I wrote a post a while ago about vanilla / grounded / weird adventures, which are basically BFRPG / LotFP / DCC:

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2023/04/comfort-color-contrast-three-types-of.html

"Which one is better?

I realize that by merely reading this post you might think I prefer weird/grounded adventures to the more "vanilla" stuff. I do think vanilla, by itself, becomes a bit boring for me as a GM after a while - although I've seen PCs have fun with it, as it is comfortable. So yes, I'm a bit tired of the same old clichés - but I do not think vanilla is bad "per se" (and I still use vanilla adventures).

I think it is one flavor that you can mix with others for great results. Maybe you give it a coherent take (see GURPS Banestorm) or use the vanilla as a basis to throw an unexpected contrast at your players (e.g., inserting a spaceship in the middle of an otherwise vanilla campaign). Or vary a little so things do not get stale. As noticed above, I'm using many different kinds of adventures in my sandbox, and I think this keeps things fresh. I already used more vanilla BFRPG stuff, but also LotFP and DCC, and they interact in interesting ways."

WFRP 1e would be the right weirdness for me, no more.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on December 09, 2023, 02:25:24 PM
I would say that it's a careful balancing act. Monte Cook is full of creativity, but all his projects eventually crash, burn and get forgotten. Planescape, Invisible Sun, Numenera, Ptolus, etc. You need enough familiar elements to feel "grounded", but you need enough originality to feel fresh and novel. J.K. Rowling managed to achieve this. Her wizards are very stereotypical with pointy hats, wands, flying broomsticks, etc. but she adds in enough new and creative things to feel fresh and novel. Achieving this requires carefully managing your doubts and restraints. You need to let yourself go to overcome your imposed limits, but not go so far that you cross into fever dream territory.

This is the crux of the issue.

To my own personal taste, I love the weird, the abstract, the cosmic. Give me the seas of lead, the living suits of armor, the swords made of moonlight, the elves from space, the worlds in a bubble and the dream dimensions. Give me Michael Moorcock's Multiverse and C.S. Lewis' Forest Between the Worlds. Love em all.

However, there's a very good reason why almost all the most successful fantasy roleplaying settings and the vast majority of people's homebrews fall under either "standard D&D world" or "slightly altered real history". Roleplaying games rely on a shared imagined space, and benefit greatly if everyone at the table can easily imagine the same thing. That goal is facilitated through the use of common tropes already familiar aesthetics. Get too weird and the players disconnect, because they can't imagine the world and therefore can't engage with it. I had that exact experience with Numenera. I read the book and found myself thinking "this seems neat, but I doubt I'd be able to bring it across to my players". Initially I thought I just wasn't picking it up, so I went and bought the CRPG based on the setting. And you know what? I quit the game after a few hours, because I had no idea what was going on in the world and therefore no way to roleplay in it. Every NPC was so weird that just trying to figure out what a random shopkeeper's deal was was exhausting.

All that is why despite the fact that I love the very weird in fantasy, I generally run games in easily understandable settings and then try and bring the weird in around the edges.

Quote from: Exploderwizard on December 09, 2023, 09:24:40 AM
I like the majority of the world relatively "normal" so that when I make some weird places they have sort of an impact. I like to keep the weirdness in distant hard to reach places so that it actually sounds fantastical when the locals talk about such things as myths. If these weird things were just plopped all over the place then they they would just be the accepted normal in the world. Deep within the savage jungle, in the mountains of the frozen North, and beneath the depths of the far ocean. These are the places where true weirdness are to be found. Adventurers may discover some of these mythic locations but will they survive to tell the tale?

This, with the exception that I also want a few "normal", fairy tale elements mixed in to remind the players constantly that they aren't in the real world.  I want a few grounded, fantasy races and some rather grounded magic, and then I want the truly fantastical on top of that, but rare and distant, as in the quote. 

The fairy tale version of the talking animal is a good example of what I mean.  The vast majority of animals are just normal animals.  So when you meet a talking fox, it's strange.  At the same time, there are tales of talking animals in the world, so that meeting a talking animal is something that people take in stride--at least after the initial shock. This is opposed to the modern, scientific thing, where as soon as the mermaid is found, a bunch of government scientists want to capture and study her.

Not very weird. I want them almost "normal," but with the weird and fantastic leavening the dough.

