D&D 4e Campaign World

[LostSoul]

The great thing about the points of light setting is that it lets DMs do whatever they want with the campaign setting, within a small framework.

I am running in that setting (the Nentir Vale); I have recently decreed that Turoth was led to ruin by nine Sorcerer-Kings, a cult that signed a pact with Baelzebul to lead an empire that would last until the end of time. After a series of sudden, bloody coups, they the Empire of Bael Turoth for a thousand years.

Then the Lord of Lies came calling.


I would much rather have the freedom to write stuff like that than feel constrained by setting assumptions.

 

[Glyfair]

I would much rather have the freedom to write stuff like that than feel constrained by setting assumptions.

I mostly agree. Strangely enough, that's how I felt about Greyhawk.

We started with brief tidbits of information that stirred the imagination. We then got the setting, which didn't damage this too much. We had mostly guidelines. Then more and more information was released we slowly but surely killed the mystery and added more to the "this is the way the world is supposed to be." That gradually sapped away my interest in Greyhawk (and most of the other early settings, in fact).

 

[Doc_Klueless]

I mostly agree. Strangely enough, that's how I felt about Greyhawk.

I played in both Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms when they first came out in their boxed sets (ug, I'm old). I liked how they were skeletons for DMs to hang meat on. I'd kinda like the same thing for 4e. However, a wiki is really all I need or want.

While I am a subscriber to DDI, I simply lack the time to read every article or adventure to leach out the world information. Do I need this to play? Nah. I always run a homebrew. I do think that there is some great, adventure-inspiring stuff in the books though and I don't wanna miss any of it!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I mostly agree. Strangely enough, that's how I felt about Greyhawk.

We started with brief tidbits of information that stirred the imagination. We then got the setting, which didn't damage this too much. We had mostly guidelines. Then more and more information was released we slowly but surely killed the mystery and added more to the "this is the way the world is supposed to be." That gradually sapped away my interest in Greyhawk (and most of the other early settings, in fact).

I only new Greyhawk from 3E. It was basically the "implied setting", as Monte Cook likes to call it. The details were vague, but there was a kind of outline. I liked that.
The next setting I got to know was FR, and that seemed overly detailed to me.

But there are also happy middle grounds to me - Eberron seems to have the right amount of detail to jump in and have a lot of freedom.

 

[Klaus]

Yeah, that wiki is sorely needing an update. A factoid I can pull off the top of my head is that the human empire was destroyed by a force of Gnolls, and the king of said empire was pulled into the abyss or somesuch. That was in the Yeenoghu article, IIRC (or maybe the Gnoll article).

More info:

King Elydir, the last king of Nerath, became a vestige that lends its power to anyone willing to make a pact, in hopes of helping a future hero.

The ______ Power books have lots of implied setting tidbits that aren't covered in the core books, in several sidebars. For instance:

- Genasi scoff at the eladrin claim to the invention of the Swordmage style. No evidence supports either claim. (Arcane Power)
- Dragonborn bards keep alive the sagas of old Arkhosia. (Arcane Power)
- Zebukiel, the Gray Worm, betrayed Arkhosia in hopes of forcing an end to the conflict with Bael Turath. He was hunted down and now lives as a a maimed wyrm. (Draconomicon 1).

- Lycanthropes are subject to the moon's influence because of strife between Melora and Sehanine.

 

[drothgery]

But there are also happy middle grounds to me - Eberron seems to have the right amount of detail to jump in and have a lot of freedom.

I'm a big Eberron fan, and don't think it's over-detailed by any stretch of the imagination, but there's really quite a bit of stuff out there. I mean, in addition to the 3.5 Campaign Setting and the 4e Players's Guide and Campaign Guide, there were 13 Eberron hardcovers published. Add in the Adventurer's Guide to Eberron softcover, and that's nearly 3000 pages of material in print. Granted, there's some rules and fluff overlap between the 3.5 and 4e books, but still, it's a lot.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'm a big Eberron fan, and don't think it's over-detailed by any stretch of the imagination, but there's really quite a bit of stuff out there. I mean, in addition to the 3.5 Campaign Setting and the 4e Players's Guide and Campaign Guide, there were 13 Eberron hardcovers published. Add in the Adventurer's Guide to Eberron softcover, and that's nearly 3000 pages of material in print. Granted, there's some rules and fluff overlap between the 3.5 and 4e books, but still, it's a lot.

You might be right and it's my selective perception - I basically never read beyond the "core" setting books (in 4E Players Guide and DM Guide), and they made me feel I knew enough about the setting to run it, and that there wasn't anything hidden beyond that that I better know if I meant it "serious".

Anyway, I like the Eberron approach, and I like the PoL approach. They are different approaches to "presenting" a setting. I think the PoL is something that triggers a lot of associations without really feeling "nailed down". It serves as an inspiration by making one want to connect the dots and information to a whole - but this whole can be different from person to person and even day to day.

Eberron on the other hand creates a well described style and theme - which inspires by making one seek out other concepts of this style and theme and bring them to Eberron or find a way to represent them them.

Both seem to lead to creativity for me. It causes new ideas to spring up. I think it's typical that creativity works best within a certain range between freedom and constraints. If it is too narrow, most ideas immediately clash with the assumptions or descriptions fo the settings. But if the setting is too broad, there is a blank slate and you have no starting point from where to fill it.

Of course, every person might have a different "comfort zone" here.

 

[Rechan]

I'm a big Eberron fan, and don't think it's over-detailed by any stretch of the imagination, but there's really quite a bit of stuff out there. I mean, in addition to the 3.5 Campaign Setting and the 4e Players's Guide and Campaign Guide, there were 13 Eberron hardcovers published. Add in the Adventurer's Guide to Eberron softcover, and that's nearly 3000 pages of material in print. Granted, there's some rules and fluff overlap between the 3.5 and 4e books, but still, it's a lot.

To be fair, those books are rehashed (PGtE), very very focused (Sharn: City of Towers, Stormreach, Dragons of Eberron), stuff that hadn't been touched on AT ALL (Secrets of Sarlona), or things that focus on more background information on organizations or history (Forge of War, Dragonmarked, Faiths of Eberron), or crunch (Magic of Eberron, Races of Eberron).

Of the ones that go into more detail of the actual PLACES beyond the ECS, there are only a few (Explorer's Guide, Secrets of Xen'Drik, Five Nations).

There are tons of places in Eberron that have only had their surface scratched, imho.

 

[Derulbaskul]

I would just love to see a really good world map with lots of locations marked on it but not necessarily described.

 

[MerricB]

I'm a very big fan of the world, which I'm seeing mostly through running the adventures.

Cheers!