The difference between too little/too much campaign setting support?

[ShinHakkaider]

The reality is, too little or too much is subjective. What I consider too much content in a given campaign setting, another person may consider just right or too little.

The reason you hear the two extremes is because those who think a setting is 'just right' usually don't say anything and all you hear is the curmudgeons complaining 'too much' or 'too little'.

D00d, this is soooo on point that it hurts.

Personally I've never understood why some people cant simply take the material and make it THIER OWN. I guess I've been playing and DMing so long that I remember the days where a DM actually detailed things on his /her own instead of waiting around for a suppliment to do it for you.

 

[Desdichado]

Yeah, that could certainly be an issue. But, as they like to say at ENWorld: "That's a player problem", not a setting problem.

Yeah, that's true. But that same player could be fine in another setting like, say, Midnight, which has fairly limited source material.

 

[Mystery Man]

Yeah, that's true. But that same player could be fine in another setting like, say, Midnight, which has fairly limited source material.

Those damn hypothetical people....

 

[Desdichado]

Those damn hypothetical people....

Apparently you missed the "I know firsthand..." clause at the beginning of my first post.

 

[Mystery Man]

Apparently you missed the "I know firsthand..." clause at the beginning of my first post.

I consider you a hypothetical person. Nothing is real on the internet, didn't you know that?

 

[eris404]

Don't know about gamers in general, but if I were going to use a published setting, I think I would rather have too much material rather than too little. The whole point (to me at least) of using an established setting is because...well...it's already established and the DM has less work to do. With "too much" support, I can pick which suppliments I want to use and if I have the time and inclination, I can add my own stuff into it. With too little support, I'm making up my own stuff anyway, so I might as well make my own setting. :\ There are times I'd rather pay someone else to do that work and just get to playing faster and more often.

So my answer to "how much?" is: the absolute minimum of support that will allow me to start a campaign with very little preparation (and with a few setting-specific adventures, perhaps allow me to run several weeks worth of adventures with little or no preparation); allow the players to make setting-appropriate characters with the level of detail they want; and still allow the publisher to stay in business.

 

[Hammerhead]

The only answer to how "How much is too much" is however much the market can support, from a game publisher's view. If I have some interest in the Underdark and feel it needs more coverage, I'll buy the book. Otherwise, I'll invent a few details of my own. If some player has a problem with it, then I change the name of the setting I use to The Forgotten Lands instead of the Forgotten Realms and call it a homebrew. In other words, it's my world (and to an extent, the players) and a DM can do what he wants with it.

 

[Desdichado]

I consider you a hypothetical person. Nothing is real on the internet, didn't you know that?

So true. I had overlooked that gem of wisdom in my exuberance to "finally be a real boy."

 

[Nightfall]

How much is too little?

When a setting is killed off in its prime.



Come on I wanted at LEAST 10-20 more years on Scarred Lands.

Anyway, regarding cannoniality, for me I don't give a crap about what people put into their Scarred Lands games. As long as a) I get mentioned at least ONCE in the entire campaign outing, b) druids aren't clerics, c) monks, rangers and paladins get much higher profiles than their barbarian/fighter counterparts d) Arcane magic generates heat. e) People understand the Eight Victors are da'bomb. then it's still Scarred Lands to me. Course you can drop most of that and just keep e and I'll be happy too.

 

[YokoburiKinura]

Masque of the Red Death, on the other hand, could have really used maybe one or two more supplements to flesh out the setting a bit more, and to give people some more ideas for campaigns. Because, just about more than any other setting, that was an extremely hard system to run a really extended campaign in since the only ideas we could come up were one-shots, and short adventures.

This is so true. I hope that my latest attempt will be a sustainable campaign and I do have an idea for it, but figuring out how to get it started and put in the pieces between the major events will be tough. I've already found that there tends to be one idea that comes to mind first in a setting like that which tends to be done over and over. How am I going to get the party to the mid-levels without them first facing three 'vengeful ghost' mysteries in a row? I can definitely concur that more supplements would be helpful in this regard, as the world doesn't operate in any way like many D&D worlds.