Campaign Setting outline

[Belen]

Mr. Dyal,

I have an outline that I put together already. It is on my home machine, so I will post it later in the day.

Dave

 

[KnowTheToe]

Don't forget to add technology to your list.

IMO, for what you are atempting, I would stick to the old KISS system. A toatl fluff world DOES NOT need everything spelled out. For instance instead of putting specific political agendas I would rather see a more flexable description of things that could be occuring. There should be multiple options covering a wide variety of possibilities. Again, IMO a write-up of "Fluff" should be filled with plot hooks and facets to tantalize the imagination. For instance, if you look at the Kalamar setting book, it is filled with tons of facts, that some may care about, but it is too much for me to remember. I would rather see less fact and more possibility. It would allow the DH to be flexable enough for many rules sets.

Well, I was pretty vague, but I think that was my point, a certain level of vagueness opens the world to the reader.

 

[Desdichado]

IMO, for what you are atempting, I would stick to the old KISS system. A toatl fluff world DOES NOT need everything spelled out. For instance instead of putting specific political agendas I would rather see a more flexable description of things that could be occuring. There should be multiple options covering a wide variety of possibilities. Again, IMO a write-up of "Fluff" should be filled with plot hooks and facets to tantalize the imagination. For instance, if you look at the Kalamar setting book, it is filled with tons of facts, that some may care about, but it is too much for me to remember. I would rather see less fact and more possibility. It would allow the DH to be flexable enough for many rules sets.

Well, I was pretty vague, but I think that was my point, a certain level of vagueness opens the world to the reader.

That depends on what its being used for, I suppose, about which I wasn't very clear. I was thinking of having this be a kind of "setting bible", in which case it does need to be a fairly comprehensive study rather than hints and hooks. This wouldn't necessarily be a "public consumption" setting so much as a reference (for me, I suppose, although somebody, somewhere, might be interested in it too) to use as I set up future campaigns, fiction, and all kinds of other things in a common setting.

 

[Mark Plemmons]

For instance, if you look at the Kalamar setting book, it is filled with tons of facts, that some may care about, but it is too much for me to remember. I would rather see less fact and more possibility. It would allow the DH to be flexable enough for many rules sets.

Actually, "fluff" includes these kinds of details. And they don't really affect the rules set(s). They're just background detail.

Personally, I've found that you have to have the facts/background first, before you can explore the possibilities. For example, if you want to start a war, you need to know the terrain, the political allies, the military strengths, the attitudes of the people in each land, the imports and exports, and so on. If your players want to travel from one land to another, they need to know what peoples/lands they'll be passing through, and how friendly or hostile they might be to the PCs. Otherwise, you find you end up having to invent it yourself later, when the subject arises. Ignoring this works too, but I think that it leads to a more generic campaign, where every land feels the same and the people seem mostly identical. You need that detail to make your setting feel like a real place.

I certainly wouldn't try to memorize everything about a region. I don't think most DMs do. Just note the parts relevant to the current situation, and you can reference the rest when you need to.

 

[jgbrowning]

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.

Alpacan Fury.... that's funny.

joe b.