Why Worldbuilding is Bad

[Raven Crowking]

Interesting responses to both polls so far. I'd say that the vast majority seem to reuse campaign settings, and it seems to be true across the board. The "play once and dump" campaign setting norm seems to be an Internet myth.

OTOH, I notice that (as of this time) 60% of your respondents seem to maintain the same setting from campaign to campaign.

Honestly, neither of these results is what general EN World chatter has led me to believe. I had expected the 3rd Ed reuses to be less frequent, and the changing campaigns to be more frequent.

Both thus far show that the effort used to create a setting last beyond the confines of a single campaign for the majority of EN Worlders in any event.

 

[Hussar]

Interesting responses to both polls so far. I'd say that the vast majority seem to reuse campaign settings, and it seems to be true across the board. The "play once and dump" campaign setting norm seems to be an Internet myth.

OTOH, I notice that (as of this time) 60% of your respondents seem to maintain the same setting from campaign to campaign.

Honestly, neither of these results is what general EN World chatter has led me to believe. I had expected the 3rd Ed reuses to be less frequent, and the changing campaigns to be more frequent.

Both thus far show that the effort used to create a setting last beyond the confines of a single campaign for the majority of EN Worlders in any event.

Well, currently, it's about 50/50 but that's splitting hairs.

To be fair though, if I answered your poll absolutely honestly, I'd have to say yes to all three as well since I have reused pretty much every setting that I've used once. But, generally, it's been use it a couple of times and then move on.

I wonder how much the reuse factor is a result of the work/money put into it. I'm not saying that it is, I just wonder if it's possible that one of the reasons people reuse settings is because they've either put a lot of time and/or money into that setting and want to see some sort of results for that.

In any case, I would say that there is a significant portion of gamers out there that aren't setting faithful. For those gamers, perhaps taking a setting first approach is another way to go.

 

[Hussar]

I am not sure but I think my last poll was flawed. So, I'm trying again, with This Poll - Would you use a new setting for your next campaign?. Hopefully that will show better how setting loyal people are.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Well, currently, it's about 50/50 but that's splitting hairs.

Well, it changes as it goes on. However, your poll assumes a change in campaign, and (as I said earlier) the value of campaign setting work is not in its continuous use (or we could have a poll saying "Do you ever stop playing?" to "prove" that any effort was wasted) but in whether or not that setting material is used for more than one campaign.

I wonder how much the reuse factor is a result of the work/money put into it. I'm not saying that it is, I just wonder if it's possible that one of the reasons people reuse settings is because they've either put a lot of time and/or money into that setting and want to see some sort of results for that.

Could be. But I think Gygax had some insight into why you might reuse a campaign setting when he wrote about world development in the 1e DMG.

In any case, I would say that there is a significant portion of gamers out there that aren't setting faithful. For those gamers, perhaps taking a setting first approach is another way to go.

It depends, again, on if "setting faithful" means "never doing anything else" or "continually going back to the same setting". Slightly more than half of your poll's respondents said that they do not change settings, the overwhelming majority of mine said they reuse settings.

I would say that puts the "setting faithful" at a very high majority.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

I am not sure but I think my last poll was flawed. So, I'm trying again, with This Poll - Would you use a new setting for your next campaign?. Hopefully that will show better how setting loyal people are.

That one's even worse!

If you were to start a new campaign tomorrow, would you use a different setting?
Yes, and this includes using different locations within the same world
No, I would use a different setting than I am using now.

The question is "Would you use a different setting?"

If I say Yes, then I would use a different setting.

If I say No, then "I would use a different setting than I am using now".


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Well, even despite the flaws to your newest poll, 70% seem to have some sort of setting loyalty. What conclusions do you draw?

 

[Old Gumphrey]

I lol'd because this is the biggest thread on the page and the topic is "time management in game design".

 

[I'm A Banana]

I lol'd because this is the biggest thread on the page and the topic is "time management in game design".

s'true!

Well, even despite the flaws to your newest poll, 70% seem to have some sort of setting loyalty. What conclusions do you draw?

Me? Nothing too exceptional. If the link between setting loyalty and loving worldbuilding is a true link, it just shows that 70% of D&D players are great clomping nerds who have fun building fictional worlds, and, of course, who think their world is the best of them all for their group (and are probably right).

I think a much truer poll to my point would be something along the lines of "what's the longest time you've spent in one campaign setting?" But even then, ENWorld is kind of emblematic of great clomping D&D nerds, so I wouldn't be astonished at all to find it being a high percentage spending a lot of time in their homebrew setting. I mean, we are spending our free personal time debating the finer points of semantics and the benefits and pitfalls of being a great clomping nerd about your homebrew setting. On an online message board. We aren't just D&D nerds, we're D&D Super-Nerds, even those of us who *don't* suffer from the particular propensity to setting porn.

So it does little to disprove my construct of:

• Worldbuilding isn't an essential ingredient for a good D&D game
• Worldbuilding can be fun for us nerdy types
• People should do as much worldbuilding as they want, as much as is fun for them
• Doing more worldbuilding doesn't make your setting any better than a setting that does little or no worldbuilding. Worldbuilding itself is not worthy of praise just because of what it is.
• Too much worldbuilding can be a very bad thing, resulting in powerless players and DMs who are more interested in their campaign setting than in running a D&D game

 

[Hussar]

RC - If I answered your poll honestly, I would be forced to say yes in all three editions as well. But, that's because in 1e I ran Dragonlance twice, I ran my homebrew a couple of times in 2e and, out of the six campaigns I've been involved in in 3.5 edition, I've use Scarred Lands twice.

But, you are right, my second poll is a screw up. lol

What it says to me, is that about a 1/3 of DM's aren't all that concerned with setting and are more than willing to move on to a new setting with each campaign.

I never said that this idea was for everyone. Heck, the idea of setting first has been so ingrained into the mindset of gamers I'd be shocked if the results of my poll were any different.

My point is that common wisdom may be mistaken. That setting isn't anywhere near as important as people make it out to be. That if you craft decent adventures, setting can pretty much go sit in the corner.

 

[Raven Crowking]

What it says to me, is that about a 1/3 of DM's aren't all that concerned with setting and are more than willing to move on to a new setting with each campaign.

1/3 of DMs being willing to move on? It shows that 1/3 of DMs don't necessarily set their campaigns within the same world back-to-back, but that doesn't mean that they don't revisit it again after a break....something my poll shows is quite consistent (certainly more than 2/3rds of DMs set multiple campaigns in the same setting).

Beyond which, changing settings affects the amount of use you get from the setting, but doesn't demonstrate how much you care about the setting while you're using it.

I never said that this idea was for everyone. Heck, the idea of setting first has been so ingrained into the mindset of gamers I'd be shocked if the results of my poll were any different.

Shocked? I thought you believed that setting loyalty was a myth until we ran those polls?!?!