Making campaign settings promote better roleplaying/character interaction

I kind of run the opposite sort of game that The Shaman does . . .
You take the high road and I take the low road and somehow we both end up in bloody Brigadoon. :cool:

By the way, there's a space station in my Traveller setting which is based on Gormenghast's castle.
Names: I borrowed heavily from Gormenghast here in the sense that I wanted quirky names. Peake had Sepulcrave, Titus Groan, Flay, Swelter, Dr. Prunesquallor, Barquentine -- these are fantastic names, and you can see a pattern with them. The trouble with some fantasy naming conventions is that they're not intuitive for the players to anticipate. . . . In my case, I named characters stuff like "Spackleroot" and "Caddera Drupe" and "Sandgrief," names that didn't make a lot of sense -- but that hinted at the sideways, quirky logic that infuses the culture.
I gotta say, that's really awesome, B.

The last time I ran a fantasy game I used real-world languages and names and applied them to different cultures for just this reason. For example, gnolls had Bantu names, which really added a lot of flavor to them.
Seasons and weather: I always wonder why I don't use these more, because it means so much to describe the city as full of fog after a heavy rain, or with slick icy patches and bits of unmelted snow in the shadowy corners. It can be only a line here and there, but having weather show up in more ways than just a storm for dramatic effect helps showcase the setting. If it's pouring rain outside, then the PCs and the NPCs taking shelter in the tavern have one more thing in common: a desire not to have to go back out in the rain until it lets up. That can have some impact.
It's winter in our game, and I remind the players regularly of that fact in small ways: a beggar shivering in a tattered blanket, workers breaking up ice floes collecting against bridge pilings, a non-player character blowing on his hands before drawing his sword.
Colors: It never hurts to tint a color palette in some way. Yellow causes anxiety, so it's fun to have potentially threatening groups wear yellow. A city whose stones turn bluish in the twilight has a different feel than one that turns rich and red-gold from reflected sunlight. Like weather, it doesn't have to be used all that often, but take a look at a game like Assassin's Creed sometime: they do a fantastic job with making each city feel distinct with just a nod toward a different color palette.
Peasants wear earth tones in whitewashed hovels, nobles bright silks in salons with red velvet wallpaper, soldiers wear colored sashes which indicate their nationality, servants can be identified by the colors of their livery.
Food: What do people eat and drink? It's a favorite question of mine. I've had tremendous luck with personalizing even the most generic of D&D campaigns with a few signature drinks and dishes.
One of the little things I really like about The Village of Hommlet is the list of libations offered at the inn; they speak to a larger world.

I've added details on horses to my game for the same reason; being mounted on a coal-black Percheron gives one flavor, a chestnut Andalusian another.
Enemies: Humans and their ilk are, hands down, my favorite villains.
As a fan of no-monster settings, I couldn't agree more.
Limiting the monster palette and figuring out what will showcase the local flavor most is one of my favorite tricks.
Definitely.
I love it when it goes well enough that the players buy in.
Last night, one of my favorite moments of player buy-in apeared, when the adventuers went searching for an npc at a location they visited in the past, in order to invite him to join them at a meeting with another npc. There was no specific reason for them to invite Ferusac other than they trust him and consider him to be a friend.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Players will do what they think they can do.

Using a familiar setting can cause the players to do things, because they know how to avoid the GM thwarting them.

Using an unfamiliar setting can cause players to not do things, because they don't know how to avoid the GM thwarting them.


That being said, I think the underlying issue is if the GM is stomping on players for being "wrong" or not. Often times GMs fall into the trap of having a world that is really nothing more than an elaborate game of Simon Says, instead of a basis for an interactive story . . . I don't think that using a familiar setting is strictly needed to get players to interact if the GM is careful not to stomp on players when they attempt to interact with any setting.

Great comment, Nork, something I've had in my head while GMing the last several months.

Players stop interacting with/reacting to what they're presented when they don't think any of their choices really make a difference, and there's two main reasons for that.

One is, as you've stated, if they're getting "railroaded," or if not railroaded, exactly, just generally being told "No, that's not possible because the setting dictates it."

The other reason, and this is the one I really appreciate the advice everyone has given, is that they don't have enough information to make meaningful choices. The GM hasn't given them a firm grip of the setting is a big one; not really giving any thought to their character other than the numbers on the page; not asking questions, or just generally assuming that the GM's job is to be the railroad.
 

This is where the combination of the 32-page players' [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Gazetteer-Dungeons-Dragons-Gary-Holian/dp/0786917423/ref=pd_sim_b_1]Amazon.com: Gazetteer (Dungeons & Dragons, 3rd Edition) (9780786917426): Gary Holian, Erik Mona, Sean Reynolds, Frederick Weining: Books[/ame] and the 192-page DMs' [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Living-Greyhawk-Gazetteer-Dungeons-Drangons/dp/0786917431]Amazon.com: Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (Dungeons & Drangons: Living Greyhawk Campaign) (9780786917433): Erik Mona, Frederick Weining, Gary Holian, Sean K Reynolds: Books[/ame] really shines. Equip the DM with lots of details behind the scene and give the players enough to get the curious and started, as well as reasonably informed.
 

"And your Thri-Kreen's name is...?"

"Manfred Hans Blütstein, but you can call him Manny...Manny Hans."

"*groan*"

These are the best kinds of puns, the ones that cross the line twice and go from groan inducing to chuckle worthy.

