Spelljammer...just wow

[Ripzerai]

Moogle seems to have nailed it - a "strong central conflict" seems to make settings less popular, not more, because it limits the flexibility of the setting. You can do almost anything with the Realms or Greyhawk or Eberron that you want to do, but in Dark Sun or Dragonlance you're stuck revisiting the same themes because they so dominate everything else on those worlds. A setting can survive this - as Dragonlance has - if the themes are widely liked, but it's generally bad game design to make the conflicts in a setting too central or too strong.

 

[Psion]

If you're saying shared experience, rather than strong central conflict, the classic modules do probably provide a baseline. But those classic modules definitely didn't provide the kind of strong central conflict seen in the original Dragonlance modules, or integral to the Dark Sun setting.

We've already discussed this; as Odhannan mentions above Greyhawk might benefit from being the first, and having the attention of the entire audience at the time, a benefit that few shared. Nonetheless, the adventures that I mention were nominally set in greyhawk, represented central conflicts and villains of the setting in the minds of the audience, and so played a similar role.

Please do me the favor of trying to understand my previous posts before going over the same ground.

Considering how contentious Time of Troubles was, I don't think you can consider it a selling point. Or much of a central conflict, for that matter, since it was resolved in a single, short, not-terribly-well-regarded module series.

The rest seem to me textbook examples of 'lots of little conflicts.' *None* of those speak to my experience of the Realms, except for the Zhents. My experience of the Realms was focused on Zhentil Keep as the primary antagonist in AD&D, and Thay as the primary antagonist/sometime patron in more recent years. I would never have thought of Grazzt as 'iconic to the realms,' and Shar/Selune is something I don't recall ever dealing with.

I think perhaps you are:
1) Assuming that I am asserting that there must be a singular conflict; I'm not. A large setting like FR can generally afford to have a few, so long as the conflicts don't become so varied and so minor that they no longer have a unique identity in the mind of the fans.
2) Assuming I mean something more concrete and limited in scope that I intend. I don't see Grazzt or Shar or Mystara and their various conflicts to be singularly iconic of the realms. However, the conflicts of the well known and established FR deity set are a common theme in Realms novels, adventures, and supplements. This over-arching set of conflicts serves in the role I speak of. The time of troubles, for as contentious and damning as you portray it to be, pretty much set the stage for this ongoing set of conflicts.

Again, I don't think either FR or Greyhawk had this at all.

Of course, since you have misconstrued my meaning to mean something that they don't have...

Eberron, which also appears to be doing well, doesn't have it either. Neither did Mystara/the Known World.

Re: Eberron. Oh, I beg to differ. The influence of the quori and lingering impact of the last war are uniting themes that are woven into the supplements and adventures.

Mystara, you could well be right. They sort of tried to make one with red steel, and there were isolated regional conflicts of the sort you assumed I was referring to in FR, but really, I think this is a reason that, despite being nearly as well heeled as Greyhawk and having a fascinating set of supplements, never seemed to get the same sort of traction, even after multiple attempts at restarting the setting.

Honestly, the scro/elf conflict in Spelljammer always seemed more central to the setting to me than any conflict in FR or Greyhawk.

Again, I think you are seeing "conflict" as a central specific skirmish or war more than something more pervasive to the setting in the way I mean it.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Again, I don't think either FR or Greyhawk had this at all. Eberron, which also appears to be doing well, doesn't have it either. Neither did Mystara/the Known World.

Pretty much in agreement with Moogle here, but thought I'd chime in on this point- Mystara did at one time have a central conflict (Wrath of the Immortals) which is in many ways not regarded all that well by the online community at least. The consensus seems to be that it being a world with 'lots of little conflicts' (to use the term of parlance in play here) was much better than the one big one.

As a further point, a second similar type of conflict (titled World in Flames)- a followup proposed and penned by Bruce Heard, long time designer and product manager of Mystara (who is generally well regarded by that settings' fans)- was not very well received among the online community either, for similar reasons.

Just my two cents and a sort of example of why central conflicts may not always be in the best interests of a setting.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Forgotten Realms, when it was growing, had the Time of Troubles, but conflicts between certain deities and nations were always highlighted and important, such as the machinions of Grazzt, the Shar/Selune conflict, as well as the threat of the Zhentarium and the Drow/Dales conflicts.

How can the above be an example of one "larger, more crucial conflict that will likely be used as a central identifying feature of a setting among different groups" when they all deal with different groups and events that are not necessarily connected to one another? I don't recall any connections between the Zhentarim and the Drow for instance, nor did the events of the Moonshaes have much to do with anything else going on in the Realms (the first trilogy was self-contained, the second got slightly involved with Evermeet).