Weird works in fiction usually because there is at least one "mediating" character within the story.  As long as there is a "foreigner" or "outsider" or other fish-out-of-water character that the audience can identify with as the strangeness of the fiction is explained and demonstrated, the reader can both appreciate the weird but still be able to understand what is going on.  RPGs tend to lack that mediator.  An elven character is expected to have lived (or at least understand) elven culture, so without serious buy-in and effort from the player of the elf character, you are going to end up with an elf that doesn't understand any elf-weirdness, which drags you out of the fiction quickly.  That's why most races in RPGs end up as rubber-forehead aliens.  Without giving the elf-player the freedom to riff and make up the culture as they go, the players will be restricted to what they know as "normal" for an elf (the tropes mentioned earlier).  This is why, without serious player dedication, most truly "weird" races can only be NPC races.  It's also why the best "weird" settings are settings that the characters are foreign to as well...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on December 10, 2023, 12:17:47 PM
Weird works in fiction usually because there is at least one "mediating" character within the story.  As long as there is a "foreigner" or "outsider" or other fish-out-of-water character that the audience can identify with as the strangeness of the fiction is explained and demonstrated, the reader can both appreciate the weird but still be able to understand what is going on.  RPGs tend to lack that mediator.  An elven character is expected to have lived (or at least understand) elven culture, so without serious buy-in and effort from the player of the elf character, you are going to end up with an elf that doesn't understand any elf-weirdness, which drags you out of the fiction quickly.  That's why most races in RPGs end up as rubber-forehead aliens.  Without giving the elf-player the freedom to riff and make up the culture as they go, the players will be restricted to what they know as "normal" for an elf (the tropes mentioned earlier).  This is why, without serious player dedication, most truly "weird" races can only be NPC races.  It's also why the best "weird" settings are settings that the characters are foreign to as well...

That's probably one of the main reasons the old Dungeons & Dragons cartoon was able to present as zany a world as it did (lots of fantastic environments and some of the weirder monsters); the protagonists were all kids from the real world dumped into the fantasy so the expectation is for them to learn as they go.

It also aligns well with a lot of myths and legends and older fantasy stories where a modern (for the time it was written) protagonist is thrust into some Otherworld (or alien planet; see John Carter or Flash Gordon) where in the adventure occurs.

It honestly wouldn't make a bad premise for a campaign setting; all the PCs come from the real world and have been pulled into the fantasy one, possibly being transformed or granted gifts in the process. Instant PC connection if they arrive together, instant quest to pursue (find a way home), instant allies or enemies (depending on why they were pulled into the world).

Not too weird anymore. I can look back on my gaming world and see where it was more epic than it is now by a long shot. I bored of the higher powered funky stuff a good decade or so ago. My world has become neutered, so to speak. I stick to the basics with a low magic world rooted more in verisimilitude than anything.

A lot of what I regard as the best fantasy (particularly in literature but sometimes in visual media like films or videogames) has what, for lack of a better term, I'll call an "impressionistic" quality to it. The really fantastical elements of the setting are conveyed to the audience in a disjointed or incomplete way, often viewed at a remove or through the eyes of characters that themselves don't understand what they're seeing. When you start game-ifying the setting, that quality is one of the first casualties. The minute you give Azathoth a stat block or write up rules on how to use a Melnibonean dreaming couch, you kind of cheapen those things.

Ironically, this might be one of the few places where "story games" actually have an advantage over traditional roleplaying games. The fact that things don't need to make any kind of mechanical sense probably makes it easier to preserve that vagueness and sense of mystery.

in my campaigns, the "weird" bits are usually found on other planes, or are indications of another plane impinging on the material plane. It's a great way of indicating that the PCs are "not in Kansas anymore" and their expectations should change accordingly.

Truly weird stuff is cool, but in long-running campaign you need the grounding of something that feels real/normal or the players have no easy way to invest in the game. How can the PCs make plans if they don't understand how their environment "works"? This leads to frustration.

Alternatively, the weird becomes everyday. At which point, it's no longer weird and gets stale.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on December 10, 2023, 07:38:36 AM

Quote from: Exploderwizard on December 09, 2023, 09:24:40 AM
I like the majority of the world relatively "normal" so that when I make some weird places they have sort of an impact. I like to keep the weirdness in distant hard to reach places so that it actually sounds fantastical when the locals talk about such things as myths. If these weird things were just plopped all over the place then they they would just be the accepted normal in the world. Deep within the savage jungle, in the mountains of the frozen North, and beneath the depths of the far ocean. These are the places where true weirdness are to be found. Adventurers may discover some of these mythic locations but will they survive to tell the tale?

This, with the exception that I also want a few "normal", fairy tale elements mixed in to remind the players constantly that they aren't in the real world.  I want a few grounded, fantasy races and some rather grounded magic, and then I want the truly fantastical on top of that, but rare and distant, as in the quote. 

The fairy tale version of the talking animal is a good example of what I mean.  The vast majority of animals are just normal animals.  So when you meet a talking fox, it's strange.  At the same time, there are tales of talking animals in the world, so that meeting a talking animal is something that people take in stride--at least after the initial shock. This is opposed to the modern, scientific thing, where as soon as the mermaid is found, a bunch of government scientists want to capture and study her.

Actual fairy tales don't make this distinction. Some animals (and inanimate objects) talk, some don't, it's never explained why and people just take it for granted. Same reason why children's media depicts normal animals (and even toys!) having complex lives invisible to humans, unless you're one of the rare people who can talk to animals or is simply willing to listen.

These worlds don't operate on the mechanistic logic of our reality: expecting them to robs them of their magic imo.

