Campaign Settings; what do you look for?

[Thanee]

Hmm... what I expect is a well thought out background and a lot of support (i.e. sourcebooks zooming into relevant parts of the countries, etc). If I am going to use a published setting, I don't want to be left filling in blanks all the time (I could write my own setting then), but of course, what is presented to me, would have to make sense, be interesting and imaginative, or even innovative, and so on, and so on. Of course, what has been said above also, there still needs to be room to maneuver, not every stone needs to be named and numbered, but the important locations, cities, landmarks, etc should be explained in detail. Same with climate, calendar, and other relevant information.

Other than that, it fully depends on the individual setting (i.e. how much pseudo-realism would be expected, etc).

Bye
Thanee

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Generally, as a homebrew addict, I never look for campaign settings to play in. That said, I generally look for two things: Original worlds and themed locations. Unfortunately, the former is rare (most everything is psuedo-midievel, a rehash of already over-done ideas, or just plain silly), while the later is more common (such as SL's Hollowfaust).

Over-all, I'm looking for decent flavor to inspire me and suitable rules that support that flavor.

 

[Rokonin]

Maybe not down the same path you guys/gals are talking, but for me, a campaign setting has to have variety. Settings like Al-Qadim or Dark Sun are fun, but I lean more towards the Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms settings, simply because of the sheer size and variety of the worlds. This allows me to add in whatever I wish, be it an inspiration from a movie or book, or an adventure from Dungeon or the internet.

 

[barsoomcore]

Because I'm an inveterate kit-basher/homebrewer/ideastealer, for me a good campaign setting is one that features as many good ideas that I can use in my own campaign setting as possible.

Oriental Adventures kicks butt in this regard. That's probably the most useful book I've ever purchased. I use the classes, the spells, the monsters, the equipment, the skills and feats -- without running an "Oriental" campaign. Great book.

Skull & Bones is another great one. So much good yummy stuff in there.

I've gotten a lot of use out of both the Relics & Rituals books, too.

I like campaign setting books because they tend to have a wide variety of elements -- there's usually new spells, magic items, monsters, classes, gear -- all in one book. I don't really care about maps or any of that stuff because I tend to use my own locations and just plug in material from other sources.

 

[D+1]

Cartography. The map is the #1 thing that can hook my interest. If the world as I, the DM, will be constantly looking at it from my god-eye view looks interesting I'll be more willing to give the setting a deeper look. If the maps look terrible, I'll be much less inclined to look any further at it simply because you're already losing my interest in the physical "look" of the world.

Something different is good, but the further out it pushes the envelope the less inclined I am to pursue it. I'm gonna have to sell my players on participating in this campaign world and that means *I* have to pitch it to them, not give them a book to read. If it's going to take a whole session to explain all the differences from Core Rules and lay out the basic tableau of the setting then I might buy it - but it'll just go right to my shelf after reading and stay there. I need to be able to explain it to my players in a few minutes and have them say "Cool!" or I'm not gonna bash my head against the wall for the next umpteen months trying to get them to feel what I did when I read it.

History is bound to be rewritten so don't give me entire chapters starting with the dawn of recorded time. Give me the world as it exists now and the basics of how it got to be this way. If you want to lay out history for the world in serious depth then put it in a supplement. If I'm not going to be interested in that information as part of a supplement then I'm probably not interested in it at ALL.

Related to the cartography - a world will need good countries, evil countries, a few smaller, a few larger - and then have wilderness that the PC's will generally be the first to explore (should they choose to do so or should I choose to move the campaign in that direction). I need to be able to run an ENTIRE campaign based in a single city in this world, in a small part of a kingdom, and on up to world-spanning and world-altering epics.

The world has to have things wrong with it. The peaceful and good kingdom of Warmenfuzzy has to have a ruler with black and dangerous ulterior motives, or is beset on all sides by enemies, or something. I need to be able to take the "snapshot" view of the world that the material gives me and move the world forward without having to dream up a direction to take it and a motivation for doing so. And it DOESN'T have to involve the entire world in a single over-reaching story arc. If such an arc exists that's fine, but it shouldn't be the raison detre for the setting. It shouldn't proceed on the assumption that playing out that single grand arc is what everyone who runs the setting will do with it or that it should color everything else about the setting.

There is also still the contradictory point that the LESS I need to explain or hand out to the players to get them up to speed on the world the better. A setting should NOT require a complete Handbook for the players.

 

[Thanee]

Oh yes, a really good map (or even atlas) is great to have.
A decent map at least is a necessity.

Bye
Thanee

 

[pdkoning]

I would like details about history, from the 'creation' to recent history, a description of the current state of the setting, is it at war? has the economy collapsed? Rulers and powers.
Of course I like information that is important for day to day business, Inns, Temples, the influence of religion, law and order.
And of course a map.

And the setting has to be 'interesting' Now what is interesting? I think that it should have some concepts and ideas that are not implemented by other (major) campaign settings.

Even if there was no artwork in a setting, but it was interesting enough I would still read it.

 

[sellars]

Cartography. The map is the #1 thing that can hook my interest.

Definately! For me the maps are really important.

Thing I also like are descriptions on culture, so regional clothing, food, music, customs, etc. That's what really interests me, because that has to do with the everyday life in the campaign. I like to emphasize that when I am DMming. I don't care too much for politics, when the campaign is not directly affected by it.

My favorite settings include: Dark Sun, Al Quadim, and RL (especially masque of the Red Death)

 

[Minicol]

I would like to get some feedback on how DMs here feel differently concerning what constitutes the most important aspects of a campaign setting. Do you prefer a campaign setting which defines its lands in terms of its History? (1)

Or do you prefer a setting which allows the GM to fill in the fluff but provides tons of demographic data like imports, exports, population density, topographical info, etc? (2)

Or is it flavor text, artwork, and supporting fiction that is most important? (3)

Lastly, does anybody feel that campaign settings should be presented in a way which assumes the GM will start from a small region (4).

Very interesting question
(1) I would say yes, but not only history but also nationalities, factions, border conflicts, religious conflicts... anywhere there is strife, there is adventure.
(2) No, it comes second to (1), though it helps

(3) Yes, because you need it to differentiate your world from the others

(4) No, you should detail a few regions better and provide a few starting points, but give at least an idea of what is on the current continent. people would know about it from merchants, oracles, and so on...

 

[Afrodyte]

I like detail too, but I like it presented piecemeal. I don't like setting books that bombard me with large historical treatises, or relentless amounts of detail in paragraph form. I want a succinct history, and if it must be more involved, write a novel or at least write in a style that doesn't sound biblical. I wonder if my preference is the norm in the RPG community, or if I am the minority. Because, of course, there are many history buffs who role-play, and many people who read the Silmarillion for fun (crazy people )...

I read the Silmarillion for fun, and I like it better than LotR. However, I share your preference for succint history and setting details. In addition, I think a few evocative details do more for me than reams of information written so dryly that it makes an almanac read like a Stephen King novel.

What about detailing the whole continent, but each region (chapter) starts with a single town or city and then describes surrounding regions? So the DM could choose a region, read about the "default" city or town, and then work his way outward with his players from there.

Or alternatively, perhaps two towns, cities, or villages. One is typical for that region and the other exceptional. It'd be like detailing the American northest by picking a sleepy town in Vermont or Rhode Island as the "typical" settlement but have NYC be the extraordinary example.