Ray Winnger's "Countrycraft" Article from Dragon #293

[Corinth]

Exactly!

Oh, and for those who noticed, Ray's article does not contradict (entirely) Robin Laws' preceeding article. (Which, BTW, explains the concept of the series bible as used in American TV and adapts it for use in RPG campaigns.) All that work that you do in creating your world for your campaign can go to good use in creating a campaign bible that tells the players what you want out of this game; it puts you and your players on the same page from the get-go and prevents communications mix-ups that can be very detrimental to gameplay. (Such as the lack-of-respect-to-authority thing in another thread.)

 

[Uncle Joe]

I always saw the BR domain rules as pretty weak. I like Ray's version though. Very nice.

I guess it all depends on your needs. This system would probably be fine for simple resource management, but as an "update" to the Birthright system I found it lacking. It severely guts the game aspect of the original rules, and that is the part I found most appealing.

 

[Darkness]

Dear Gawd! I just got Dragon #292 today. I really wonder when I'll get #293. Living in Autria can suck at times...

 

[FullTinCan]

Dear Gawd! I just got Dragon #292 today. I really wonder when I'll get #293. Living in Autria can suck at times...

This may well be the problem, I have never even heard of Autria, but I assume the post has. (Sorry couldn't resist)

 

[FullTinCan]

The First Rule of Dungeoncraft: "Never force yourself to create more than you must"

The 7th Rule of Dungeoncraft: "Running a good D&D campaign is about building a world, not about building a story"

How do these two peacefully co-exist? Is it less work to simply create a world? Does a story always require a backdrop of a world? If so, then the 1st and 7th rule are in harmony.

Personally I have found the rules and suggestions to be perfect. I frequently run one-shots when we are between campaigns or can't assemble the appropriate players. In each of these one-shots, I usually think of a situation and let the players take it from there. And true to Ray's statement "Each situation provokes a reaction, creating a new situation, provoking a new reactions, and so on" holds for each of these one-shots.

I start with a situation, and the situation is responded to, and by the end of the one-shot a new obvious direction has always arisen, thus the cycle can repeat. The players are given control of their actions and the DM can logically respond to the reactions.

 

[Agamon]

The First Rule of Dungeoncraft: "Never force yourself to create more than you must"

The 7th Rule of Dungeoncraft: "Running a good D&D campaign is about building a world, not about building a story"

How do these two peacefully co-exist? Is it less work to simply create a world? Does a story always require a backdrop of a world? If so, then the 1st and 7th rule are in harmony.

Ray's 7th rule is a bit confusing without the explanation, IMO. It has to be brief, though, and I can't think of a better way to say it one short sentance, myself.

By "building a world", he doesn't mean building the whole world, as in "planet", but world as in, "place to explore". The whole Dungeoncraft series is about building worlds, but as the first rule infers, you don't build the entire world, in all its minutiae.

And yeah, I'd say you need a world to tell a story. One of the major concepts of a story is the setting, after all.

 

[FullTinCan]

By "building a world", he doesn't mean building the whole world, as in "planet", but world as in, "place to explore". The whole Dungeoncraft series is about building worlds, but as the first rule infers, you don't build the entire world, in all its minutiae.

And yeah, I'd say you need a world to tell a story. One of the major concepts of a story is the setting, after all.

I was assuming that a person wouldn't create the whole world. Interestingly Tolkien created the world and then told a story about the world so that people could see the created world.

 

[Falcon]

I think it is interesting to note the different approaches Winninger and SHARK bring to developing a campaign world. There are obvious differences in basic assumptions regarding the nature of a campaign world and what is necessary or desired in order to make it work.

 

[Corinth]

The first rule is minimalist in approach. You do not create more than you must to satisfy the need at hand. The seventh rule is a principle. You make a world for your players to adventure within, not a story for them to act out. The former does not conflict with the other because you can, and some would say that you should, build your world as you go when there is a need to do so.

 

[el-remmen]

While I love Ray’s Dungeoncraft articles, I have always had a problem with defining “must” – in the sentence “Never force yourself to create more than you must.”

I created Aquerra using a top down method where I made as much as the world as I could in large chunks, creating entire nations and organizations and landscapes, without worrying about the needs of any one campaign. I do not see how you can build a world with verisimilitude without creating a whole lot of the world the PCs will likely never see – but that affects their life and the area a campaign takes places in regardless. The bottom-up method might work for a small campaign, or a one-shot – but Without creating a sufficiently large and detailed area how can you really know what the world is like – what people’s attitudes about foreigners, political situations, where giants are found and where it is rumored there are bandits, or what the common opinion of people of the north are like, etc…

I really don’t see the 1st and 7th Rules working together very well. . . Unless you define “must” as a lot more work than Winninger seems to imply it is. The problem with the bottom-up method is that no place or people live in a vacuum – and there are all sort of forces that play upon the culture and society of a place.