Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 3935183" data-attributes="member: 48965">@Buzz: I get what you're saying, though I think this only works with certain players.&nbsp; There really are players who enjoy playing the game and experiencing the surprises a world created by the DM holds, but may find even the smallest amount of actual worldbuilding on their part to be unfun.&nbsp; I have felt this way in different campaigns for different reasons. I've played in campaigns where I had really cool thoughts (mainly about my character/background/etc.) and wanted to integrate it into someone elses game.&nbsp; I've also played in games where I felt the world or campaign arc was cool enough that I enjoyed exploring and discovering it's mysteries.&nbsp; There are even times where I have felt both.&nbsp; In the end I think it really does boil down to playstyles and there's really no right or wrong as far as how to worldbuild.&nbsp; Though I would be a little dissapointed in a game where the DM can't answer basic questions about how the world works or what my character knows if I ask him.@Ryan:&nbsp; I wonder how you determine what is important enough to be created or worked on and what is not.&nbsp; I am of the mindset that anything can have potential use in one's game, but do not see a way to cherry pick which potential hook PC's will want to investigate.&nbsp; In your Ptolus example,&nbsp; The hook about the noble family seems just as likely to be ignore as pursued.&nbsp; If it is ignored then wouldn't it fall into your category of useless prep?I guess it's just different philosophies, as I like a more brainstorm approach where stuff I think of that seems cool or interesting is waiting in some corner of my world and the PC's can discover and explore it if they choose to.&nbsp; In this method, there is no prioritizing of the hooks, though level and power of characters can still create this to an extent.&nbsp; I also like to have the basics of my world down, so that if a question is asked (or bardic knowledge used) there is, or can be extrapoliated, a feasible answer to the question.&nbsp; This in no way stops me from revising something if it seems uninteresting or there is a cooler alternative...especially since there's no way a player's character can know everything about a subject.&nbsp; But it does give me a solid framework to draw from.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imaro, post: 3935183, member: 48965"] @Buzz: I get what you're saying, though I think this only works with certain players. There really are players who enjoy playing the game and experiencing the surprises a world created by the DM holds, but may find even the smallest amount of actual worldbuilding on their part to be unfun. I have felt this way in different campaigns for different reasons. I've played in campaigns where I had really cool thoughts (mainly about my character/background/etc.) and wanted to integrate it into someone elses game. I've also played in games where I felt the world or campaign arc was cool enough that I enjoyed exploring and discovering it's mysteries. There are even times where I have felt both. In the end I think it really does boil down to playstyles and there's really no right or wrong as far as how to worldbuild. Though I would be a little dissapointed in a game where the DM can't answer basic questions about how the world works or what my character knows if I ask him. @Ryan: I wonder how you determine what is important enough to be created or worked on and what is not. I am of the mindset that anything can have potential use in one's game, but do not see a way to cherry pick which potential hook PC's will want to investigate. In your Ptolus example, The hook about the noble family seems just as likely to be ignore as pursued. If it is ignored then wouldn't it fall into your category of useless prep? I guess it's just different philosophies, as I like a more brainstorm approach where stuff I think of that seems cool or interesting is waiting in some corner of my world and the PC's can discover and explore it if they choose to. In this method, there is no prioritizing of the hooks, though level and power of characters can still create this to an extent. I also like to have the basics of my world down, so that if a question is asked (or bardic knowledge used) there is, or can be extrapoliated, a feasible answer to the question. This in no way stops me from revising something if it seems uninteresting or there is a cooler alternative...especially since there's no way a player's character can know everything about a subject. But it does give me a solid framework to draw from. [/QUOTE]

Verification