How much detail for published campaign settings?
A setting has to touch the imagination of the readers and present them with ideas that triggers "adventure". Back story and concept; players and GMs relate to and become "hook" by how the campaign setting is layed out.
Now, how this is done; backstory. This can be in locations, people, places, creatures and world myth. Example: Ratmen, alright you have them but now call them Skaven and base their culture on all the bad things you know of rats.
The more you place into the hooks and backstory, the more appeal BUT watch out, you don't want to closed in hooks, you wan to present enough material for the readers to take it and make it their own!
Now, how this is done; backstory. This can be in locations, people, places, creatures and world myth. Example: Ratmen, alright you have them but now call them Skaven and base their culture on all the bad things you know of rats.
The more you place into the hooks and backstory, the more appeal BUT watch out, you don't want to closed in hooks, you wan to present enough material for the readers to take it and make it their own!
Li Shenron
Legend
I agree about not putting too much detail, but I think the typical D&D campaign setting core sourcebook has the right amount. I don't actually own many, just the 3ed FRCS and Rokugan, and I think they are fine. Then FR regional books can go into much deeper details if wanted, and adventures will go into full details of a much smaller scale locales.
One additional thing to think about, is the distinction between society and the wilderness.
It's a personal thing, but mostly I tend to set adventures in the wilderness (especially dungeons, apparently I am a bit old-school with that...), and I make up my own details, thus I'm fine with a campaign setting giving me only overland maps (which I really need to have a sense of consistency, otherwise I cannot design large continents by myself) with scattered suggestions for points-of-interest, and then leaving me the job for detailing them and mapping on a small scale.
OTOH, I have more difficulties designing things such as the overarching/background plots and the relationships between people/organizations of power, so I would really like having the campaign setting doing that job for me. I suppose it's different for others... but in my case, I can't really come up with good intricacies of conflicting agendas between NPCs and power groups, especially if some historical perspective is added.
So what I really need to be ready in a campaign setting book is those large-scale, overarching "structures" in both geography and society.
One additional thing to think about, is the distinction between society and the wilderness.
It's a personal thing, but mostly I tend to set adventures in the wilderness (especially dungeons, apparently I am a bit old-school with that...), and I make up my own details, thus I'm fine with a campaign setting giving me only overland maps (which I really need to have a sense of consistency, otherwise I cannot design large continents by myself) with scattered suggestions for points-of-interest, and then leaving me the job for detailing them and mapping on a small scale.
OTOH, I have more difficulties designing things such as the overarching/background plots and the relationships between people/organizations of power, so I would really like having the campaign setting doing that job for me. I suppose it's different for others... but in my case, I can't really come up with good intricacies of conflicting agendas between NPCs and power groups, especially if some historical perspective is added.
So what I really need to be ready in a campaign setting book is those large-scale, overarching "structures" in both geography and society.
Desdichado
Hero
While it's true the the gray box FR is highly regarded and late 2e era FR is not, I think it's a mistake to say that the amount of detail is the cause of that. There's a lot of other reasons why the gray box is highly regarded (most of the settings that existed prior to FR gray box were poorly organized and poorly presented, making using them much more difficult) and a lot of other reasons why late 2e era FR is not (lots of notorious NPCs stealing the show, the setting being designed to promote TSR's 'good always wins easily' mentality, the setting being strongly associated with blatant power creep, strongly associated with novels that "blew it up" from time to time, over-exposure of a few key NPCs, etc.)
I think rather, any amount of detail is the right amount of detail if the detail suggests adventuring ideas. If they don't, then who needs it? What do I care about the blacksmith of some hicksville village in the backcountry of the Silver Marches unless he's secretly somebody more interesting than the blacksmith? For example? Settings that are evocative, and that suggest adventure, tend to find an audience who can always use more material as long as the material is of a similar quality. I'm still bummed that there wasn't more Iron Kingdoms detail, for example, and there is actually quite a lot. But I could use more, because for almost all of it, I could see how I could use it to have fun adventures.
