TheRPGSite

The rules: It has to be a published setting, for D&D (any edition) or a published OSR/3rd-party-D&D setting.

It also must be a setting you actually either played in or DMed, not just read.

Which one did you have an actual experience of attempting and found the worst?

Quote from: RPGPundit;932099The rules: It has to be a published setting, for D&D (any edition) or a published OSR/3rd-party-D&D setting.

It also must be a setting you actually either played in or DMed, not just read.

Which one did you have an actual experience of attempting and found the worst?

Forgotten Realms (fused with Spelljammer)

The setting itself didn't bother me as much as the people I was playing with. I mean, I was a That Guy, but these were some Thooose Guys.

The Spelljammer parts were kind of fun (or, at least looking at the books was fun) but I didn't care for the Forgotten Realms part.
It was weirdly inspired by real-world cultures and history, but also weirdly divorced from reality.
It also weirdly kitchen-sink, but also weirdly specific about what was not allowed.
It had a lore that was incredibly dense, but at the same time very shallow.
Felt like a theme park.

Pathfinder: For some reason it totally disinterests me. Theres elements that seem interesting. But Pazio has this freakish knack for somehow presenting those elements in the least interesting ways.

Dark Sun: Didnt like the art. Setting at first seemed interesting. Then just seemed to fall apart. Players liked the new races and seemed to like the setting. Then the high end lethality set in and it became a slog in the sand.

Dragonlance: Much like Dark Sun. DMed this. Players seemed ok with it.

Kara-tur and Al-Quadim: I love the OA book itself. But the Kara-tur setting was so bleah in actual play. And not really sure what about Al-Quadim bugged me. But its really low on my interest list.

Hollow World: Looked good on paper. But just fell flat at the table. Also was never fond of Mystarra. I'll stick to good-ol BX Karameikos. Some of the gazeteers though had some interesting elements at least.

Forgotten Realms: Started off simple enough. But rapidly became so overblown that its become low on my interest list to GM or play in.

White Wolf's version of Masque of the Red Death: I really like the details given for the period. But WW's spin on the setting seemed too bleak and the new monsters too samey and unimaginative for some reason.

World of Greyhawk.

I only used two published settings in actual play, Greyhawk and Dragonlance.

Darlene's beautiful map aside, Gygax had no ear for names, and the funny, parodistic names (of everything, from countries to gods) made identification difficult. They seemed to signal "don't take anything serious" to the players.

DL worked a lot better, thanks to a massive buy-in from the players.

Never cared for Spelljammer. No vitriol, just wasn't my thing.

Birthright, just...  Not for me.

I cultivate an exaggerated dislike of Dragonlance for the entertainment of the DL-loving crew in my group.

But despite the novels being utter, festering crap, I actually think the setting is decent and serviceable. Except for kenders, of course. Fuck these guys. And gully dwarves too, while we're at it.

One of these days I swear I'll run my "grimdark Dragonlance" campaign.

Dark Sun. The first of the lets ramp up character power versions of d&d, long before 4e and 5e came along. We played a few sessions of it as 'starting' characters and it just felt wrong.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;932111World of Greyhawk.

I only used two published settings in actual play, Greyhawk and Dragonlance.

Darlene's beautiful map aside, Gygax had no ear for names, and the funny, parodistic names (of everything, from countries to gods) made identification difficult. They seemed to signal "don't take anything serious" to the players.

DL worked a lot better, thanks to a massive buy-in from the players.

Im the opposite with Greyhawk. I like the names of the countries and lands. Whereas I find Forgotten Realms naming to be way too simplistic word+word naming for 90% of the locales.

Eberron. Warforged and lightning trains. :-/

Quote from: The Butcher;932127I cultivate an exaggerated dislike of Dragonlance for the entertainment of the DL-loving crew in my group.

But despite the novels being utter, festering crap, I actually think the setting is decent and serviceable. Except for kenders, of course. Fuck these guys. And gully dwarves too, while we're at it.

One of these days I swear I'll run my "grimdark Dragonlance" campaign.

I liked the original first 6 books. One of my players read the new retelling of those books and ever after hated the setting as apparently it kills off alot of the main characters. Personally I got tired of the "Cataclysm Reset" happening over and over and the bleak tone of one of the books I picked up.

The Forgettable Realms for me. Warmed over European history, and it just felt like I could do just as well on my own.

the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance. FR is just a mess with novel bloat and the "world changing events" every year ruined the setting. I also think it shouldn't be the default setting to D&D.

I'm gonna say Spelljammer.

Now, I like the idea of Spelljammer, but I find in play that the setting is just too silly-gonzo. If I wanted to make Giant Space Hamster jokes, or put in an elven Guyver fighting Tinker Gnomes, I'd go ahead and play Toon.

Not that a Spelljammer campaign can't be cool. But I have to ignore a lot of stupid setting stuff to get there.

