Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 07:49:55 AM

Quote from: BadApple on November 14, 2024, 09:34:19 PMi think one of the things that old D&D did right was to have a set of rules and then a set of optional settings a DM cold choose from.

I wish other rpgs did this. Unfortunately, it seems every genre outside medieval fantasy is only allowed to have one setting.

That's simply not true. There are at least a half-dozen cyberpunk settings, several superhero settings, and numerous sci-fi/space opera settings. There is a difference that each of these tends to have its own ruleset whereas D&D uses one ruleset for a variety of settings (including some where it is likely not the best ruleset to fit the setting).

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 10:50:45 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 07:49:55 AM

Quote from: BadApple on November 14, 2024, 09:34:19 PMi think one of the things that old D&D did right was to have a set of rules and then a set of optional settings a DM cold choose from.

I wish other rpgs did this. Unfortunately, it seems every genre outside medieval fantasy is only allowed to have one setting.

That's simply not true. There are at least a half-dozen cyberpunk settings, several superhero settings, and numerous sci-fi/space opera settings. There is a difference that each of these tends to have its own ruleset whereas D&D uses one ruleset for a variety of settings (including some where it is likely not the best ruleset to fit the setting).

That's what I mean. Rather than multiple settings, each set of rules only supports one setting. This fractures the potential player base compared to using a universal ruleset for multiple settings. It kills creativity and diversity by forcing all the focus on that one setting.

Maybe the D&D rules aren't the best fit for every one of its settings, but it's sufficient for the majority of them and gives them exposure that they otherwise wouldn't get. The fact that they have to play together also pressures them to be more distinct. Altho several settings like Faerun and Oerth feel very similar, others like Ravenloft, Spelljammer and Planescape feel very distinct.

With scifi games I try to research, most feel homogeneous and generic and not particularly interesting. I'm more interested in the dead TSR/WotC scifi settings like Star Frontiers, Star*Drive and d20 Future.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 12:20:55 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 10:50:45 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 07:49:55 AM

Quote from: BadApple on November 14, 2024, 09:34:19 PMi think one of the things that old D&D did right was to have a set of rules and then a set of optional settings a DM cold choose from.

I wish other rpgs did this. Unfortunately, it seems every genre outside medieval fantasy is only allowed to have one setting.

That's simply not true. There are at least a half-dozen cyberpunk settings, several superhero settings, and numerous sci-fi/space opera settings. There is a difference that each of these tends to have its own ruleset whereas D&D uses one ruleset for a variety of settings (including some where it is likely not the best ruleset to fit the setting).

That's what I mean. Rather than multiple settings, each set of rules only supports one setting. This fractures the potential player base compared to using a universal ruleset for multiple settings. It kills creativity and diversity by forcing all the focus on that one setting.

Maybe the D&D rules aren't the best fit for every one of its settings, but it's sufficient for the majority of them and gives them exposure that they otherwise wouldn't get. The fact that they have to play together also pressures them to be more distinct. Altho several settings like Faerun and Oerth feel very similar, others like Ravenloft, Spelljammer and Planescape feel very distinct.

With scifi games I try to research, most feel homogeneous and generic and not particularly interesting. I'm more interested in the dead TSR/WotC scifi settings like Star Frontiers, Star*Drive and d20 Future.

Are you deliberately ignoring several contemporary examples?

Genesys has setting books for both Android (cyberpunk/near-earth sci-fi) and Twilight Imperium (space opera sci-fi).

2d20 system has settings for Star Trek, Mutant Chronicles, Fallout, Dune, Corvus Belli Infinity.

Aliens, Coriolus, and Mutant Year Zero all use the same base system.

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 12:33:28 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 12:20:55 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 10:50:45 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 07:49:55 AM

Quote from: BadApple on November 14, 2024, 09:34:19 PMi think one of the things that old D&D did right was to have a set of rules and then a set of optional settings a DM cold choose from.

I wish other rpgs did this. Unfortunately, it seems every genre outside medieval fantasy is only allowed to have one setting.

That's simply not true. There are at least a half-dozen cyberpunk settings, several superhero settings, and numerous sci-fi/space opera settings. There is a difference that each of these tends to have its own ruleset whereas D&D uses one ruleset for a variety of settings (including some where it is likely not the best ruleset to fit the setting).

That's what I mean. Rather than multiple settings, each set of rules only supports one setting. This fractures the potential player base compared to using a universal ruleset for multiple settings. It kills creativity and diversity by forcing all the focus on that one setting.

Maybe the D&D rules aren't the best fit for every one of its settings, but it's sufficient for the majority of them and gives them exposure that they otherwise wouldn't get. The fact that they have to play together also pressures them to be more distinct. Altho several settings like Faerun and Oerth feel very similar, others like Ravenloft, Spelljammer and Planescape feel very distinct.

