DreadPirateMurphy
Explorer
I've been a D&D player, and I've always thought that I might want to DM. I've been playing Bioware's Dragon Age CRPG, and there are some aspects of their world design that I really want to steal if I ever design my own campaign.
To the readers on this board, I would like to know if folks have played around with the following in their campaigns and how it worked out.
Favorite aspects:
1) The legends of the setting have only a passing resemblence to what actually happened. Often when setting the background for a scenario or campaign in setting books, you read that "there is a legend that says..." In Dragon Age, there is a popular epic story about the Witch of the Wilds -- but you can gain a second hand account of what actually happened that is very much at odds with the popular version, and even explains how completely unrelated events were tied into the myth. This approach appeals to me, because so much of what comes in commercial campaign settings is presented as "fact."
2) There are two major surface races, the elves and the humans, and the elves are a conquered and formerly enslaved people. I have nothing against elves, but I find it hard to believe that humans that are anything like real humans would manage to live in harmony, or even parity, with dozens of other sentient races. Most D&D settings presume at least the core PHB races. Humans in Dragon Age have so dominated elves that they are reduced to living in racial ghettos or living as nomadic gypsies. The nomadic elves pity the city elves, and the city elves mock elves who try to assimilate into human society. Maybe I'm too cynical, but this result seems a lot more plausible than "humans build cities while elves hide in woods, and they never meet."
3) Wizards are considered dangerous because of the potential for corruption and the power imbalance between wizards and non-magic-users. This reminds me of the way some authors have tried to address how people would really react to people with superpowers. In Dragon Age, there is a religious order of templars that keeps mages coralled in towers, and has the authority to purge corrupted enclaves. This appeals to me, like the first two, on a plausiblity basis. The idea of wizards being on par with warriors in terms of power may be a 4E ideal, but it stretches my suspension of disbelief.
So...complex and conflicting legends, hyper-competitive sentient races, and suspicion of the power imbalence inherent to magic...has anybody added these elements to their campaigns?
To the readers on this board, I would like to know if folks have played around with the following in their campaigns and how it worked out.
Favorite aspects:
1) The legends of the setting have only a passing resemblence to what actually happened. Often when setting the background for a scenario or campaign in setting books, you read that "there is a legend that says..." In Dragon Age, there is a popular epic story about the Witch of the Wilds -- but you can gain a second hand account of what actually happened that is very much at odds with the popular version, and even explains how completely unrelated events were tied into the myth. This approach appeals to me, because so much of what comes in commercial campaign settings is presented as "fact."
2) There are two major surface races, the elves and the humans, and the elves are a conquered and formerly enslaved people. I have nothing against elves, but I find it hard to believe that humans that are anything like real humans would manage to live in harmony, or even parity, with dozens of other sentient races. Most D&D settings presume at least the core PHB races. Humans in Dragon Age have so dominated elves that they are reduced to living in racial ghettos or living as nomadic gypsies. The nomadic elves pity the city elves, and the city elves mock elves who try to assimilate into human society. Maybe I'm too cynical, but this result seems a lot more plausible than "humans build cities while elves hide in woods, and they never meet."
3) Wizards are considered dangerous because of the potential for corruption and the power imbalance between wizards and non-magic-users. This reminds me of the way some authors have tried to address how people would really react to people with superpowers. In Dragon Age, there is a religious order of templars that keeps mages coralled in towers, and has the authority to purge corrupted enclaves. This appeals to me, like the first two, on a plausiblity basis. The idea of wizards being on par with warriors in terms of power may be a 4E ideal, but it stretches my suspension of disbelief.
So...complex and conflicting legends, hyper-competitive sentient races, and suspicion of the power imbalence inherent to magic...has anybody added these elements to their campaigns?