Quote from: The Butcher;932127But despite the novels being utter, festering crap, I actually think the setting is decent and serviceable. Except for kenders, of course. Fuck these guys. And gully dwarves too, while we're at it.

One of these days I swear I'll run my "grimdark Dragonlance" campaign.

If you ever do, ask me about my Anti-Canon. Cam Banks once called it "incredibly depressing and grim ... perfect for a Warhammer FRP campaign." :D

Quote from: The Butcher;932127One of these days I swear I'll run my "grimdark Dragonlance" campaign.

Dragonlance Without The Suck is on my list of games to run, that I'll probably never get around to actually running. :D

Spelljammer... which I still like as a concept... but measured by how much of it we threw out/ignored... how much stuff we brought in from other settings (Dark Space!)... I guess it's top of the 'can't stand' list. Not that I've played many of the published settings... mostly Dark Sun, Kara Tur (also heavily altered) and some relatively anonymous feeling Forgotten Realms (when trying out 5e).

Forgotten Realms. So disinterested in the established lore and factions. I really, really don't want to care about which organization each key NPC is part of in that world.

Dark Sun. I already live in a godless crapsack world, and it will all be deserts soon as well. :D

Judges Guild Wilderlands. Bizarrely random, skewed to mega levels, nonsensical.

Dragonlance, hands down

Dragonlance - it did not feel like a living world to me.

Quote from: Krimson;932243Dragonlance - it did not feel like a living world to me.

If you just used the AD&D Dragonlance Adventures book then it was not much different from any other bog standard fantasy setting with a few minour tweaks since it was set right after the novels and so clerics were back.

It never felt like a living world. It feels more like one constantly being torn apart by the gods and then re-assembled worse each iteration. Nothing you do matters because the next cataclysm will wipe it all out AGAIN, probably within your PCs lifetime. And failing that, the setting just gets reset. But worse.

Quote from: Omega;932253It feels more like one constantly being torn apart by the gods...

Funny thing about that. In our old campaign (which still runs from time to time) we had this big war I ran against Chthonic entities known as the Worm Gods, which were big worms about as long as Jupiter's diameter. They were inspired by the Doomsday Machine from the original Star Trek. Long story short, Krynn was one of the first worlds to get eaten. I could have also been annoyed with it because Raistlin was an obvious Elric ripoff with a different color palette.

Did not like Dragonlance at all. As other systems, the OP's requirement to have played a setting before offering judgment precludes me from commenting on settings that turned me off with their basic features, so much so that I didn't want to even try them (Eberron, for example).

The Forgotten Realms definitely feels very bloated and kitchen sink full of all the neat things they could think of that could fit into a fantasy world. But I could stand it.

Spelljammer and Planescape are deliberate steps into parts of the game that I have not all that much interest in (don't give me infinite alternate worlds to explore, give me one good one. I can make it as big as I need). But I could stand it.

Mystara you can definitely see where it's just a bunch of disparate ideas glued together haphazardly, but it actually feels okay. It's one of my go-to published settings.

A lot of the other, for want of a better word Xtreme worlds like Eberron or Dark Sun are nice little vacations from normal fantasy tropes that are okay in small doses.

The one I really can't do is Ravenloft--and I actually consider it a really well made, thematically consistent, and well designed game world. I just like my horror in a nice 90-150 minute package that doesn't try to have continuity going past the point where the lone survivor escapes the zombies (or fails to, depending on the movie). Having a stable world of continuing horror just takes the creep out of the creepy.

Quote from: DavetheLost;932145The Forgettable Realms for me. Warmed over European history, and it just felt like I could do just as well on my own.

I wish it was "warmed over European history" — settings explicitly calqued on history like Conan's Hyborian Age, WFRP's Old World, and D&D's Mystara and Birthright at least have flavor. I find the Realms distinctly lacking in this regard, other than some of the southern cities having a vaguely Mediterranean flavor, and the subsets ngs they tried to shoehorn in (Maztica, Zakhara, Kara-Tur). But vast swathes of the classic setting look identical to me. What is it that tells someone from Cormyr apart from someone from Waterdeep or Icewind Dale or wherever?

I'm still somewhat fond of FR, though. I blame the 2e Caldwell covers, the SSI games and being in my early teens when first exposed.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;932165If you ever do, ask me about my Anti-Canon. Cam Banks once called it "incredibly depressing and grim ... perfect for a Warhammer FRP campaign." :D

(http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Leonardo-DiCaprio-Django-Unchained-You-Had-my-Curiosity.gif)

Quote from: Ratman_tf;932166Dragonlance Without The Suck is on my list of games to run, that I'll probably never get around to actually running. :D

Mine's not so much "minus the suck" as it is "how would the whole thing play out in a sword-and-sorcery universe?"

Spelljammer, in AD&D 2e it just felt really stupid.

Weirdly, when I found a conversion in Dungeon magazine for D&D 3.0, I ended up liking it. I could see a progression of exploration/exploitation with spelljammers being the first wave outward, followed by permanent teleport circles on a world acting as a mass transit system, then if there was enough of a demand there would be permanent gates between worlds. It made sense as a part of everything else. Adventures tended to look like an episode of Stargate SG-1, but that was OK since they were fun.