With scifi games I try to research, most feel homogeneous and generic and not particularly interesting. I'm more interested in the dead TSR/WotC scifi settings like Star Frontiers, Star*Drive and d20 Future.

Are you deliberately ignoring several contemporary examples?

Genesys has setting books for both Android (cyberpunk/near-earth sci-fi) and Twilight Imperium (space opera sci-fi).

2d20 system has settings for Star Trek, Mutant Chronicles, Fallout, Dune, Corvus Belli Infinity.

Aliens, Coriolus, and Mutant Year Zero all use the same base system.

I am ignoring them. I don't find any of those interesting or inspiring.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 12:42:39 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 12:33:28 PM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 12:20:55 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 10:50:45 AM

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 07:49:55 AM

Quote from: BadApple on November 14, 2024, 09:34:19 PMi think one of the things that old D&D did right was to have a set of rules and then a set of optional settings a DM cold choose from.

I wish other rpgs did this. Unfortunately, it seems every genre outside medieval fantasy is only allowed to have one setting.

That's simply not true. There are at least a half-dozen cyberpunk settings, several superhero settings, and numerous sci-fi/space opera settings. There is a difference that each of these tends to have its own ruleset whereas D&D uses one ruleset for a variety of settings (including some where it is likely not the best ruleset to fit the setting).

That's what I mean. Rather than multiple settings, each set of rules only supports one setting. This fractures the potential player base compared to using a universal ruleset for multiple settings. It kills creativity and diversity by forcing all the focus on that one setting.

Maybe the D&D rules aren't the best fit for every one of its settings, but it's sufficient for the majority of them and gives them exposure that they otherwise wouldn't get. The fact that they have to play together also pressures them to be more distinct. Altho several settings like Faerun and Oerth feel very similar, others like Ravenloft, Spelljammer and Planescape feel very distinct.

With scifi games I try to research, most feel homogeneous and generic and not particularly interesting. I'm more interested in the dead TSR/WotC scifi settings like Star Frontiers, Star*Drive and d20 Future.

Are you deliberately ignoring several contemporary examples?

Genesys has setting books for both Android (cyberpunk/near-earth sci-fi) and Twilight Imperium (space opera sci-fi).

2d20 system has settings for Star Trek, Mutant Chronicles, Fallout, Dune, Corvus Belli Infinity.

Aliens, Coriolus, and Mutant Year Zero all use the same base system.

I am ignoring them. I don't find any of those interesting or inspiring.

You asked for it. You were shown it. You reject it. The problem in this case is not with it, it is with you.

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 02:11:24 PMYou asked for it. You were shown it. You reject it. The problem in this case is not with it, it is with you.

I'm sorry. They're just never what I'm looking for. I'm pretty jaded with media in general. Everything keeps falling into repetitive tropes.

What distinguishes any of those settings from the bazillion settings that exist? Why should I buy and play those over making my own?

Half of those I never heard of and the ones I am familiar with are boring and old hat or sabotaged by shitty writers.

Star Trek? I watched so many of those shows as a kid and I'm pretty bored of the whole thing. The franchise took a nose dive recently and I really have no interest in touching it anymore.

Fallout? Fuck Besthesda and their "Oblivion with guns" bullshit.

Dune? Fuck Brian Herbert and his shitty fanfic. The only good Dune games were the Westwood RTS games.

Aliens? Fuck Ridley Scott and his shitty History Channel Ancient Aliens fanfic.

I'd rather write my own settings than touch those dumpster fires.

I did some cursory research on those other settings, altho the Google results are shit tier so I don't think I'm getting good explanations of what they even are. But what I have read just doesn't inspire me the way that the 80s and 90s games do.

I don't know why, but it feels like games made after about 2000-2010 or so just aren't as good as the games made before then. If that's a "me" problem, then I haven't the foggiest clue how to fix it.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 07:01:54 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 02:11:24 PMYou asked for it. You were shown it. You reject it. The problem in this case is not with it, it is with you.

I'm sorry. They're just never what I'm looking for. I'm pretty jaded with media in general. Everything keeps falling into repetitive tropes.

What distinguishes any of those settings from the bazillion settings that exist? Why should I buy and play those over making my own?

Half of those I never heard of and the ones I am familiar with are boring and old hat or sabotaged by shitty writers.

Star Trek? I watched so many of those shows as a kid and I'm pretty bored of the whole thing. The franchise took a nose dive recently and I really have no interest in touching it anymore.

Fallout? Fuck Besthesda and their "Oblivion with guns" bullshit.

Dune? Fuck Brian Herbert and his shitty fanfic. The only good Dune games were the Westwood RTS games.

Aliens? Fuck Ridley Scott and his shitty History Channel Ancient Aliens fanfic.

I'd rather write my own settings than touch those dumpster fires.

I did some cursory research on those other settings, altho the Google results are shit tier so I don't think I'm getting good explanations of what they even are. But what I have read just doesn't inspire me the way that the 80s and 90s games do.

