How big is your world?

[Chunklets]

Now, a follow-up question: Does the size of a setting matter? Do campaign settings *need* to be that big? Do the PCs actually visit or explore all the areas of the setting?

Those of you who have smaller campaign settings, do the PCs ever run out of room? Does the campaign ever feel too small? Have PCs ever gotten to a point and said, "This is it?"
Quasqueton

Yes, I think size does matter (ooo!), even if the PCs don't actually visit all or most of the setting's areas. IMHO (and I feel the same way about settings of fantasy novels, not just games), a setting needs to have the feel of size. For example, the Great Quest For The Lost City Of Foorx loses a bit of its ooomph if the adventurers can get there in two days on foot.

As I hinted at above, the PCs don't need to visit all the areas of the setting. NPCs, treasure, etc. from faraway places can add an exotic air to the proceedings even in the characters' home area.

 

[Arnwyn]

Now, a follow-up question: Does the size of a setting matter? Do campaign settings *need* to be that big? Do the PCs actually visit or explore all the areas of the setting?

Yes, for me it does. My players sure like to have their characters travel around and "see the sights" and experience all the different cultures.

 

[Hand of Evil]

800 X 1000 miles - standard mapping unit for CC2. This makes my center grid. Mostly this is a state (other terms can apply) and its borders. The borders and other grids will be mapped as needed.

For me I think the fantasy worlds I have seen are over populated. I keep cities and towns in a tight little circle and have a lot of wilderness.

 

[megamania]

Lately I have been playing on a planar level so my game world is infinity.

Caldonia (what I had mapped) was about 1000x1500 miles of shallow sea inlets and island nations. So I guess that would be about Miss river to NE roughly (a bit smaller still I think).

 

[megamania]

Following up on the related question-

My players were going to visit each island. There are about 15-20 seperate islands. Each had its own unique feel.

Top
Caldonia- human rule. Average magic levels
Middlelands- Elven forest lands. Think magical red woods with elven druids
Broken Lands- Orcs & Goblinoids in a salt marsh made up of Mangro Groves
Mud Lands- Swamps

Left side
Caldonia
Regal Islands- Monks and lands of ancient but subtle secrets. Origins of world
Islands of the Ruined- Vocanic island went boom. Who knows what can found
Avatarrii- Dinosaurs with Compi riding Kobold tribes. Ancient but primitive

Bottom
Avatarri
Jarkarri & J Rex- Barbarian lands that hold secret to world. Island= no magic
Apprenti- Fertile lands- controlled by mages fought for by barbarians
Arcania- HIGH MAGIC and largest island
Islands of Darmmer- Mage / Lich islands of security

Right side
Islands of Darmmar
Moradin- Core of large volcanic that has been built into solid rock fortress Dw


The rest fall on right side and lower middle and I can't remember off the top of my head

Halfling lands- they settled here to explore sunken city of unknown origin
Dragon Lands- 'nuff said directly next to Arcania and sole reason mages and dragons alike have not taken over
Island of the dead- Cursed with undead
several others

 

[GrumpyOldMan]

I have never been interested in world-building. I’ve always preferred to use ready made worlds and adapt them to my tastes. I have two favourites, which I return to again and again.

The first is a flat world, a bubble floating inside a storm of chaos. The main continent is (approximately) the size of the USA. It is a mythic place where, each morning in the far east of the world the Gates of the Dawn crash open and the mighty Sun God rides out on his flaming chariot, blazing a trail through the realm of the Sky Gods. The world is a factional place with Mighty Empires, brave Barbarians and creatures of Earth, Darkness and chaos. It is a place of myth, magic and heroes. The there are three moons, of course, as the world is flat, they cannot be in orbit. One is invisible, one is blue and climbs up the sky dome, the other is red and hangs benignly (or malevolently, depending on your point of view) over a vast, expanding, Empire. I’ve played many campaigns, mostly in the same area, and I’ve hardly scratched the surface of possibilities.

The second is a planet some 12,000km in diameter orbiting an earth like star, it has one moon with a synodic period close to 30 days and a 360 day year. The entire planet is mapped, distant continents have few details, the largest, similar to Europe, Asia & Africa is more detailed with nations, languages, trade goods and routes all given. Most detailed area is an island off the northwest coast of this continent. This area less than 1500km x 100km contains several Kingdoms, in various stages of feudalism, a ‘Republic’ a land under foreign occupation and, so rumours go, a couple of non-human cultures. The lands are extremely well detailed, with adventuring and political opportunities at every turn. Again, I’ve played many campaigns, mostly in the same area, and I’ve hardly scratched the surface of possibilities.