Dragonlance just did nothing for me. It seemed like a contest to cram every possible cliche into a world.

Greyhawk hit me like wet cardboard. Some of the modules were usable though.

I like Forgotten Realms. In my defense I use the maps, names and cultures but not much else. The actual world story line is something I skip.

Dragonlance is the Disney Dungeons & Dragons movie.  It really is, and that's fine I suppose.

Darksun never appealed to me.  It's just too new dark age of darkness right in the new dark age of darkness.

Ebberon annoys me.  Sorry, not a warmachine fan either.  I tend to like low powered low magic fantasy I guess.  No, that's not quite it either.  I don't need Starwars in D&D drag?  Nah?  Anyhow, no, it didn't do it for me.

Quote from: RPGPundit;932099The rules: It has to be a published setting, for D&D (any edition) or a published OSR/3rd-party-D&D setting.

It also must be a setting you actually either played in or DMed, not just read.

Which one did you have an actual experience of attempting and found the worst?

Forgotten Realms seemed sugar-coated when I tried playing in them. The setting was devoid of all the unglamorous parts I expected it to have, and was more like a 20th century North American society, which is not the kind of inspiration I want:).
Much later I learned that this was the setting working as intended, which only makes it less likely I'd ever try it again;).

Oddly enough all the 5e Forgotten Realms material so far has succeeded in REALLY turning me off the setting. Before it was a pretty hostile environment. Now its a bleak demon infested orc ravaged totally hostile setting.

Quote from: The Butcher;932317Mine's not so much "minus the suck" as it is "how would the whole thing play out in a sword-and-sorcery universe?"

  The Anti-Canon may work with this: the high concept is "[almost] all the gods are evil--and they aren't really gods." The so-called 'gods' are actually ancient dragons from another world who have seduced and beguiled the people of Krynn, all in the interest of their own glory. Paladine favors pampered pets, Takhisis suffering slaves, and Gilean subjects for experiments, but all of them are more interested in their own glory and status than in mortals.
   
   Kender? Paladine's attempt to make 'better' elves, who settle for childish diversions instead of being drawn to transcendent Truth and Beauty. The Cataclysm? The Kingpriest caught glimpses of the rot at the heart of Krynn, and Paladine sent it down out of a mix of offended pride and predestination paradox. The War of the Lance? Paladine and Takhisis were just going through the motions--the time-travelling shenanigans of the Legends trilogy gave both of them knowledge of the future; Paladine let it all play out as it would, while Takhisis raged futilely. Raistlin? Raistlin was being played by Paladine (who wanted him to take out Takhisis without any risk to Paladine himself), Gilean (intellectual curiosity) and the three moon 'gods', who wanted Raistlin to kill their parents so they could then strip him of his magic and take their place.

Forgotten Realms at least until Third Edition. Where up until that point it seemed that by editorial mandate they needed to copy as much from Lord of the Rings as possible imo. Dragonlance because Kenders are annoying and silly in the stories. With players almost never running them well. Certain areas of Golarion. Galt in particular. So a country in a constant of anarchy manages to fend for itself so completely due to soul sucking guillotines and a fantasy version of the KGB. With the countries bordering Galt acting very much like modern day counterparts not taking advantage. Pretty much any setting where humanity is king. At least without a good explanation. Beyond the designers like humanity and want them to be top of the food chain. While somehow stronger, smarter better races are eclipsed by humanity because "reasons".

Like the least?
Anything Forgotten Realms after 1e.  Time of Troubles. Elminster, Harpers and the rest becoming Mary Sue GMPCs, Gods getting assassinated and the powers of their "Portfolio" getting traded and stolen like sets of clothes, endless Mystra/Magister shenanigans, 73 Campaign Shattering Events...and that's all before 4th came along and dragged the setting down the toilet with wonders like the Shadowfell.  Movie series, TV series, Comics, all get reboots, if there's ever a setting that needs a reboot, it's the Forgotten Realms.

Ravenloft.  Now don't get me wrong, there was a lot of interesting stuff in there, just so...hokey in it's implementation.  It's a very rough-hewn setting that has toolmarks of the designers all over it.  
"How can we get D&D players into a position where they can have Gothic Horror adventures?"

The whole setup is so...structured.

• The Q-power level Dark Powers being able to encompass nearly anything and everything connected to the Ethereal Plane, even making a Dark Lord out of a Demigod.
• The special rules for each Realm making the D&D players actually feel fear.
• The special rules for Dark Powers Checks.
• The removal of Agency of the PCs...they are basically nothing more than actors playing bit parts in the Dark Lords' "hell episode" of Twilight Zone or Insight.

