Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1321158" data-attributes="member: 6398">Consider the thread currently about Dawnforge.  One of the posters, when asked to describe the setting, didn't describe it at all.  Rather, he cut out a lot of [A] is like in the Realms, and [C] is like [D] in Dragonlance, etc.  Every region was given a comparison to another setting rather than being described.  Granted, this might have just been a poor choice on the part of the poster (indeed, his camparisons may not be accurate).  But like I asked in the thread, what would draw me to a re-hash of campaign elements that were already overdone before 2E was released? Does it have to be so different as to be "alien" in feel/flavor?  No, not at all (though I invite it...  Bring on the pulp!).  But if the high points of a setting is that it's got similarities with other settings, then why would this be remotely interesting?  Iron Kingdoms, Oathbound, Midnight...  Each of these has something new to bring into the table, a new twist that, while perhaps not "original", is presented in a manner that creates an original location for adventures to occur. Birthright is very classical fantasy (with a few sacred cows tossed in for no reason other than to not tick people off), but it presents a new facet of the game not seen before (the 2E version of the seeting), that being the aspect of ruling domains in a "you and the land are one" manner akin to the legend of Arthur, and thus (when it was originally released) was a fresh-breath to the game. Guess people shouldn't expect "too much"; heck, even the Great Flood wasn't original.  But there's a definate difference between "let's auto-gen a map, build countries Frankenstein-like from a bunch of overused ideas, and hide the shallowness in lots of kewl powerz giving crunch" and "let's make a plausible setting that isn't 'just like' something else". On the subject of "niche" settings, I say "bring it on".  I would happily buy a one-book campaign setting (aware that there would be no future support unless it just got insanely popular) provided that the flavor is intrigueing/inspiring and the OGC is clearly identified.  Heck, I already have such in my collection of material.  Necopolis is a good example.  A gazatteer, lengthy mini-campaign, well written PI, and lots of new OGC, all in one book.  I'd have a book case of stuff like that if it even aimed for the same quality Necromancer delivered.  A setting that's presented richly enough to immerse into with minimum effort, undeveloped enough that I can do quite a bit with it, and unsupported as a product line so I never need to worry about someone whining about how I need to update to Necropolis 3.7 so my group gets assimilated by New Sacred Cow of the Year. Hell, until 2E's mass-production box-sets, one-book start ups were common for Campaign Settings.  Grayhawk was a small-book gazetteer (a follow up to Blackmoore, I believe, which was just a tad before my time) that was used to fill in the background material of modules, Dragonlance was a series of 12 modules (War of the Lance, beginning to end-of-the-story-people!!!), Ravenloft was one module, and the Forgotten Realms was fluff material that Ed Greenwood drew from his homebrew world (!!!) to give his Dragon articles a higher word count (or to make up an excuse for where all his Twinkies and Pepsi went).</blockquote>

Verification