I don't know why, but it feels like games made after about 2000-2010 or so just aren't as good as the games made before then. If that's a "me" problem, then I haven't the foggiest clue how to fix it.

You constantly ask "why isn't there any X" and when shown that X actually exists, you say it's never exactly how you want it to be. Your expectations are your own enemy here and you're damning yourself to being perpetully unhappy if you expect anyone else to make a perfect fit for what's in your head. If you need a perfect fit, then by all means do it yourself. As is, you sound like many a depressed person that says everything is failing to engage them when you're not willing to engage youself in anything.

I can sympathize a bit with BoxCrayonTales' position on this. For the last few years I've been reading lots of fantasy settings in the (probably vain) hope of finding one that I love enough to run it over multiple campaigns for years to come. I've read plenty of perfectly serviceable settings, but nothing has clicked for me in the way I'd hoped. I pick away at my own setting from time to time, but it's a project I do more for my own amusement than out of a serious intent to bring it to completion. Mostly I've resigned myself to switching settings based on what fits a particular campaign I want to run.

I have a similar problem with fantasy game systems themselves. I've read plenty of good ones, but have yet to hit one I'm entirely satisfied with. So it's entirely possible this is just a function of how my brain works.

I constantly think about making my own stuff, but I feel my intent is poisoned by all my resentment towards corpos

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 15, 2024, 08:29:28 PMMostly I've resigned myself to switching settings based on what fits a particular campaign I want to run.

I don't see solution as a problem.

I've come to believe that multiple, typically shorter, campaigns can be more enjoyable than a single long campaign that just keeps on going.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 15, 2024, 09:17:22 PMI constantly think about making my own stuff, but I feel my intent is poisoned by all my resentment towards corpos

Again, what you need to work on first is you. Let yourself enjoy things like a kid again, at least for a bit. These are games--don't let all the bullshit of the world poison your fun time.

Anyway, going back to my original point, there aren't actually any universal games for other genres like D&D tries to be universal pseudo-medieval fantasy. Using the same system isn't the same thing. D&D has a set of core rules and then setting books which refer to those rules. Aside from GURPS, I don't recall any other surviving games do that. There's definitely no universal scifi rpg now like Alternity back in 1998.

Quote from: HappyDaze on November 15, 2024, 10:00:36 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on November 15, 2024, 08:29:28 PMMostly I've resigned myself to switching settings based on what fits a particular campaign I want to run.

I don't see solution as a problem.

I've come to believe that multiple, typically shorter, campaigns can be more enjoyable than a single long campaign that just keeps on going.

I agree with that, especially about shorter campaigns. Even if I found "the one" in terms of a setting, I'd run it for multiple campaigns rather than one extra-long one, I'd never expect it to be the only thing I run. But I think most GMs have one or two settings they sort of "specialize" in, and there's some benefit to that. Certain settings definitely run much better when the GM has a lot of understanding of them.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 16, 2024, 08:13:25 AMAnyway, going back to my original point, there aren't actually any universal games for other genres like D&D tries to be universal pseudo-medieval fantasy. Using the same system isn't the same thing. D&D has a set of core rules and then setting books which refer to those rules. Aside from GURPS, I don't recall any other surviving games do that. There's definitely no universal scifi rpg now like Alternity back in 1998.

When you say "Using the same isn't the same thing" I'm assuming you're refer to something like what Modiphius does with 2d20, publishing multiple non-compatible games under the same basic "game engine"? That would be as opposed to something a true "universal" system, where you have a core rulebook, and then a set of setting books with rules modifications. If so, that's how Savage Worlds works, and that's still alive. I don't really know what the active state of BRP is; it seems like Chaosium has kind of lost interest in it being a universal system. In the past I'd say they've flirted with both approaches.

Come to think of it, Call of Cthulhu is actually kind of close to what D&D does, with all of its sub-settings (Down Darker Trails, Cthulhu by Gaslight, Cthulhu Invictus and so on). You could say they're setting out to be the universal Cosmic Horror RPG the same way D&D is setting out to be the universal Dungeon Fantasy RPG, but of course most of them aren't sci fi. I think there are multiple sci fi settings out for the Cepheus system, but I'm not up on my Cepheus lore. Others might know.

There was also Fuzion, I guess. Had some pretty crazy settings, like Aliens vs Transformers.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on November 16, 2024, 08:13:25 AMAnyway, going back to my original point, there aren't actually any universal games for other genres like D&D tries to be universal pseudo-medieval fantasy. Using the same system isn't the same thing. D&D has a set of core rules and then setting books which refer to those rules. Aside from GURPS, I don't recall any other surviving games do that. There's definitely no universal scifi rpg now like Alternity back in 1998.

Savage Worlds - about 25 settings currently
ICRPG - the Master Edition includes 5 settings