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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 4350498" data-attributes="member: 59082">You mean Wyverns & Labyrinths doesn't work for you? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />My sense is that you'd have to do both--cover a wide swath of territory and styles (like your four spheres and more) AND carry a specific flavor and exoticism. This is why I mentioned Shards of the Stone: It was one large world with many "realms" of different tones and textures, more different from each other than, say, the regions of the Forgotten Realms. Most campaign settings seem to play the real world analogue game; you have your core fantasized medieval Europe, then a Northern wilderness, then a middle eastern region, ancient Egypt, etc. Shards exemplifies what I think could work: A similar level of diversity (as FR and others), but not as real world analogues. I mean, that has been done to death. I think someone would have to come up with the right flavor, or combination of flavors, that was both familiar and exotic at the same time.Yes, highly improbable. Still, it is fun to think about. Your last sentence finds the core, imo, as well as supports what I was saying before. Not only would the setting have to be something truly unique or different--or "traditional fantasy" done so well that it seemed fresh and new--but the system would have to somehow be both simple and open-endedly complex.And it may be, as someone said previously by mentioning Magic the Gathering, that some new element would be required, something that broke the boundaries of table top RPGs. An "evolutionary development," so to speak.</blockquote>

Verification