What six questions would you have asked?

[mmadsen]

The recent Wizards of the Coast contest -- pardon, call for submissions -- asked you to answer six questions on a single page to describe your setting. If you were running the contest, what six questions would you ask? Do you think they asked the right ones?

1. Core Ethos Sentence. [A sentence that describes the core ethos of the world. For example, FORGOTTEN REALMS is a world of sword-and-sorcery adventure, where heroes battle monsters with magic.]
2. Who are the heroes? [Brief description of heroes central to the setting. This need not be a comprehensive list.]
3. What do they do? [What are the main objectives of the heroes, and what steps do they take to achieve those objectives?]
4. Threats, Conflicts, Villains [What is the main danger to the world, and from whom does it come?]
5. Nature of magic [What is the source of magic? How abundant/scarce is it?]
6. What’s new? What’s different? [What makes this setting unique?]

 

[arcseed]

I think they're pretty good. After all, what's the important things you need to know about the setting, from their point of view?

1) Do the players have interesting options that are fun to roleplay? Do we have protagonists in the novels we care about? (2 and part of 3)

2) Can we tell a lot of good stories in this setting? (3 and 4)

3) How easy is it to market this setting? Does it make a distinctive brand that people will be interested in? (1 and 6)

The magic question seems kinda weak to me, and only really important in how it contributes to #6, wheter or not it helps give the world a distinct flavor.

Of course, it's not quite the questions I ask myself when designing a setting-- I tend to take a central image or theme, spin it out to the logical consequences, and then see what I have to work with in terms of character and story. And sometimes it sucks, and I have to tweak heavily or start over.

 

[alsih2o]

their questions were good, but i will take a crack at 6 more...


1. what is the Conan- LoTR ratio?

2. where are the heroes?(we have a dragon who wants to talk to them...)

3. which is the higher reward- cool magic items or members of the opposite gender with all their teeth?

4. which type of villian is dominant?
A. guy who hisses on "S"es, like a snake
B guy who spends most of his time belittling toadies
C reclusive wizard
D large ocean dwelling carnivore with no bones(hi shark! )

5. how much longer till the fighter push that danged sorcerer up front for a change?

6.what do you think is different until you submit this only to find out it is described in the one world you didn't pay?

 

[SableWyvern]

2.Who are the heroes? [Brief description of heroes central to the setting. This need not be a comprehensive list.]
3.What do they do? [What are the main objectives of the heroes, and what steps do they take to achieve those objectives?]

Hmm. I haven't followed this whole submission thing at all, so maybe I'm missing something, but...

At some point, I thought RPing was about PCs. While I don't dismiss the potential importance of NPCs, to make NPC heroes two of six major emphases in a campaign setting seems wrong.

Maybe it's just me, I'd I'd rather see organisations, political entities, rulers and the like, rather than a list of famous heroes that strut around fighting bad guys and relegated the PCs to the background (as a lot of people seem to think FR has done).

While to have that sort of setting isn't intrinsically bad (and, admitedly, a submission could possibly take a broader view of the questions anyway), setting that sort of concept as being central to every potential submission is wrong (IM slightly HO).

The first thing I thought when I read this was actually in line with:

2) Can we tell a lot of good stories in this setting? (3 and 4)

While I see the requirement for such a mindset, I would like to think that the ability to churn out pulp novels would not be one of the primary concerns when designing a world.

 

[toberane]

Hmm. I haven't followed this whole submission thing at all, so maybe I'm missing something, but...

At some point, I thought RPing was about PCs. While I don't dismiss the potential importance of NPCs, to make NPC heroes two of six major emphases in a campaign setting seems wrong.

Maybe it's just me, I'd I'd rather see organisations, political entities, rulers and the like, rather than a list of famous heroes that strut around fighting bad guys and relegated the PCs to the background (as a lot of people seem to think FR has done).

