Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Why Worldbuilding is Bad
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3479630" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>You're right. ToEE isn't a railroad. How about Dragonlance? Or the fact that dead PC's get raised by their enemies in the Slavelords modules? Are these not examples of railroading from 1e? Are all earlier edition modules railroads? Most certainly not. Are all later edition modules railroads? Most certainly not. This is not edition specific.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But, taken in context, its pretty clear that The Shaman is saying that by deviating from standard D&D assumptions, it becomes more and more difficult to move adventures from one setting to another. I disagree. Filing the serial numbers off of a setting to use a module is rarely very difficult. Thus, setting is fairly irrelevant.</p><p></p><p>Or, to put it another way, if your setting is so tightly wound that changing minor cosmetic elements causes it to fall apart, you resemble what Harrison is talking about.</p><p></p><p>Take the Warforged Ninja bit again. 7th Sea is set in a fairly advanced setting with fantasy elements, I think. How difficult would it be to add a slight bit of steampunk and say that warforged, or at least constructs, exist in the setting? Not very. Since the general population accepts dwarves and elves, saying that they don't reach for their torches and pitchforks when the warforged comes into town isn't much of a stretch. Yet, you continiously refuse to even entertain the idea of loosening the grip on the setting canon to allow the player to play what he wants.</p><p></p><p>In other words, setting has become more important than game.</p><p></p><p>You call the no platemail a player entitlement issue. I suppose that anytime the player wants anything that the DM doesn't is a case for player entitlement. The problem is, a minor change in setting would allow the player (me) to get what he wants. I wasn't asking the DM to completely rewrite her campaign. I wasn't asking for massive amounts of rework or even retconning of existing campaign canon, since it had never come up before. I was asking to be allowed to use the rules that existed in the core books. If that's player entitlement, well, sign me up.</p><p></p><p>Take another example. One DM I played with changed the rules for spell research in 2e to reduce the chances by about 99% or so. Instead of having about a 25% chance of success (I honestly forget the actual chances) it was down to about 1%. Now, these changes were brought in because he felt that named spells should be restricted to powerful wizards. Low level wizards should never have named spells. </p><p></p><p>As it happened, he instituted these changes after I had already spent time in game amassing a library and labratory for spell creation. So, all the effort I had put into creating my "mad scientist" type character went straight down the toilet. All because he had a certain campaign element fixed in his mind and that was more important than my character.</p><p></p><p>Or, as another example, look at all the problems with paladins. A large number of these problems boil down to the DM having differing ideas of what a paladin is than the player does. Instead of the DM sitting down and thinking about how the paladin character would work in the adventure, he decides that paladins must be a certain way and any deviation from that is met with loss of status. Again, the DM's setting triumphs over the game.</p><p></p><p>Does this mean that world building is always bad? Nope. But, it does mean that when world building is placed over player wishes and the needs of the campaign, that it is bad.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3479630, member: 22779"] You're right. ToEE isn't a railroad. How about Dragonlance? Or the fact that dead PC's get raised by their enemies in the Slavelords modules? Are these not examples of railroading from 1e? Are all earlier edition modules railroads? Most certainly not. Are all later edition modules railroads? Most certainly not. This is not edition specific. But, taken in context, its pretty clear that The Shaman is saying that by deviating from standard D&D assumptions, it becomes more and more difficult to move adventures from one setting to another. I disagree. Filing the serial numbers off of a setting to use a module is rarely very difficult. Thus, setting is fairly irrelevant. Or, to put it another way, if your setting is so tightly wound that changing minor cosmetic elements causes it to fall apart, you resemble what Harrison is talking about. Take the Warforged Ninja bit again. 7th Sea is set in a fairly advanced setting with fantasy elements, I think. How difficult would it be to add a slight bit of steampunk and say that warforged, or at least constructs, exist in the setting? Not very. Since the general population accepts dwarves and elves, saying that they don't reach for their torches and pitchforks when the warforged comes into town isn't much of a stretch. Yet, you continiously refuse to even entertain the idea of loosening the grip on the setting canon to allow the player to play what he wants. In other words, setting has become more important than game. You call the no platemail a player entitlement issue. I suppose that anytime the player wants anything that the DM doesn't is a case for player entitlement. The problem is, a minor change in setting would allow the player (me) to get what he wants. I wasn't asking the DM to completely rewrite her campaign. I wasn't asking for massive amounts of rework or even retconning of existing campaign canon, since it had never come up before. I was asking to be allowed to use the rules that existed in the core books. If that's player entitlement, well, sign me up. Take another example. One DM I played with changed the rules for spell research in 2e to reduce the chances by about 99% or so. Instead of having about a 25% chance of success (I honestly forget the actual chances) it was down to about 1%. Now, these changes were brought in because he felt that named spells should be restricted to powerful wizards. Low level wizards should never have named spells. As it happened, he instituted these changes after I had already spent time in game amassing a library and labratory for spell creation. So, all the effort I had put into creating my "mad scientist" type character went straight down the toilet. All because he had a certain campaign element fixed in his mind and that was more important than my character. Or, as another example, look at all the problems with paladins. A large number of these problems boil down to the DM having differing ideas of what a paladin is than the player does. Instead of the DM sitting down and thinking about how the paladin character would work in the adventure, he decides that paladins must be a certain way and any deviation from that is met with loss of status. Again, the DM's setting triumphs over the game. Does this mean that world building is always bad? Nope. But, it does mean that when world building is placed over player wishes and the needs of the campaign, that it is bad. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Why Worldbuilding is Bad
Top