The worlds? Glorantha and Hârn.

To answer Quasqueton no, I’ve used barely a fraction of the background materials and the players in my Hârn campaign rarely go abroad (by which I mean out of their home Kingdom). For the first few (campaign month they were never more than 40km from home, but I had no problems keeping them busy. Even after 10 years gaming, they’ve still plenty to do.

GOM

 

[Orius]

Interesting answers. Most of your homebrew settings are quite huge.

Now, a follow-up question: Does the size of a setting matter? Do campaign settings *need* to be that big? Do the PCs actually visit or explore all the areas of the setting?

Well, from my experiences, they don't need to be huge. The first of the homebrews that I mentioned above was a planet with a diameter of about 13,000 miles. While I had some good ideas, the world itself was just too damn big. Plus trying to map out a round world turned out to a be a pain in the ass, so I switched to a flat world. Hey, it's fantasy.

 

[Agemegos]

the England/Scotland/Wales island. Say, is there a name for that island as a whole?

Yep, it's called "Great Britain" (being the biggest of the British Isles).

 

[Agemegos]

How big is your homebrew setting? (Can you describe it's size in relation to the Real World?)

Gehennum is an archipelago about 1,500 km long and up to 400 km wide. There are over 6,000 islands of which 880 are inhabited. The total land surface is about 200,000 square kilometres. That's about two-thirds the area of the Philippines, and rather bigger than mediaeval England.

On various adventures PC have visited foreign countries such as Ashikagalon and Elusium (10,350 km away and 12,500 km in the other direction), The Blessed Isles (2,110 km away), Ramastaarn (4,600 km away), Fairon (1,860 km away), Jotunheim (10,000 km away) and a few others.

Is your setting a place to support multiple campaigns? Or do you change settings with each new campaign?

I have been running campaigns set in Gehennum since 1988, set in three main historical periods and an 'alternative history' set 100 years after the action of one major campaign that altered the course of history. I think I must have run ten or eleven Gehennum campaigns, not counting occasional scratch adventures.

 

[D+1]

Does the size of a setting matter? Do campaign settings *need* to be that big? Do the PCs actually visit or explore all the areas of the setting?

Yes it matters, no they don't need to be that big, and no they've NEVER explored all areas of a setting.

That's most of the reason why over the years the settings I use or at least the PARTS of a setting that I use have gotten smaller and smaller. I never feel the need to have a campaign with a scope that spans the globe. Players never get a feel for a place like that and it's hard to pass along any kind of feel for a place like that.

Those of you who have smaller campaign settings, do the PCs ever run out of room? Does the campaign ever feel too small? Have PCs ever gotten to a point and said, "This is it?"

No they never run out of room (at least haven't so far), yes it does sometimes nonetheless feel too small, and if they've asked that last question they've never mentioned it to me (though they have mentioned more than once how much fun they're having which does no end of good for my ego.

IME the larger the setting the more it's like trying to get to know the country by never leaving the Interstate. You pass through all manner of terrain, little hamlets by the score and big cities - but never see more than an inn or a few other buildings as you move from point A to B.

When players move overland and you repeatedly tell them, "You march for a week and nothing happens," or, "You ride for ten days, kill a few orcs, ride for 9 more..." then you are presenting a world that is impressive ONLY for it's size. It's otherwise a wide, boring, empty place. It DOES matter how big the world is because it affects the pacing of your campaign. How long do pc's have to travel before something, anything, happens to them? Size has a direct effect upon your style of play, the overall structure of a campaign, etc. Bigger is not necessarily better. As long as you have SOME idea of what's in the white spaces (what we used to refer to as "graph-paper terrain") so that you can fill it in if NEEDED, then it's NOT needed. Trying to nonetheless directly apply those wide open spaces to your campaign when characters never see them or nothing ever happens in them alters the tone of the game.

I think people may think they want the biggest, world-spanning game they can pump out but often it ends up being a lot of empty/flavorless white space. The smaller the scale the more detailed and intimate a connection you can establish to the setting. Not that world-spanning campaigns can't or don't work, just that it's not really what most people want, even though they might THINK that bigger=better.

Just MNSHO