoming acquainted with Scarred Lands.

Worst Setting: Dunno, I'm not sure any were really that bad. Depends how you apply them.

 

[memesis]

I'll probably get lynched for this, but here goes.

Forgettable Realms and Dragonlance top the bottom

Best setting, within the context of its game? Exalted, so far. The setting can afford to be rich, vivid, magic-soaked, with big deeds and interesting places and people, and the PCs don't have to play second fiddle to hordes of established NPCs. In fact, the PCs probably have to become heroes just in self-defense.

For best D&D setting, Planescape and/or Dark Sun. Not terribly pleasant places, but certainly ones where it's possible to either stand out or stay out of sight depending on your abilities and motives.

 

[haiiro]

Very subjective question, but for what it's worth:

Best:

1e Forgotten Realms (grey box). I like the new FR stuff, but nothing has ever conveyed the same sense of completeness, vastness, depth and wonder as the old boxed set did for me. The supplements only added to this, at least up until Elminster's Ecologies; after that, they were a mixed bag.

Taladas -- Krynn's other major continent -- was also a great setting. I'd chalk that up to nostalgia (it was the first setting I ever ran), but even looking at the material years later I still enjoy it.

Worst:

Diomin -- shlocky art, "cool sounding" but generic races, shoddy production values and virtually no original content whatsoever. I hated the first Diomin book, and I haven't looked at any of it since then.

Ravenloft just never gelled for me, partly because I don't think D&D and Gothic horror mix very well, but also partly because most of the material I owned or looked at for it wasn't very well done. That may have changed over time (or be totally different now that WW handles the line), but it still doesn't interest me.

Mixed:

I really enjoyed elements of Spelljammer, although some of it was too simplistic for my tastes. I like using world-bound flying ships of various sorts in my campaigns, and Spelljammer remains a good source of inspiration (and sometimes mechanics).

Greyhawk's attempt to balance being generic enough to be the "iconic setting" and being interesting has always fallen short, IMO. I find Greyhawk too generic, and many of the names are unwieldy to the point of irritation. I do like that in many ways it is a more grim and war-torn world than most, and I've often tried to incorporate these elements into my games.