Instead of having Ravenloft be mysterious and not defined, like simply series of adventures similar to the original Ravenloft, smaller in scope...they decided to go Full.Planescape with it and Ravenloft became another Setting Defining Change.  With the Mists being able to actually remove towns and forests from the map instead of just pulling PCs into some pocket dimension, you had a choice...either your cosmology altered to allow the Dark Powers the abilities they needed to get the job done, or not.

You either completely restructured the nature of your setting's cosmology in order to make it fit, or you completely restructured Ravenloft to fit your setting. Or, a third option, you just said "What's a Setting Cosmology?" :D

Planescape is very similar with it's Doors to Everywhere and Lady of Pain, and Spelljammer is also similar with its structuring of the physical universe to make the worlds of D&D Multiversal.  All three of them can deliver tons of great gaming, but Ravenloft makes my teeth itch in a way the others don't, despite the quality of much of the content.

Quote from: Omega;932535Oddly enough all the 5e Forgotten Realms material so far has succeeded in REALLY turning me off the setting. Before it was a pretty hostile environment. Now its a bleak demon infested orc ravaged totally hostile setting.

Before 4e, the Forgotten Realms were effectively a theme park, to the point where Greenwood himself told in an interview that since most of the dungeons had already been stripped of loot, so he went around and put in some of his own magical items so that younger adventurers would find something.  This is also the setting where most of the epically high level characters all be Magic Users of some sort, from Bards to Wizards.  In fact, if they were near or over the highest level for the edition, they were spell casters.  In 3.x it got so silly, that it made some of us wonder how did any evil escape the might of the Elminster.  And the excuse of him having something more important to do implied that the PC's would never reach the same heights of heroism.

It also had the big problem back in 2e, that most of the 'big' adventures were done by the characters in the various themed novels.  Even if they weren't supposed to be canon, a lot of people took them as, because it's written down.

4e comes along and say what you will about the system, they tried to shake up the Realms so that real danger existed, Kingdoms were threatened and the Gods and Demons were scary once more.

Now that 5e is up to the plate, and Salvatore and Greenwood are desperately trying to fix their babies back to how it was back in 2/3e, with some admittedly limited success.  I don't see how it's bleak or as ravaged as 4e was implying.

I hated Eberron. It was supposed to be the "modern slick" setting, but it didn't hold up to any scrutiny. The place was way too damn big for what they were trying to do--the nations fighting each other were hundreds or even thousands of miles apart and the population density was super low. Even in Sharn, the population density once you account for the mile-high multi-level towers pretty much meant that the place was a ghosttown with 1/2 million inhabitants. Then you had things like the train that workers were supposed to use to commute into the cities. Of course, the costs for it were something like 1 silver per mile, so nobody could afford it on the assumed wages. Also, one nation (Breland) specialized in 'heavy industry' yet there was nothing present in the setting that actually showed the products of that.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;932546The Anti-Canon may work with this: the high concept is "[almost] all the gods are evil--and they aren't really gods." The so-called 'gods' are actually ancient dragons from another world who have seduced and beguiled the people of Krynn, all in the interest of their own glory. Paladine favors pampered pets, Takhisis suffering slaves, and Gilean subjects for experiments, but all of them are more interested in their own glory and status than in mortals.

Ooh, good one.

Quote from: HappyDaze;932603I hated Eberron. It was supposed to be the "modern slick" setting, but it didn't hold up to any scrutiny. The place was way too damn big for what they were trying to do--the nations fighting each other were hundreds or even thousands of miles apart and the population density was super low. Even in Sharn, the population density once you account for the mile-high multi-level towers pretty much meant that the place was a ghosttown with 1/2 million inhabitants. Then you had things like the train that workers were supposed to use to commute into the cities. Of course, the costs for it were something like 1 silver per mile, so nobody could afford it on the assumed wages. Also, one nation (Breland) specialized in 'heavy industry' yet there was nothing present in the setting that actually showed the products of that.

I can't soeak about the specifics of Eberron because I'm only superficially familiar woth it; but the cold, hard truth of the matter is that most people writing game settings today don't give a damn about workable fantasy economies. Which is actually sort of okay for the most part because so many players and GMs nowadays seem uninterested in engaging the world at this level. But as soon as you have PCs in mover-and-shaker positions doing epic world-shaking stuff, you risk the setting coming down on your head like a Potemkin village.

Quote from: RPGPundit;932099The rules: It has to be a published setting, for D&D (any edition) or a published OSR/3rd-party-D&D setting.

It also must be a setting you actually either played in or DMed, not just read.

Which one did you have an actual experience of attempting and found the worst?

There are several that I disliked so much that  I never ran or played them, but going by the rules you specified, I'd have to say Forgotten Realms. Or maybe Dragonlance. Both of those were crappy experiences (both as a player, not as a DM).

I'd probably have to go with Forgotten Realms. It manages to feel both overly dense with detail and shallow at the same time.

