Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8004864" data-attributes="member: 29398">I don't at all disagree that you need adventures!My point is that you're likelier to have a richer and deeper game if those adventures have something solid by way of setting, background and history underneath them.  Even if most of that foundation never reaches the players, some of it will; and you've no way of knowing which bits until after you've already dropped the puck.  You want to be at least vaguely ready to handle whatever basic questions the players might ask, including:--- physical and astronomic details e.g. how many moons, what are their phases (and by extension what does the game-world calendar look like)--- a map of the local region showing major towns, major features, and homelands for all the various playable races in your game--- names and positions (and usual locations) of the current ruler(s) and-or significant power-brokers--- enough cultural details to give the players an idea of the milieu they're in e.g. feudal Saxon, ancient Greece, 1500's Far East, or whatever--- any relevant inter-realm relations between the adventurers' realm and neighbours e.g. war, peace, ignorance, etc.; and how those came to be--- the names of the last x number of rulers, so when the players ask how old a treasury coin is by looking at the ruler's head you'll know the answer--- etc.Put another way, yes you can play for months without a setting but that play will soon show itself to be lacking something.And note that everything above assumes one is running a campaign bigger than a single hard-line AP, for which you need next to nothing.As for Paizo adventures and their crazy amount of backstory: my issue is more that 99% of the time their provided backstory doesn't match the backstory that's already arisen within the campaign that's brought the PCs to the adventure; and I also wish they'd leave it out.</blockquote>

Verification