World ideas that you think are lame

[Aeolius]

what's next, an iconic gnome on a Harley named Spike?

Why would anyone name their Harley "Spike"?

 

[caudor]

Why would anyone name their Harley "Spike"?

Hehe, this does highlight one of my more common grammar errors (and I rolled a 1 on top of that to receive a double-post). If I wanted to be a d20 writer, I'd probably be the editor's worst nightmare.

Correction: An iconic gnome named Spike sitting on a Harley

 

[Trickstergod]

High magic worlds.

All they do is cheapen magic, in my opinion. Especially when it comes to resurrection-type magic. When the king of Hi-o Bumpity Bump grooves with an assassin's stab-on, I prefer the king to stay dead, instead of only being a few thousand gold short. Miracles being a buck (or gold piece) away don't jive with me.

Not that I have a problem with high-level play; just that I prefer those folk to be saints, major villains, lonely archmagi in their towers, and the PC's. All around, not easily accessible folk who have agendas that preclude making phat billz.

If 9th level clerics are readily available, and magic item shops proliferate the land, then I go looking for another world.

 

[Aeolius]

Correction: An iconic gnome named Spike sitting on a Harley

Or perhaps an iconic gnome named Spike sitting on a Harley named Henrietta.

Back on topic... I dislike campaign settings so overshadowed by novels written about them that players only wish to play characters from the books.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

I see it is that time of the month lets knock Kalamar. I happen to love Kalamar and play in it ever week. I find it far from bland. I really don't know how you can say that. You have a world with a rich history with believable geography and with layers and layers of intrigue.

Maybe you don't have high powered magic users running everywhere and it does not have the high magic feel of Forgotten Realms but Kalamar supports a different kind of game one I think is a little more real world historical feel to it.

You just listed some of the resons i do not like it. i dislike realsitic geography, "layers of intrigue", and a historical feel. I like to play adventure type games. Not political games.

 

[Gundark]

I have real problems with mixing magic and tech. I detest blatant anachronisms. Gunpowder, trains... for me, these mess up my conception of a D&D fantasy world. I know it's kind of silly, but it's a hard barrier for me to get over.

I love steamtech and the like. It's funny these type of questions are never answered . But then again I think that this thread was to gather opinions not to determine the "Best" setting/world

I also hate doom worlds like midnight.

 

[tetsujin28]

You just listed some of the resons i do not like it. i dislike realsitic geography, "layers of intrigue", and a historical feel. I like to play adventure type games. Not political games.

Yup. I play games to kick ass. I avoid politics in real life, and avoid it like the plague in games. But hey, if that's what you like, go for it. I'm not going to knock anyone's style of play. That's for places like rpg.net ;-)

 

[Sir Whiskers]

World concepts I'm not fond of:

1. Worlds where the pc's are not heroes. Playing villains can be fun for a one-off adventure, but I want to play (and play with) heroes in campaigns.

2. For that reason, low-magic, grim-n-gritty, whatever term a person uses: these don't tend to be as much fun for me. Probably because the "realism" of the campaign can too quickly become an excuse to play non-heroic characters (though this may be due more to player styles than campaign concept). Besides, I find it difficult to be properly heroic when I'm worrying about how many days' of trail rations I have.

3. Worlds with npc's overshadowing the pc's. I couldn't care less if the Great Empire has 50th-level npc's, so long as they are window dressing. As soon as I find that my 5th-level character can't ever shine because of the always-more-powerful/honored/respected/etc. npc just around the corner, I want out. Note: this is not the same as saying a campaign should not have consequences.

4. Plot villains who can only be defeated when and how the GM decides. Basically, I'm talking about campaigns built around immutable plots that the players are not permitted to interfere with. A related problem is the GM giving his/her villains all the cool stuff that they would never give a pc; in effect, the npc villain becomes the GM's character.

5. Worlds focused almost completely on either roleplaying or hack-n-slash. A good world concept mixes the two. I hate worlds where the only way to defeat every encounter is combat. Similarly, worlds where combat is permitted only once every several sessions don't tend to appeal to me.

6. Worlds with no internal logic. I don't mind the GM creating a world that bends "reality", so long as he's consistent within his world. A world where things keep happening solely because the GM thinks they're "cool" usually also suffers from GM railroading. The players never get control, because things make no rational sense.

 

[blackshirt5]

I guess this is why it's a good thing there are many different campaign settings. Because the things you describe above really annoy me in a campaign world. I want the world to be realistic. Of all the campaign settings out there, Kalamar is one of the best, IMO. Wilderlands is the only one I like better. I haven't looked at Harnworld, but I suspect I'd like it a great deal too.

I agree with those who dislike the patchwork feeling of Forgotten Realms, and having tons of magic items lying around. In fact, high magic in general isn't to my taste.

I just wanted to say, though, that I'm not really comfortable labeling someone else's hard work as "lame". One style is as good as another, it's just that we all have different tastes. Calling a setting lame implies that it's not very well done. Usually, this just isn't true.

Alright, I can understand that.

I also tried playing in a Kalamar campaign about two years ago and it bored me to tears; not sure if that was the setting, the DM, or a combination of both.

I just like the idea of a wizard creating a gigantic blast crater, personally!

 

[blackshirt5]

I see it is that time of the month lets knock Kalamar. I happen to love Kalamar and play in it ever week. I find it far from bland. I really don't know how you can say that. You have a world with a rich history with believable geography and with layers and layers of intrigue.

Maybe you don't have high powered magic users running everywhere and it does not have the high magic feel of Forgotten Realms but Kalamar supports a different kind of game one I think is a little more real world historical feel to it.

As opposed to that time of the month when we knock FR?

As Buttercup said to Nightfall, just because you think the setting is the be-all, end-all of settings, doesn't mean it is for other people.