Quote from: HappyDaze;932603I hated Eberron. It was supposed to be the "modern slick" setting, but it didn't hold up to any scrutiny. The place was way too damn big for what they were trying to do--the nations fighting each other were hundreds or even thousands of miles apart and the population density was super low. Even in Sharn, the population density once you account for the mile-high multi-level towers pretty much meant that the place was a ghosttown with 1/2 million inhabitants. Then you had things like the train that workers were supposed to use to commute into the cities. Of course, the costs for it were something like 1 silver per mile, so nobody could afford it on the assumed wages. Also, one nation (Breland) specialized in 'heavy industry' yet there was nothing present in the setting that actually showed the products of that.

It was mechanically timid as well. It was supposed to have a more swashbuckling, pulpy feel. To represent that, they gave you Action Points. You could spend them before or after you rolled a d20, but before the DM told you the result. You then got to roll a d6 and it to your d20 roll. You only got a handful per level, and they only refreshed by leveling up again. You could only use one per round.

The end result was that they were so scarce that players were reluctant to use them, and when you used them you would always be unsure if they would help. You might have a decent looking roll that falls one short of success, but when you find out you failed, you are too late to use an Action Point. If you roll a one, it might seem a great time to use an Action Point, but since they add a d6, the bumps you up to 7 at best.

During the brief time we played Eberron with D20, I don't think that anyone successfully used an Action Point to pull off something cool. It felt like they really dug the Bennies in Savage Worlds, so they wanted to include them. However, they were worried about throwing off their whole perfectly designed Encounter Level system that they wanted to make sure they weren't actually useful to players.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;932822There are several that I disliked so much that  I never ran or played them, but going by the rules you specified, I'd have to say Forgotten Realms. Or maybe Dragonlance. Both of those were crappy experiences (both as a player, not as a DM).

According to the rules of the OP I couldn't pick Forgotten Realms because I'd never actually played in it... except in the form of Neverwinter Nights. But that was enough to kill my interest in the setting... it just struck me as bland mashed potato fantasy.

Thinking more on this topic, the whole "Campaign Setting" model has always been underwhelming to me. I remember excitedly buying the World of Greyhawk boxed set as a kid. I was expecting this vast sandbox for players to explore, but it was mostly zoomed out above the scale at which PCs engaged with the world. The encounter tables were cool, but the rest was mostly just fluff. Compared to something like Griffin Mountain from roughly the same era, it wasn't a good value.

I've felt that way about most campaign setting books.

To be honest I have never really pursued pre-made campaign settings. They have always either seemed to macro in scope, well above any level of detail that the PCs would engage with, or too restrictive in detail limiting my space for creativity.  There have been one or two notable exceptions where teh game world is what made me interested in the game, Skyrealms of Jorune, Blue Planet, Rocket Age, but for D&D style fantasy I would rather make up my own world.

Forgotten Realms: I read the 1e stuff and was excited. I read Ed Greenwood's crap in Dragon mag and was excited.

Ravenloft: Good at the start. As it became developed, not so good. Too developed for PCs to get a hand in.

Columbia Games' HarnWorld: This shit gassed me out. It was low-key, meaning that I could overlay onto it whatever I wanted.

Greyhawk: At first, not so gassed. Majorly lacking. Then, I realized that I could do whatever I wanted within its confines--and when those strictures didn't fit, why i would just re-work the strictures.

I don't have any other experience.

Quote from: Baulderstone;932826It was mechanically timid as well. It was supposed to have a more swashbuckling, pulpy feel. To represent that, they gave you Action Points. You could spend them before or after you rolled a d20, but before the DM told you the result. You then got to roll a d6 and it to your d20 roll. You only got a handful per level, and they only refreshed by leveling up again. You could only use one per round.

The end result was that they were so scarce that players were reluctant to use them, and when you used them you would always be unsure if they would help. You might have a decent looking roll that falls one short of success, but when you find out you failed, you are too late to use an Action Point. If you roll a one, it might seem a great time to use an Action Point, but since they add a d6, the bumps you up to 7 at best.

During the brief time we played Eberron with D20, I don't think that anyone successfully used an Action Point to pull off something cool. It felt like they really dug the Bennies in Savage Worlds, so they wanted to include them. However, they were worried about throwing off their whole perfectly designed Encounter Level system that they wanted to make sure they weren't actually useful to players.

The issue with Eberron is Keith Baker not understanding that D&D doesn't work with Pulp, and Action Points wouldn't even help.  Pulp is flashy, active and not bogged down in minutiae about how many feet of movement you can do before you get a free attack, or they get a free attack on you.

Here's the thing I know about pulp (and it may be a misconception) but in Pulp, it's rarely the 'magic user' that does all the massively flash stuff.  Most of the heroes are physical, they fight, they run, they are bigger than life in a way that most editions of D&D doesn't seem to allow players (Or it may be more a perception, rather than rules) to do the things that Doc Savage or The Shadow or The Phantom (AKA The Ghost Who Walks) were depicted as doing.

Another issue is that D&D is a game about niches and specialists to the point where you NEED teams of at least 4 to have every base covered, but in Pulp, a lot of the heroes not only could they do great feats of physical strength, but they also had the mental acuity of the great thinkers, which D&D relegates to the Wizard, and grants magic.