I think rather, any amount of detail is the right amount of detail if the detail suggests adventuring ideas. If they don't, then who needs it? What do I care about the blacksmith of some hicksville village in the backcountry of the Silver Marches unless he's secretly somebody more interesting than the blacksmith? For example? Settings that are evocative, and that suggest adventure, tend to find an audience who can always use more material as long as the material is of a similar quality. I'm still bummed that there wasn't more Iron Kingdoms detail, for example, and there is actually quite a lot. But I could use more, because for almost all of it, I could see how I could use it to have fun adventures.
Last edited:
aco175
Legend
I like settings to have more detail over less, but still have rom for DM's to add to it to make it their own, not just a module. It was said earlier about the mage guild with only some being detailed and some left for each DM to play with. I would have smaller areas for play and thus have them be better detailed and better organized for those wanting to add things as well. FR did ok with the local books, but the original gray box just had several pages on each region/country and only like 10% was premade.
Another thing I would like to see is that some locations are left off limits and you are told from the beginning. I remember some setting doing this before, not sure which right now. I think if you buy this cool setting and have the town and dungeon on the outskirts set up a certain way for a campaign then come back around later with another group or even the same group that it should still be what you designed and not changed because a supplement came out. Yes, I know you can leave it since it is yours and you are the DM, but I have books from 2E that have old things I designed and that I can dust off and run again with out much effort. I guess this part is more a rant.
I would like to have some sort of website that people can add to as a bonus for that setting. I'm sure some places already do this to a certain extent, but I'm talking something with links and suport. There is no money in this part though. Imagine you are playing FR and you could grab a module someone else made for a tomb in Cormyr where you are playing. You could change it to suit your needs and level. You could use it as is with the backstory given or change it and repost it back as a option for the same location or place it in another location. Traveling to Waterdeep, grab someones tavern map and description, someone elses npc for a hook and a third persons sewer map. Now, you can add some encounters to the map and repost it after you have finished.
These are all options to the oficial campaign, but become great tools for people coming back to your setting.
Another thing I would like to see is that some locations are left off limits and you are told from the beginning. I remember some setting doing this before, not sure which right now. I think if you buy this cool setting and have the town and dungeon on the outskirts set up a certain way for a campaign then come back around later with another group or even the same group that it should still be what you designed and not changed because a supplement came out. Yes, I know you can leave it since it is yours and you are the DM, but I have books from 2E that have old things I designed and that I can dust off and run again with out much effort. I guess this part is more a rant.
I would like to have some sort of website that people can add to as a bonus for that setting. I'm sure some places already do this to a certain extent, but I'm talking something with links and suport. There is no money in this part though. Imagine you are playing FR and you could grab a module someone else made for a tomb in Cormyr where you are playing. You could change it to suit your needs and level. You could use it as is with the backstory given or change it and repost it back as a option for the same location or place it in another location. Traveling to Waterdeep, grab someones tavern map and description, someone elses npc for a hook and a third persons sewer map. Now, you can add some encounters to the map and repost it after you have finished.
These are all options to the oficial campaign, but become great tools for people coming back to your setting.
grodog
Hero
Both excellent points. I feel like good settings need to leave room to allow the DM to make it their own within the scope and boundaries defined by the setting (otherwise there's not much point to buying a setting vs. just homebrewing it from the get-go).
One of the weaker aspects of latter-day 2e Greyhawk revival was that many of the published adventures and sourcebooks were in fact filling in mysteries mentioned in either the 1979 DMG ("who is Vecna?"), the 1980 folio/1983 boxed set (now I can't think of one offhand, of course
), the 1992 From the Ashes boxed set (The Star Cairns, Doomgrinder, Rary/The Bright Desert, etc.), or earlier 1e modules (Keraptis and his Indoctrination Center in Return to White Plume Mountain, etc.). In and of itself that's OK, as long as there are new mysteries created to replace the old ones, but the Greyhawk Revival didn't do that very much.When I buy a setting I want detail. Otherwise I can just homebrew my own.