 

[Psion]

How can the above be an example of one "larger, more crucial conflict that will likely be used as a central identifying feature of a setting among different groups" when they all deal with different groups and events that are not necessarily connected to one another? I don't recall any connections between the Zhentarim and the Drow for instance

I never said there was any.

When I said "among different groups", I meant gaming groups, i.e., people playing in the setting. I imagine multiple gaming groups playing in the realms would relate their experiences relating to the drow or relating to the zhents.

 

[Creeping Death]

The conflicts that I found in spelljammer were:

Neogi/Umberhulk slavers against anyone else (really selling anyone to anyone)
Beholder race wars
Elf/Scro
Mindflayers vs. everyone (IIRC, mindflayers used to control all, but where overthrown and continually scheme to get it back); and mindflayers vs. Gith*.

I also liked to mix planescape in as well to get orc vs hobgoblin/goblin, Githyanki vs Githzerai, goblinoid vs elf, demon vs devil, and so on. You had more conflicts than you could shake a stick at.

Later,

 

[Matthan]

I've loved Spelljammer since first hearing the idea of it (which unfortunately was after its demise) and I've gone back and bought many of the products of the line and enjoyed most of them. About its popularity, I can only look back and give an opinion, but my hope is that it might spark some thoughts in those of you who lived through it to give it some weight.

The overlooked thing that I believe hurt Spelljammer was the novels. Where Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms had strong novels that helped cement the setting as fan favorites. Part of that is timing (what else was there like it at the time?) and part of it was quality. The Chronicles provide a touchpoint for many young fantasy fans. How many gamers think fondly of Raistlin? Drizzt and Elminster seem to likewise helped to bolster popularity of the Forgotten Realms. (As an aside, I think the initial stumbles of Dragonlance products that kept so close to the novels and original modules hurt the view of Dragonlance as an RP setting, by the time they started expanding their outlook most gamers had written off the setting or passed the time when they wanted to play in the world i.e. when they just finished the novels. FR seems to have used its popular characters to prop up ideas about the wider world. Elminister explains different things. The Underdark referring to Drizzt.)
Spelljammers novels were hurt by the shifting authors dealing with a continuing story. If we had 6 Spelljammer books with the same authors that got to tell their own story (and consequently shown the flexibility of the setting), you may have gotten a different response.

The other thing that I do believe played a part was simply the amount of settings that were starting to roll out. And everyone plays this card, I admit. Spelljammer took a lot of risks with its design. Not everything turned out perfect, but it's a bold design. Unfortunately, in my opinion, it didn't read the direction of fan culture (which is a terrible term that I'm going to taken to task for) very well. In other words, it went with more wild and fun fantasy than a darker fantasy. Look at that time period and look at what was selling across the board. Comics were starting to get "darker." Movies as well. Even tv shows were playing on those same few notes. And we bought it. Spelljammer didn't fit that mold. It could have, but it never presented itself that way. Ravenloft did and sold fairly well and maintained a decent novel line alongside it. I would even argue that Planescape went more in that direction with how it presents the different factions and the art choices. Spelljammer hit at that wrong point for a product of its kind. It still found an audience, but never a mass one (relatively speaking since we're talking about gamers).

That's my unproven musings. Though to the person earlier in the thread who mention Iron Heroes Spelljammer, my thanks, you may have just given me the drive to start a campaign.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

When I said "among different groups", I meant gaming groups, i.e., people playing in the setting. I imagine multiple gaming groups playing in the realms would relate their experiences relating to the drow or relating to the zhents.

No, I got that- I guess what I'm not understanding is that you are claiming there is "a larger, more crucial conflict that will likely be used as a central identifying feature of a setting" when to me it doesn't appear that there is only a conflict, but many different, varying types of conflicts.

 

[Psion]

No, I got that- I guess what I'm not understanding is that you are claiming there is "a larger, more crucial conflict that will likely be used as a central identifying feature of a setting" when to me it doesn't appear that there is only a conflict, but many different, varying types of conflicts.

To repeat what I clarified above, I don't think it necessarily has to be a singular conflict, but there should be few enough and central enough that they can be used as an identifying feature of the setting that GMs and authors alike can use them to develop a somewhat common vision of what the setting is about.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Right- well, your first clarification in the above post didn't really clarify that "non-singular" part that you just now mentioned. So, in other words when you say "central conflict" and "larger, more crucial conflict" and "strong central conflict" you also mean, "several, smaller, but still significant conflicts". Gotcha.