A lot of people here hate things like 'Mook rules', and often have this misconception about them (one on one they're no threat to Pulp Heroes, but 2+?  Yeah, you could be down for some hurtin'!), but they are a staple of Pulp, they are in fact mandatory.  But D&D (until 4e) has never been built for that in mind.

Which is why I say that Savage Worlds is the best system for it.

Quote from: Baulderstone;932834Thinking more on this topic, the whole "Campaign Setting" model has always been underwhelming to me. I remember excitedly buying the World of Greyhawk boxed set as a kid. I was expecting this vast sandbox for players to explore, but it was mostly zoomed out above the scale at which PCs engaged with the world. The encounter tables were cool, but the rest was mostly just fluff. Compared to something like Griffin Mountain from roughly the same era, it wasn't a good value.

I've felt that way about most campaign setting books.

Yup, think a lot of modern hexcrawls are too zoomed out and they're a lot more ground level than campaign setting books. My sweet spot would be a hexcrawl with one page of information per hex.

I have to say Dragonlance. I loved the novels and the hardback book, but in actual play, we used the railroady adventures, and it did not go well.

Dragonlance and Maztica.

Wait, there was more than one?

#Kidding

Quote from: Christopher Brady;933247The issue with Eberron is Keith Baker not understanding that D&D doesn't work with Pulp,

That makes WotC selecting Ebberon as the winner of their setting search competition even more interesting, as for what it's worth I agree with you.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;933420Wait, there was more than one?

#Kidding



That makes WotC selecting Ebberon as the winner of their setting search competition even more interesting, as for what it's worth I agree with you.

I think that they were trying to draw out the crowd that was starting to lean toward more narrative games, but the effort was weak. I also recall that the Dragonmarks were really weak and nobody I knew were willing to spend/waste a feat on them, nor were they interested in the prestige classes centered around them. This was disappointing as the Dragonmarked Houses were supposed to be a big deal in-game and the ability to be Dragonmarked was being played up as being something awesome--it was not.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;933247The issue with Eberron is Keith Baker not understanding that D&D doesn't work with Pulp, and Action Points wouldn't even help.

I find that earlier editions of D&D work well with pulp. I didn't find that 3e did pulp well (too heavy and slow and particular for my tastes), but I admit that I only played it a couple years, and then returned to TSR D&D.

QuoteAnother issue is that D&D is a game about niches and specialists to the point where you NEED teams of at least 4 to have every base covered..

I think that is somewhat campaign (and DM) dependent. Heck, original D&D didn't even include a Thief class (it was added in the Greyhawk supplement).

QuoteA lot of people here hate things like 'Mook rules', and often have this misconception about them (one on one they're no threat to Pulp Heroes, but 2+?  Yeah, you could be down for some hurtin'!), but they are a staple of Pulp, they are in fact mandatory.  But D&D (until 4e) has never been built for that in mind.

I disagree with that. Original D&D had its own "mook rule" for Fighting Men, where a Fighter gets 1 attack per level when fighting "non-fantastic" enemies (i.e., "normal men" or enemies with 1HD or less). So a 4th level Fighting Man (a "hero") gets four attacks vs. average warriors or orcs or goblins, and an 8th level Fighting Man ("superhero") gets 8 attacks when facing such foes. One might say an 8th level fighter is the equal of 8 men in a given round of melee. This rule was also carried into 1st edition AD&D, modified slightly so that it affects enemies of less than 1 HD, rather than 1HD or less, but note that AD&D also makes regular soldiers 0-level (with the AD&D DMG specifying that regular 0-level men-at-arms have 4-7 hit points), so it works out similarly.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;933445I find that earlier editions of D&D work well with pulp. I didn't find that 3e did pulp well (too heavy and slow and particular for my tastes), but I admit that I only played it a couple years, and then returned to TSR D&D.

The earliest version of D&D I've ever played, and it was a one shot, was a game of Rules Cyclopedia.  And in that game we needed a small army to clear through the room past the Ogre in Keep on The Borderlands.  And the Goblins through that secret passage, sorta secret.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;933445I think that is somewhat campaign (and DM) dependent. Heck, original D&D didn't even include a Thief class (it was added in the Greyhawk supplement).

Healing, from 2e on, was very needed, and having magic spells for those high levels (like 7 on up) was most often than not the deciding factor in an encounter.  But yeah, it's definitely a 3.x thing.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;933445I disagree with that. Original D&D had its own "mook rule" for Fighting Men, where a Fighter gets 1 attack per level when fighting "non-fantastic" enemies (i.e., "normal men" or enemies with 1HD or less). So a 4th level Fighting Man (a "hero") gets four attacks vs. average warriors or orcs or goblins, and an 8th level Fighting Man ("superhero") gets 8 attacks when facing such foes. One might say an 8th level fighter is the equal of 8 men in a given round of melee. This rule was also carried into 1st edition AD&D, modified slightly so that it affects enemies of less than 1 HD, rather than 1HD or less, but note that AD&D also makes regular soldiers 0-level (with the AD&D DMG specifying that regular 0-level men-at-arms have 4-7 hit points), so it works out similarly.

