New Campaign=New Setting?

[DragonLancer]

When your group ends one campaign and starts another, do you tend to change settings as well, or start a new campaign in the same setting as the previous one(s)? If it is the latter, does the previous campaign have an impact on the new one (generally speaking)?

If we're enjoying the setting, then when one ends we continue in the same setting. If the events in one campaign were significant, they continue to be felt in the new one.

 

[thundershot]

We keep using the same setting... We've put way too much into it to just abandon it.

 

[Ibram]

I've used the same campaign setting in all my D&D games (though one campaing took place on the other side of the world, and so was in many ways a "new" setting). Each campaing has taken place over a different area, though there has been some overlap, adding a bit more detail to the world.

 

[Nyaricus]

I DM either Forgotten Realms, my homebrew Ascension, or me and my player's homebrew [unnamed]. It doesn't really matter which we play, as I am familiar with the first 2 and am fleshing out the latter with my players.

I personally like to change up the area, at least. Althoguh I tend to get into caravan/goblinoid-orc attacks too much IMCs. Alas...

 

[Exquisite Dead Guy]

I run all my games in FR. I've got enough source material to run a campaign in a different region each time should I choose so there isn't a problem with "same old, same old" creeping in.

I usually don't make overt refernces to previous campaigns though there may be an occasional NPC that is just too good to not re-use.

 

[Rel]

I was just having a conversation with Old One, Rodrigo, Piratecat and KidCthulhu about this yesterday (I'm a dirty, rotten name dropper! ).

We switch campaigns about every 6-9 months and we almost always change setting and we frequently change system and/or genre as well. We are currently playing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and this time we'll be playing the same system for the next campaign (the one I'll be running) but it'll be a Pirates of the Caribbean game rather than the traditional "Old World" setting of Warhammer.

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

It depends on the DM. The Universe DMs most of our games. His first big campaign and second big campaign took place in the same setting, but nearly 800 years apart. As such, the main characters from the first game had become saints and legends - you could really see and feel their impact on the world and it was awesome.

We'll be starting a new game at the end of this month and he gave the players a choice. We could play a game in the same setting or he could create a new one. The players chose a new setting and so we're now world building... which is my favorite part of gaming.

That said - my quasi-game is set in 1922. Someday, if I ever finish it and run another quasi-game, it will not be in the same universe because, well, I just don't see that happening. It seems less exciting or necessary to have a sequel to an alternate history/modern game because, in many cases, the adventurers aren't public heroes in the same way fantasy (or even space/sci fi) adventurers are. Instead, in many cases, they are fighting to keep whatever dark forces are trying to destroy the "normal" world out of the public eye.

However, there's something about a fantasy setting that, in my opinion/experience, begs for a sequel. Something about magical adventurers and the like that makes me want to keep the imaginary world turning... but maybe it's just me.

 

[Kmart Kommando]

We always play Forgotten Realms.

I hate FR. hate hate hate hate well, you get the point.

Reading FR novels = good
trying to recreate an FR novel in a D&D adventure = bad (yet try they do)

it's always 'you can't be evil' and the enemies of your force-fed single god always know where you are. (I like the idea of worshipping whatever god(dess) is in charge of what you're into at the moment.
everyone knows what monsters are, and what their weaknesses and abilities are, whether they have 15 or 0 ranks in the appropriate knowledge skill.
all of the FR uber supplement books are fine, but the third party book that has a good feat or class in it is banned.
above 5th level or so, you start meeting any famous NPC from some FR novel, and you pretty much have to do their bidding (all aboard the plot hook express).

I'm not saying I can do better as a DM, but with so many years of experience between the players, taking a session to build a world and a cohesive party can't be a bad idea.

Iron Heroes for life!

 

[el-remmen]

I've used the same homebrew world for every campaign I've ever run [(for the last 15 years)]. This means it keeps getting fleshed out more and more for each campaign, and the players' have helped give it the structure and form it has today.

What JG said, with the one parenthetical addition. . .

 

[RFisher]

When I GM, a new campaign means a new setting, even if it may be a variation on a theme. I want to change that, though.

As a player, I've only played with a couple of GMs that have had "persistent" worlds. I've enjoyed those campaigns a lot.