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 04:17:13 PM
A lot of what I regard as the best fantasy (particularly in literature but sometimes in visual media like films or videogames) has what, for lack of a better term, I'll call an "impressionistic" quality to it. The really fantastical elements of the setting are conveyed to the audience in a disjointed or incomplete way, often viewed at a remove or through the eyes of characters that themselves don't understand what they're seeing. When you start game-ifying the setting, that quality is one of the first casualties. The minute you give Azathoth a stat block or write up rules on how to use a Melnibonean dreaming couch, you kind of cheapen those things.

Ironically, this might be one of the few places where "story games" actually have an advantage over traditional roleplaying games. The fact that things don't need to make any kind of mechanical sense probably makes it easier to preserve that vagueness and sense of mystery.

I would call it "whimsical." Impressionism is already an established art movement.

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 04:17:13 PM
A lot of what I regard as the best fantasy (particularly in literature but sometimes in visual media like films or videogames) has what, for lack of a better term, I'll call an "impressionistic" quality to it. The really fantastical elements of the setting are conveyed to the audience in a disjointed or incomplete way, often viewed at a remove or through the eyes of characters that themselves don't understand what they're seeing. When you start game-ifying the setting, that quality is one of the first casualties. The minute you give Azathoth a stat block or write up rules on how to use a Melnibonean dreaming couch, you kind of cheapen those things.

Ironically, this might be one of the few places where "story games" actually have an advantage over traditional roleplaying games. The fact that things don't need to make any kind of mechanical sense probably makes it easier to preserve that vagueness and sense of mystery.

That's a really good point, and and interesting idea on storygames too.  I think of that in terms of either sense of mystery or sense of wonder.  I like the idea of a game where the dm knows the rules but the players don't to keep that going.  I've tried it a bit, and it works, but it seems to put too much work on the DM to be practical. 

I relation to BoxCrayonTales comment, I might call it "wondrous" instead, as "whimsical" sounds trivial.

I like weird, but as a principle of game design and campaign planning, I have to champion the stereotype. Like, another ale-swilling dwarf isn't going to knock my socks off, but we're already dealing with a space where we don't know what this dwarf is going to do in any given situation, and it's certainly efficient not to have to explain not only WHO the character is, but WHAT. So I like weird insofar as I can impart to the players that they need to know to exist in the fantasy world. "Everyone is an anthropomorphic animal" is different, but not complex to explain. "Here's a dozen races, all descended from crashed alien species in ancient times, except this one that's from a dream dimension and doesn't experience time normally" is a big stretch in terms of storytelling resources. You can get weirder the more texts and resources you provide, and the more players are allowed to invent or embellish on things; you can stay more vanilla, to the extent your game offers meaningful choices, freedom of play, and high stakes.

I like a little bit of weirdness. If everything is weird, then nothing is.

My setting is somewhat grounded with the weird sprinkled in here and there. The Conan stories are a good example of the feeling I try to evoke.

Quote from: Mishihari on December 11, 2023, 01:12:11 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 10, 2023, 04:17:13 PM
A lot of what I regard as the best fantasy (particularly in literature but sometimes in visual media like films or videogames) has what, for lack of a better term, I'll call an "impressionistic" quality to it. The really fantastical elements of the setting are conveyed to the audience in a disjointed or incomplete way, often viewed at a remove or through the eyes of characters that themselves don't understand what they're seeing. When you start game-ifying the setting, that quality is one of the first casualties. The minute you give Azathoth a stat block or write up rules on how to use a Melnibonean dreaming couch, you kind of cheapen those things.

Ironically, this might be one of the few places where "story games" actually have an advantage over traditional roleplaying games. The fact that things don't need to make any kind of mechanical sense probably makes it easier to preserve that vagueness and sense of mystery.

That's a really good point, and and interesting idea on storygames too.  I think of that in terms of either sense of mystery or sense of wonder.  I like the idea of a game where the dm knows the rules but the players don't to keep that going.  I've tried it a bit, and it works, but it seems to put too much work on the DM to be practical. 

I relation to BoxCrayonTales comment, I might call it "wondrous" instead, as "whimsical" sounds trivial.

"Whimsical" implies a sense of quirkiness and/or humor, which is not at all necessary to what I was talking about, but as long as the point is clear, the word used doesn't matter. I think the important quality is about things being left to the imagination, whatever word you want to use for it.

Games where the GM is the only one who knows the rules pose all kinds of problems both on the "fun" and "playability" fronts. I tried the experiment once of rolling all the dice behind the screen, not telling my players how much damage was done to them or their current HP, and they absolutely hated it. Most people don't enjoy playing a game if they're not given the data they need to make informed decisions.  There can be a lot of mileage in withholding the game logic behind how certain items or effects work, but once the players have their "gamer-brain" on, they're going to want to experiment with it until they figure out the rules, or internalize it as another random dice roll. That, I suppose, is where the advantage of more abstract games (whether "storygames" or not) lies. If the whole game is played at that more narrative or meta level, the players don't need to understand the mechanics to make choices, are therefore less incentivized to question them.

I've gotten some decent results through the old Dark Souls trick of giving players an environment full of hints about its former purpose and backstory, and getting them to try and guess at the history. Not really the same thing, though.