Whether you agree or not, and whether or not there's evidence that D&D did have mook rules (of a sort, I'll freely grant), there is a significant portion of posters on this website who have expressed a distaste for the idea of Mook/Minion rules in their D&D. But for pulp, mooks are everything that isn't a named or major villain, and D&D has too many creatures that simple won't fit, especially in 3.x where Eberron was first introduced.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;933446The earliest version of D&D I've ever played, and it was a one shot, was a game of Rules Cyclopedia.  And in that game we needed a small army to clear through the room past the Ogre in Keep on The Borderlands.

Yeah, I don't think B/X or BECM/RC included the "mook rule" I'm referencing from original D&D and AD&D. Under those rules even a higher level Fighter would want men-at-arms supporting him. I forget it's not included in those (I tend to run original or 1e AD&D). I guess there's the "weapons mastery" system in the Masters set (and the RC, if I recall correctly), but I was never of fan of those rules.

QuoteWhether you agree or not, and whether or not there's evidence that D&D did have mook rules (of a sort, I'll freely grant), there is a significant portion of posters on this website who have expressed a distaste for the idea of Mook/Minion rules in their D&D. But for pulp, mooks are everything that isn't a named or major villain, and D&D has too many creatures that simple won't fit, especially in 3.x where Eberron was first introduced.

What I was disagreeing with was that the design of D&D (prior to 4e) didn't include any rules with mooks in mind, not that others dislike mook rules in D&D. I grant that others may not like mook rules in D&D. I'm happy with the rules I cited, though. In original D&D, a higher-level Fighting Man is like a force of nature when in melee with regular soldiers or goblins or orcs. He goes through them like a whirlwind. Combine that with the morale rules, and you get classic pulp-like action where a Conan or John Carter type warrior can smash into a whole horde of foes, mowing them down until they flee before him and he hears the lamentation of their women. (Best in life!)

For higher HD creatures, I don't sweat it, I just assign them really low hit points if I want them to be mookish. For example, give that 4+1 HD ogre 5 hp, and he's essentially a mook: a glass cannon that's going to be eliminated quickly. I also freely assign NPCs whatever abilities I think they should have. For example, I might give a specific 0-level NPC the ability to throw knives like a 7th level fighting man, but he's still a 0-level NPC (there's an example of something like this is the T1 Village of Hommlet module).

I agree with you about 3e not being a good fit, though. Part of that is the rules, themselves, and part of it is also the mindset the game encourages (e.g., NPCs and monsters all being strictly built according to the same basic rules structure used for PCs, et cetera).

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;933447In original D&D, a higher-level Fighting Man is like a force of nature when in melee with regular soldiers or goblins or orcs. He goes through them like a whirlwind. Combine that with the morale rules, and you get classic pulp-like action where a Conan or John Carter type warrior can smash into a whole horde of foes, mowing them down until they flee before him and he hears the lamentation of their women. (Best in life!)

Even better, IME, is Gronan's variant of that rule: An 8th level fighter can kill 1d8 creatures of 1HD or less per round (1d6 for 6th level, 1d10 for 10th, etc ...). Much faster than rolling 8 attacks, and worked really well when I was running AD&D.

Quote from: Sable Wyvern;933452Even better, IME, is Gronan's variant of that rule: An 8th level fighter can kill 1d8 creatures of 1HD or less per round (1d6 for 6th level, 1d10 for 10th, etc ...). Much faster than rolling 8 attacks, and worked really well when I was running AD&D.

Yeah, Gary used that rule, too. I like that variant best for Fighters of Hero level and above (i.e., 4th).

Quote from: CRKrueger;932553Like the least?
Anything Forgotten Realms after 1e.  Time of Troubles. Elminster, Harpers and the rest becoming Mary Sue GMPCs, Gods getting assassinated and the powers of their "Portfolio" getting traded and stolen like sets of clothes, endless Mystra/Magister shenanigans, 73 Campaign Shattering Events...and that's all before 4th came along and dragged the setting down the toilet with wonders like the Shadowfell.  Movie series, TV series, Comics, all get reboots, if there's ever a setting that needs a reboot, it's the Forgotten Realms.

Ravenloft.  Now don't get me wrong, there was a lot of interesting stuff in there, just so...hokey in it's implementation.  It's a very rough-hewn setting that has toolmarks of the designers all over it.

I was doing to say this almost exactly. Ravenloft as a module was fine. But afterwards... just UNGH. Realms for me is 1e and then I just use it as my punching bag for the last two-decades to do what I want with it. I've killed off all the "chosen", Mystra, most of the shit they shoe-horned into their product line so I can keep it nice and useful.

