D&D 5E The Un-Setting: the Default Core World in 5e

[Greg K]

If you come up to me and say 'well I want to play a Barbarian, what Barbarians are there?' and I say 'I don't know, you tell me what Barbarian tribes are around, or where your Barbarian came from' then that's the player's cue to go make up a cool Barbarian tribe. And if his friend is a druid, then that interaction could be made easily. But I don't need to get involved, I don't need to sketch out backgrounds for every single class and race on the offchance a player might take one, which is a hell of a lot of wasted work (why sketch out four cool origins for a Dragonborn character if... no one makes a Dragonborn? Wasted effort ho).

There is nothing wrong with our approach for some people. However, "You guys come up with it and I will make it work" is not something I want out of a fantasy rpg. I don't want it as a GM or as a player. As a player, I want to see your DM vision of the setting- not some random hodge podge of whatever people bring to the table. If you have not done the general overview, I can't make any knowledgable decisions about the setting and it kills my immersion from the start. If you can't be bothered to create the setting (or use a published one), I can't be bothered to participate. I will find another group or run my own game.

 

[am181d]

The DM cannot create a complete world in one sitting, and as you noted, attempts to do this result in the '15 page handout that no one reads.' At the end of the day it is easier and saner to have the players tell the DM what the background of their character is, and have those elements incorporated into the world. It also makes for a MUCH more interesting story.

In my experience, even the most intricately designed campagin worlds rely on players to develop the core of their character concept and back story. To that extent, it feels like you're constructing a false dichotomy.

I've seen the "campaign world is created around the players" method in action, and it can certainly work, but the idea that it ***necessarily*** makes for a better story is ridiculous. In some cases it will work out better. In others, it won't. It really depends on the players and the DM involved, and who's coming up with good ideas that week...

 

[GreyICE]

There is nothing wrong with our approach for some people. However, "You guys come up with it and I will make it work" is not something I want out of a fantasy rpg. I don't want it as a GM or as a player. As a player, I want to see your DM vision of the setting- not some random hodge podge of whatever people bring to the table. If you have not done the general overview, I can't make any knowledgable decisions about the setting and it kills my immersion from the start. If you can't be bothered to create the setting (or use a published one), I can't be bothered to participate. I will find another group or run my own game.

Now you're assuming things. Of course there's a basic background and setting, but it's just that - basic. A few major cities, a few empires. Things get added on an as-needed basis.

As for hodge-podge, I mean I live in America. We have mountains, and deserts, and snowy places, and hot subtropical swamps. We have cities, and country and farms, and all sorts of different people. We have all sorts of sports, from golf, to basketball, to curling. Weird place. I'm inclined to think that all places are, in essence, a hodge-podge, and that's actually a more believable world to me than 'the world where everyone is under the rule of a single tyrant-king.'

 

[Buugipopuu]

Having worked with a Nentir Vale campaign, this can be frustrating to no end.

First, this is 4E. The world of "yes." You give me your damn backstory. All the towns you mention, all the people, all the events, they ACTUALLY OCCURRED IN THE HISTORY OF MY WORLD. Got it?

Yet still people come to me asking questions. "What is a good local town that is near the water?" I don't know. Make one up. "Can I know the local king?" I don't care. Be his daughter. "What's a big battle I could have been in?" Be creative. If you say the elves fought the humans 10 years ago, maybe they did, and there's now an unstable peace that you will have a part in maintaining/breaking.

I swear that some people can't write a backstory without all the props that go into a standard campaign setting.

My character is a Shoggoth who studied to become a stockbroker, but ended up becoming a Star Destroyer captain upon advice from his girlfriend, the Ravenous Bug-Blatter Beast of Traal (who also happens to be a Moon Princess), before moving on to open a successful chain of frozen yoghurt shops, which are found in any settlement with more than about a thousand inhabitants. Recently, these shops have been diversifying to a robot-unicorn-based delivery service which is operated through a popular app available for iOS and Android. The most significant event of his life is when his trusty Star Destroyer went into a pitched battle with a giant spaghetti monster, and was destroyed, its remains crashing onto the world's most populous city, killing everyone within a hundred and fifty miles, a disaster from which the city would never recover. Even now refugees from the event are still a common sight anywhere where travellers frequent.

Still think that you're running the world of "Yes"? And if no, how do you draw the line? What's totally inappropriate for Dark Sun could be perfect for Eberron, even if you don't go out of your way to create a setting-destroying backstory like the one above.

What if one player is a Dwarf, and mentions that he's one of the last of his race, Dwarves having been reduced to a few thousand in number after the great war of twelve years ago, and another player decides that his character is a criminal in the continents-spanning Dwarven empire which has ruled the world with an iron grip for centuries, and is on the run from their ever-present enforcement squads, who have the numbers and resources to track him wherever he runs? Clearly both their backstories can't have happened.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

I'm baffled that you think this is really a good way to sell a product to new users.

My understanding of 3e and 4e, was that Oerth and Nerath were not even outlined in the PHB and DMG. About the only campaign info in the core books were the names of the Core gods.