I introduced a werebear NPC to a campaign somewhat recently and the bear-related puns flew like a hurricane.
 

In the last three years I've been a player in two different Flashing Blades games as well as running one of my own. Most of the players in those games were fans of the system and the period, and not too surprisingly, there were, and are, some different takes on the culture and history of the period. However, it's never been disruptive to any of the games; it's understood that there are different interpretations on people, places, and practices, and everyone at the table has the good grace to accept that.
A similar philosophy can be used with non-historical settings, too. If the GM is diverging from canon for a given setting, is upfront about it, and has a group that is willing to go with it, then who cares what the canon-nazis say? I played for several years in a Buffy/Angel game that was run like a spinoff series, well removed from the main places and characters of Buffyverse canon, and with a couple of tweaks to said canon. Without the big-name Slayers and Scoobies hanging about, there was more freedom for our PCs to shine as epic heroes in their own right. And when we did occasionally encounter a canonical character, it was on a more equal footing than legend/newbie, which made such cameos more fun from a player perspective.
 

Sometimes, however, familiarity can breed contempt. If you plan to do something different with Europe, you can risk upsetting a player's expectations and disappointing them. Or, if some of the players know more than the DM... "Wait, didn't you know that if you take a left at Boulevard Saint-Michel in Paris, and then cross over two blocks, you come to the estate of Louis de Lombard, the famed knight?"

I totally agree here - one reason why my campaign was based on Irish/Celtic Myth and not a facsimilie of it. I took one class and did some indepedent research, but I am not an expert by any means. I used actual myths as part of a shadowy, long forgotten past, but everything else was developed from scratch around the concept. Those very iconic ideas were readily recognized and accepted by the players. So, even if my Irish Literature proff had sat in, I think the only thing they could have done was maybe add some flavor with references to real myth and real place names (which I would most likely have stolen and incorporated into the game :D)

However, unless the player is either a history professor or just a huge history buff, I don't think any player would be too put off by a DM playing it loose with history. They are after all re-writing as they create the story! As a DM, if it were a well established group and I knew of the players interest, I'd most likely let them help develop the world. I'd probably see (but not insist) if they wanted a character background that accounted for their knowledge - wandering <inset class here>; bard, knowledge domain cleric, etc.
 

I
I totally agree here - one reason why my campaign was based on Irish/Celtic Myth and not a facsimilie of it. I took one class and did some indepedent research, but I am not an expert by any means. I used actual myths as part of a shadowy, long forgotten past, but everything else was developed from scratch around the concept. Those very iconic ideas were readily recognized and accepted by the players. So, even if my Irish Literature proff had sat in, I think the only thing they could have done was maybe add some flavor with references to real myth and real place names (which I would most likely have stolen and incorporated into the game :D)

However, unless the player is either a history professor or just a huge history buff, I don't think any player would be too put off by a DM playing it loose with history. They are after all re-writing as they create the story! As a DM, if it were a well established group and I knew of the players interest, I'd most likely let them help develop the world. I'd probably see (but not insist) if they wanted a character background that accounted for their knowledge - wandering <inset class here>; bard, knowledge domain cleric, etc.

It sounds like you did a good job in coming up with something familiar, but not too familiar. While I agree that most players will be fine with the DM changing things around in an historical setting (I think I said 90% of the players) - I do think you run that risk in any popular setting (instead of my example of historical Paris, you can do the same with Waterdeep in the Forgotten Realms: "Hey, don't worry about the bad guys chasing us, we only need to make it to the corner, and one of the Lords of Waterdeep lives there...")

I don't mean to pick on the Realms, as I've had many a good adventure there over the past 20 or so years. It's just the setting that has had the most written about over the years with so many setting books and novels.
 

I

It sounds like you did a good job in coming up with something familiar, but not too familiar. While I agree that most players will be fine with the DM changing things around in an historical setting (I think I said 90% of the players) - I do think you run that risk in any popular setting (instead of my example of historical Paris, you can do the same with Waterdeep in the Forgotten Realms: "Hey, don't worry about the bad guys chasing us, we only need to make it to the corner, and one of the Lords of Waterdeep lives there...")

Thanks - the players seemed to like it anyway, so I'll claim it was a good job!

I do agree with published settings - I ran a Dragonlance Campaign through college and I recall telling players at the beginning - "this is precisely where we diverge from canon." That way they knew it was now "their" Dragonlance story. Luckily I only had one player that was familiar with the series (which I found odd really from a bunch of geeks like me...) Of course, I wouldnt have even tried anything in Forgotten Realms since I wasn't familiar with it at the time (probably also odd...:))
 

Thanks - the players seemed to like it anyway, so I'll claim it was a good job!

I do agree with published settings - I ran a Dragonlance Campaign through college and I recall telling players at the beginning - "this is precisely where we diverge from canon." That way they knew it was now "their" Dragonlance story. Luckily I only had one player that was familiar with the series (which I found odd really from a bunch of geeks like me...) Of course, I wouldnt have even tried anything in Forgotten Realms since I wasn't familiar with it at the time (probably also odd...:))

I ran a DragonLance game many many years ago, too. It was based on the original novels and modules that were published. Nobody else had read the books at the time, but I told them - "well, there are no dragons in the world... but, you can tell from the name of the module that since it is called "Dragon" Lance that dragons could possibly come into play down the road. However, I want your characters to act like there are no dragons in the world."
 

Remove ads

Top