Campaign Setting outline

[Desdichado]

For the Mk. II version of my Dark•Heritage setting, I'm thinking about writing it up as a "systemless" setting, and give some vague hints on how to adapt it to various systems, including d20. In other words, the setting will be completely fluff, not mechanics.

In looking at the various setting books I have out there, though, most of them concentrate a fair amount of mechanics; new core classes, new feats, new spells, new prestige classes, etc. If its a setting and a game bundled together, then naturally it's also fairly mechanics heavy. So, I'm having some trouble putting together an outline and organizational structure for the setting. If you were to read such a document, what kinds of material would you want to see included? I've got some very rough ideas, but I'll let the thread sit for a while before I muddy it up with my own stuff.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

In looking at the various setting books I have out there, though, most of them concentrate a fair amount of mechanics; new core classes, new feats, new spells, new prestige classes, etc.

Caveat to the below: I am a powergamer and I encourage powergaming at my table.

The mechanics should reflect the setting and highlight the fluff.

Lets whip out our old favorite too-good-too-be-published setting: Llamaworld d20. Now, obviously, Llamaworld could stand alone without any mechanics. The cultures are rich and deep with adventure ideas springing off every page. I mean, this thing is a frickin' masterpiece!

But you are always, always, always going to get an audience who doesn't buy a game book to read a novel. They buy games books for game stuff and game stuff means mechanics. So feats/spells/PrCs for Llamaworld should be included but they shouldn't be the kind of thing you'd find in the Forgotten Realms. You have to design things like "Alpacan Fury" to evoke the image of a frenzied llama, wading into battle, rocket launchers strapped to his side, and eager for blood. You absolutely can not call the feat "Improved Rage" and let gnomes use it at first level or whatever.

Your mechanics must be written so that a powergamer can skip everything else in your campaign and still build a character that fits right in.

Unless you really do want it to be seamless and fit in everywhere. That's cool, don't get me wrong. But that's straying a bit from what a lot of people think of when they think of game books. Or maybe that's just me. I know for a fact there are a lot of ENWorlders who would jump at a 100% setting 0% mechanics book.

Just my two cents!

 

[Desdichado]

Well, it's not like this is going to be a book. More like a website, or at most a free pdf.

And I'm half-thinking of using it more as a setting for fiction than gaming, at least in the near term. I'm still running Dark•Heritage Mk. I and it's going well. After that, I'm also playing in Eberron, and I've got d20 Modern or Cthulhu hopefully on the horizon as well.

In other words, part of the reason I'm interested in creating it as a systemless world is that I'm not going to care about system for a long time. Also because I'm indecisive on systems issues; I have a lot of options, and I'm not sure which ones I prefer.

 

[Aristotle]

In my opinion it won't be as useful to others without mechanics (although it might be a decent place to scavenge for ideas for games that do have mechanics). But, if you don't have plans to use it as a platform for games immediately, you might as well get the fluff fleshed out for the purposes you do want to use the setting for. If you do it right you should be able to easily add mechanics later (taking advantage of whatever systems you like at that time).

As an aside. I don't recall consciously reading any info on your dark heritage setting before this, but the other day I came up with a concept for a gritty supers game that I had given the code name dark heritage. Looks like I'll be changing that.

 

[Desdichado]

No, go with it. It's not like I trademarked the name or anything.

 

[nakia]

I think there are two models for a "pure setting" book, both of which arise from non-d20 systems. I've used both for setting help for d20 games.

The first is the White Wolf model. The White Wolf model focuses on stories and mood in order to give details about the setting. A lot of the White Wolf books began with a story, then continued using story elements to give setting details. Most elements were given from some particular narrative persepctive.

Then, there is the GURPS model, which focuses on details and (sometimes) real history to give setting details. A lot of those GURPS books have a timeline. They all have those little sidebars that give more detail about a small or marginal setting point. There is a considerable reference list at the end. Mood and tone are less important; the "facts" of the setting are more important.

I guess you'd need to think about what is most important for your setting -- mood/tone or details, then strucutre your write up accordingly. While I like reading the White Wolf stuff, I find the GURPS stuff more helpful.

I don't think I really answered your question. I dealt more with structure than content. But I hope it's helpful somehow.

 

[Janx]

In my own homebrew, I haven't written a single piece of rules or mechanics. It's all pretty much stock Player's Handbook rules.

But I have written a bunch of fluff. Things like religion notes, histories, description of a Monk's martial art style (ranks, techniques). Not a single rule. Just description of things.

It works.

From my own work, I look for:
country descriptions
race descriptions
history (per country or race)
religion descriptions
monk dojo/style descriptions
wizard guild/organization
local news (newspaper?)
laws (i used the U.S.'s UCMJ for my game)

 

[TheLostSoul]

For the Mk. II version of my Dark•Heritage setting, I'm thinking about writing it up as a "systemless" setting, and give some vague hints on how to adapt it to various systems, including d20. In other words, the setting will be completely fluff, not mechanics.

In looking at the various setting books I have out there, though, most of them concentrate a fair amount of mechanics; new core classes, new feats, new spells, new prestige classes, etc. If its a setting and a game bundled together, then naturally it's also fairly mechanics heavy. So, I'm having some trouble putting together an outline and organizational structure for the setting. If you were to read such a document, what kinds of material would you want to see included? I've got some very rough ideas, but I'll let the thread sit for a while before I muddy it up with my own stuff.

Besides the setting itself, there should be a chapter on what elements the setting should contain and how you imagine themn to work. If you want to have magic in the setting, a possible description could be:

Magic is rare, highly ritualistic and dangerous. When invoking rituals you risk your sanity and health. Rituals are learned individually, either from members of secret societies, cult or dangerous beings from beyond reality.

Other parts of the setting should described likewise, so you know how combat fits into the setting (dirty and gritty or swashbuckling), what kind of skills available and so forth.

For the setting itself, it should have a general description and perhaps a sample setting. It could be a small town, part of a city or anything, as long as it gives some idea of how to run the game. It will also help to include a list of sample equipment (especially if it is not the modern era or even magical).

 

[Desdichado]

Magic is rare, highly ritualistic and dangerous. When invoking rituals you risk your sanity and health. Rituals are learned individually, either from members of secret societies, cult or dangerous beings from beyond reality.

Ah, so you're familiar with my prior work.

 

[arscott]

If your setting was just a greyhawk/realms clone? Then I'd say no. There's no need to give us another elf subrace or yet another Specialized Caster PrC. If a DM wants to add something that specific into his game, then he can probably find it somewhere besides some random guy's website.

But from what I've read, Dark*Heritage is significantly different from the standard D&D model. And given the nature and scope of the differences, a change should be made in the rules to reflect them. And that means that whether the campaign is run with d20, GURPS, or something else entirely, The DM is going to want to modify the rules so that they better fit the campaign. And when you provide modifications for one system, it gives DM's a guide as to what might need changes in other systems.

One note, though:
I'd avoid rewriting base classes just to change their flavor elements. It's enough to say: Sorcerers gain their power from study, not from draconic blood, or Monks are simply unarmed combatants in this campaign, they don't have shaolinesque temples. You probably don't need to create the Arcanist or Kickboxer classes.