The experience of exploring a fictional world was built through the 3e dungeon-crawling adventures beginning with The Sunless Citadel. But there wasn't even a world map. People just went from dungeon to dungeon.

IIRC, the name "Oerth" was mentioned in the slim D&D Gazetteer. Eventually, the Living Greyhawk Gazetter book fully described the setting--but it wasn't even released until later, after many people had already completed some of the adventures. The 3e products were released in such a way that it was "expected" (though not required) that the campaigns were built up around the adventures. This seemed to work pretty well for 3e.

I haven't followed 4e as closely, but I suspect that the 4e PHB and DMG didn't have much campaign info for Nerath, beyond the names of the Core gods. Later books and articles filled out Nerath, and gave it a world map, but these weren't initial releases.

What I'm suggesting for 5e is exactly the same as 3e and 4e, except that Core books--even later books--would never designate a world name, or give a world map. (Except for actual Campaign Setting books, such as 5e FRCS, or WOGCS, or Nerath Campaign Setting)

Instead of proper names, such as "Oerth" or "Nerath", or names of specific gods (Raven Queen, Bane), there'd be footnote or appendix, with a table showing various fitting names. (Though the Core Gods would still be "nameless" versions of the Oerth and Nerath gods). It'd be part of the game, for DM to choose, invent, or randomly roll the name of the Mortal World and the names of the Gods.

And in the DMG, there'd be explicit guidelines for how to draw a world map, with tiny sample maps showing the shapes of the continents in Oerth, Toril, Abeir, Eberron, Athas, Mystara and the Hollow World, Aerth and the Inner Aerth, Aebrynis, Pelinore, Ptolus, and Iomandra.

 

[GreyICE]

[MENTION=7178]Bug[/MENTION]i: For your first example I use something called a "brain" to determine that it's very stupid and glare at you until you stop being stupid.

For the second, if the PCs did something like that, then I'd generally sit them down and hash it out. Maybe the one PC thinks he's one of the last survivors of his people because his isolated tribe died out, and the "continent spanning" dwarven empire is big, but not quite as big as the pompous propaganda of their nationalistic and jingoistic government would have you believe.

Or maybe the one PC is from a different strain of dwarf with different visual characteristics, and we're wiped out partially because they were racist jerks who considered themselves the only true dwarves.

Were they really, truly irreconcilable then I'd have to ask them to change the backstory (or if they stepped on important narrative points in my campaign by having too big of a scope) but its an issue I've almost never had come up.

Usually the sit down is if two people have back stories that are similar in all but minor details, and that's to streamline them so they were involved in the same thing (two veterans of an enormous war, etc.).

 

[Recidivism]

What I wouldn't mind seeing in 5E is a kind of template form for presenting a campaign (or campaign setting). The sort of thing that you can pass out to players as a pre-campaign template to give them a good idea of what to expect from a campaign.

e.g. Are there any class or race restrictions implicit in this campaign?
How much magic is present in the world?
How will character wealth work?
How will experience in the game work?

While I can do this myself, I don't think it would be bad for players to expect this kind of thing, as it'd establish it as standard.

 

[Plane Sailing]

When you have no choice, you need to make do with what you have. But 40 years later, there is a choice and I don't see any reason why the designers should make it harder on new DMs than it needs to be.

But I don't think it is making it harder to do this - it really is easier (and for many, I suspect most people more fulfilling too) to have your own creation, creating as much as you need, to the detail you need.

 

[Plane Sailing]

For me I don't develop worlds that way, I like to make the general framework of the world ahead of time. Making it up as I go tends to really make the game feel like I'm making it up as I go.

I'm a top down kind of guy myself too, and we still produce far less information to get our world to a playable state than a purchased (or provided
) setting.

Cheers

 

[Dungeonosophy]

That is fine for them. The setting is what interests me. I am not saying the DM needs to have every single detail planned.

1. Map: Countries, forests, mountains, major cities and towns, etc.
2. Deities: Their spheres/domains. Tenets and vestments for the clergy, tailored spell lists. Are there animosities and, if so, how does they play out among the priesthoods?
3. PC Races [...]

This is all great info to have. Some of this would be useful to have near the beginning of a campaign, and much of it would be more useful later on.

I'm advocating that the 5e DMG, and the 5e Worldbuilders Guide, cover all this and more. I'm advocating that instead of Oerth or Nerath, the default Core 5e Setting be "My Own World". Each DM crafts their own Homebrew. All these topics you mentioned would be addressed in step-by-step "rules" (guidelines).

By the end of the Worldbuilder's Guide, each DM would have made their own Homebrew Campaign Setting Book that follows the format of the 5e Campaign Setting books (FRCS, Eberron CS, etc). The WBG would include detailed instructions, including how to make a Campaign Setting logo, how to pick a font, how to illustrate the book, and how to self-publish and share our own D&D World online.

I suggest that WotC designate an official amateur website for Homebrew Worlds, in similar way that WotC has designated official amateur sites for several of the D&D Settings (Ravenloft, Mystara, etc). The name of the site might be The World Serpent Inn.