John,
I'm curious are you writing your setting with your own players in mind? In that case what they find interesting is most important. I wonder what kind of players they are and where you fit on this spectrum (e.g. action hero, method-actor, explorer, favorite character, power gamer, storyteller, tactician). Don't be afraid to create your own core story, if your players would like it and it suits your setting. See Mike Mearls article on "Core Stories":
http://mearls.livejournal.com/97347.html
Personally, I find the following elements of a setting & its design interesting:
Takes the players (and their characters) into account: Only an RPG provides an interactive setting, and only a homebrew campaign can be tailored to your players.
If your players are all graduate students in Medieval European history, avid SCA members, can quote Thomas of Aquinas, and love exploring settings, then you'd better do your research, and better yet include them in the world design (if they wish)!
If your players love bartering, then include a robust system of exchange (you might create an entire rules system just for bartering based on Spycraft's conflict resolution cards, perhaps with various witticisms, e.g. "but my wife and children will starve").
If one player wants to be deeply involved in church politics/theological debates and another wants to explore the low-life world of thieves, then create a tie between the church and the thieves' guild.
Read, read, read: Since its sounds like you're using Medieval Europe as your model, definitely research the era. At least this way if you choose to deviate from the historical model, you will be aware of what you're doing and have the opportunity to ask yourself: Why is Ilshara different in this regard?
Big beautiful maps: I love maps, what can I say.
I have a feeling your poster maps of Ilshara are going to be a hit with your players!
Room to make mistakes: Don't overwhelm yourself with details, because if your players are anything like mine, they'll know when you're being inconsistent. Keep your information manageable and stick to what you know best. Provide yourself with room to improvise and the players won't be able to tell a "mistake" from a "awesome GM foresight."
Write the setting without rules: I want to feel as if the setting were written independent of the rules, or better yet that the rules were written to serve the setting (in other words, the exact opposite of Eberron's approach, which was "Ok, we have a continual light spell, so...every city has permanent magical lanterns"). This first-draft should be understandable to non-gamers. Once you've finished, then go through and do the rules.
Setting Core: Create a one-page (or less) "Setting Core" for your setting, and whenever you're stuck in your writing come back to this core. This keeps the setting tighter, less scattered. As a player I want to feel like there's a cohesive idea that's binding this world together.
Avoid appropriating D&D "isms" & stock fantasy: I'm not excited when I hear "...ah! But my orcs have a Roman-esque empire and are Lawful Neutral." My ears hear this as:
An old idea, not necessarily appropriate to this setting, has been appropriated and given a new guise. I don't believe creativity is the art of hiding the source. Sure, most of us (myself included) are guilty of doing this, but that doesn't mean we should *strive* to emulate others' works. (see "Nyambe" by Atlas Games & "Hamunaptra" by Green Ronin for excellent examples of appropriating D&D races into a new culture). Nothing wrong with this, just I'm more interested in what's fresh and unique to your world.
Power to change the world: If the PCs are going to be traversing your world, then they need to have the power to change it, even dramatically altering the world you envisioned. Otherwise it will remain in the background. Personally, I enjoy it when after taking a setting-shaking action the GM raises the bar the next adventure, such as taking that event to its logical conclusion. "You did
what??" "Ok then, this is what happens..."
Aaron Infante-Levy