What I like though is how Kingdoms of Kalamar did it. First of all the setting is stagnant which means they don't plan to bring out books that move the mega plot of the world along. So once you start to play in the setting all the changes happen because of what your players do not because of a new source book.
The setting has lots of possible hooks for a lot of different play styles as well as areas that are wilderness to be explored by the players.
They don't stat out the major NPCs instead they leave it up to the DM to decide what level they are and what powers they have, The same with certain artifacts. It really allows you to customize your game.
What I like though is how Kingdoms of Kalamar did it. First of all the setting is stagnant which means they don't plan to bring out books that move the mega plot of the world along. So once you start to play in the setting all the changes happen because of what your players do not because of a new source book.
The setting has lots of possible hooks for a lot of different play styles as well as areas that are wilderness to be explored by the players.
They don't stat out the major NPCs instead they leave it up to the DM to decide what level they are and what powers they have, The same with certain artifacts. It really allows you to customize your game.
Oh man! I remember when I first opened that thing up. The detailed maps. The clear plastic lay overs. Getting excited about the interesting gods and things like the Red Wizards of Thay, the Zhentarim, and the Harpers.
And, I remember opening that map, looking at Shadowdale, and seeing that one black dot on the map with the note "Entry to the Drow Realms".
There was no write-up about it in the books included in the set.
My imagination soared!
Assuming a fantasy setting (replace qualifiers as appropriate for other settings):
Detail that brings out the flavor of the world is great. But it shouldn't go much beyond that. The customs of the people in a particular region, what daily life is like for various economic classes, how religion and magic are treated (if they exist at all). The maps, if any, should include the major settlements in that region and locations of nearby forests and mountains but not much more. Have vague references to other kingdoms/peoples/cultures but leave most of the world uncharted and labeled "Here be monsters."
Detail that brings out the flavor of the world is great. But it shouldn't go much beyond that. The customs of the people in a particular region, what daily life is like for various economic classes, how religion and magic are treated (if they exist at all). The maps, if any, should include the major settlements in that region and locations of nearby forests and mountains but not much more. Have vague references to other kingdoms/peoples/cultures but leave most of the world uncharted and labeled "Here be monsters."
I don't need a lot of detail in a campaign setting. For 3e, the Greyhawk Gazetteer got it about right for me as opposed to the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer which was a little too much information. Omega World d20 was inspired in its conciseness. Judge Dredd d20 was a great core book.
For 4e, I really like Hammerfast--Gardmore Abbey not as much. The Gamma World boxed set was great--the expansions we didn't play (and may never do so).
Speaking of Gamma World, I really liked the Alternity Gamma World setting contained in that core book. I liked it so much I ran the adventures using Omega World d20 rules. And, I even took the Alternity Gamma World map with me to Seattle to see some of the landmarks.
This applies to other games, too. For Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, I liked Karak Azgal so much that I got the rest of the core game. I even kept Karak Azgal when I got rid of the rest of it.
Savage Worlds has it just about right with their plot point campaign settings. There is enough there to run a game but not so much that I get mired in the details.
For 4e, I really like Hammerfast--Gardmore Abbey not as much. The Gamma World boxed set was great--the expansions we didn't play (and may never do so).
Speaking of Gamma World, I really liked the Alternity Gamma World setting contained in that core book. I liked it so much I ran the adventures using Omega World d20 rules. And, I even took the Alternity Gamma World map with me to Seattle to see some of the landmarks.
This applies to other games, too. For Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, I liked Karak Azgal so much that I got the rest of the core game. I even kept Karak Azgal when I got rid of the rest of it.
Savage Worlds has it just about right with their plot point campaign settings. There is enough there to run a game but not so much that I get mired in the details.
Similar Threads