Anthony Valterra clarified questions 2 and 3 to indicate that you could choose to answer with a broader scope. Rather than meaning, "List your iconic and legendary heroes," it could mean, "What types of heroes are there in your world. What do they do? What are their goals and how dop they achieve them?" This way the statements about heroes could directly relatie to the PC's roleplaying experience.

Also, keep in mind that the purpose of this settiung is to provide material not just for D&D, but also possibly for trading card games, miniatures games, and novels. Particularly in the area of novels, specific information about the heroes in your world would help the selection commitee consider your world for these angles.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

To be honest, I am not sure what questions I would have asked. I think that "Who are the Heroes" and "What do they do" are too simular. If I told you that the hero was "Zardoz the Great", that is all fine and well. However, a hero's name is meaningless without knowing why they are a hero.

I also do not like the question about the nature of magic. I would have tried to rephrase it, since at its base, it just provides some flavor text. Who cares if magic is a gift from 3 moons or if it is a great weave controlled by a goddess? I am more intrested in how important it is to the adventurers and common folk.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[VoodooGroves]

1. Core Ethos Sentence (I like the restriction here)
2. How is this not just a regurgitation of an existing world? What is new and different?
3. Is it something about which we could write alot of fiction, and if so, how? What major storylines do you envision?
4. Is it something for which we could sell RPG products, and if so, how? What major storylines and material do you envision?
5. Is it something for which we could sell CCG/TCG products, and if so how? What "decks" and "sets" do you anticipate?
6. Is it something for which we could sell other toy products (boardgames, plastic figures), and if so how? What products do you see as possible?

 

[SableWyvern]

Toberane:

That's a bit more reasonable than what the questions at first appeared, to me, to be asking. Had I been interested in submitting, I probably would have taken that broader approach myself without the clarification, unless it had been strictly forbidden.

I'm still inclined to believe though, that broader questions of culture and politics would have been more meaningful, and been capable of conveying the same information.

Of course, I know nothing about marketting RPGs - I would guess WotC had reasons for what they asked.

 

[arcseed]

By, 'can we tell a lot of good stories?' I didn't just mean, 'can we crank out a bunch of crappy novels?' but also, 'Can the DM come up with a lot of good story seeds that a party can make into good stories?' And as such I think it's the most important question I'd ask about any setting I'd consider buying. From my DM's perspective.

On politics and culture: Yeah, they're nice to have, but do they really matter that much? I'd tend to put those questions with the magic question-- only really worth asking if they have a major impact on the flavor of the setting, or on the characters and stories. Given that the judges are going to be going through about a zillion of these, in not much time, it seems better to ask directly about what does matter, rather than about what causes those things. They just don't have the time for, 'this kinda seems neat, what kinds of characters would I run here?'

There's plenty of space for culture and politics in the 10 pager.

 

[mmadsen]

Looking at the six questions WotC asked, I can't quibble with the first "question", the Core Ethos Sentence. Starting with a one-page summary makes good sense. I can quibble with their example though. "FORGOTTEN REALMS is a world of sword-and-sorcery adventure, where heroes battle monsters with magic." Yeah, that's helpful.

Questions two and three seemed like one question, and I still don't see why they broke it up. You're really supposed to say who the heroes are without saying what they do?

If anything, question four could've been split out -- not that it needs it. I found question four -- Threats, Conflicts, Villains -- the most natural question to answer. If I were writing my own setting, it might never occur to me to have a heroes section, but threats, conflicts, and villains are the meat of a game setting, right?

Question five, about the nature of magic, took me off guard. D&D has some pretty strong rules about what magic is, where it comes from, and so on. Were they really asking you to mess with Divine vs. Arcane magic? Wizards vs. Sorcerers? Clerics as healers vs. Druids as nature magicians vs. Wizards as artillery?

Question six seemed like a natural, if open-ended, question. Shouldn't the previous five statements make it clear what’s new and different? Should you recap what you've already written? Discuss the ideas you've presented? Compare and contrast your product with other settings?