Not a fan of Dragonlance either. BOOOOOORING.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;933420That makes WotC selecting Ebberon as the winner of their setting search competition even more interesting, as for what it's worth I agree with you.

I think they just realised there's a kind of settings that they're not covering yet, and he offered them one:).

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;933447For higher HD creatures, I don't sweat it, I just assign them really low hit points if I want them to be mookish. For example, give that 4+1 HD ogre 5 hp, and he's essentially a mook: a glass cannon that's going to be eliminated quickly. I also freely assign NPCs whatever abilities I think they should have. For example, I might give a specific 0-level NPC the ability to throw knives like a 7th level fighting man, but he's still a 0-level NPC (there's an example of something like this is the T1 Village of Hommlet module).

I like your approach.
Now if we could just get this advice in the DMG2 for the current edition, it would be great;).

Quote from: AsenRG;933578I like your approach.
Now if we could just get this advice in the DMG2 for the current edition, it would be great;).

I'm not familiar with the DMG2 from the current edition. If it offers similar suggestions, I approve of those pieces of advice. :)

I never could really enjoy Eberron.  I don't know, sometimes 'High Fantasy' can be fun, but it just seemed... wrong.  Even though playing a Warforged Juggernaut was a hoot, it just didn't work out so well.

Ravenloft used to irk me, because it was presented to me by a guy whose entire inspiration was 'Castlevania', and the entire thing just seemed lame.  Now I have a better appreciation for it.

I never cared about Forgotten Realms.  Even though everyone swears by it, I didn't think it was all that.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;933637I'm not familiar with the DMG2 from the current edition. If it offers similar suggestions, I approve of those pieces of advice. :)

I don't think it's out yet, so I suggested it would be a good thing if it offered similar advice when it's out;).

Well Ravenloft has the same problem as Planescape: it's hard for players to have an impact on the setting on a metaphysical level.

I, personally, loved Eberron and Forgotten Realms. Then again, I've always been fast and loose with the specifics of rules.

Eberron's appeal was you were all veterans of World War 1 in Fantasyland. Everyone was a shell-shocked veteran of one degree or another with the lives of millions having been wrapped up in a pointless war which accomplished nothing but plenty of people were still in terested in resuming. Also, magic was technology so everyone had really low level access to it and could use it to do anything but no one was very powerful with it. You also had the Great Old Ones in the Raskhasa Rajahs who were 60th level in a game which topped at 13th so you had to stop them from being summoned with your brain than actualy hope to fight them.

Faerun, I basically ran as Exalted before Exalted existed. The player characters could level up quickly and literally in the sense of gaining extraordinary godlike abilities like being able to shrug off arrows, swords, and so on. They could end up killing gods, finding artifacts which could destroy continents, and deal with monsters beyond imagination. It was a BIG setting where you made love with goddesses, saw incredible things, and punched out Cthulhu. I, admittedly, did change the leveling system so that everyone capped at 20th level, though so that the PCs could catch up with Elminster and company.

Ironically, my least favorite was because Faerun was a favorite. 4th Edition was like someone I used to date got really bad plastic surgery and came on my door unrecognizable.

Quote from: Daztur;933705Well Ravenloft has the same problem as Planescape: it's hard for players to have an impact on the setting on a metaphysical level.

  Define 'metaphysical level.' Because if you're referring to fundamental cosmology, then that's really more the exception than the rule in official settings--the Known World/Mystara is the only one I can think of where being able to play on that level is even close to assumed. Greyhawk and the Realms make it theoretically possible.

  Ironically, 4E's Epic Destinies and other elements seem to have done the most with allowing for 'change the fundamentals of the setting' to become a part of the endgame.

Quote from: Daztur;933705Well Ravenloft has the same problem as Planescape: it's hard for players to have an impact on the setting on a metaphysical level.

The 3e version, with the added 'Domains of Dread', sure I'll grant you that, but the original Ravenloft was a 'kill the Vampire, free the land' deal.  Which admittedly Strahd was pretty strong, but it was doable.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;933742Define 'metaphysical level.' Because if you're referring to fundamental cosmology, then that's really more the exception than the rule in official settings--the Known World/Mystara is the only one I can think of where being able to play on that level is even close to assumed. Greyhawk and the Realms make it theoretically possible.

  Ironically, 4E's Epic Destinies and other elements seem to have done the most with allowing for 'change the fundamentals of the setting' to become a part of the endgame.

It had the problem that, literally, like half of the Dark Lords were immortal in the unkillable sense. The developers really seemed to think the PCs going after them, you know, the central evils in the setting, was crapping on their groove.

Harkon Lukas, for example, would transfer his soul to the nearest Dire Wolf.

Which was in a land with thousands of them.

The thing is, that just got my PCs thinking of wolf genocide. :)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;933742Define 'metaphysical level.' Because if you're referring to fundamental cosmology, then that's really more the exception than the rule in official settings--the Known World/Mystara is the only one I can think of where being able to play on that level is even close to assumed. Greyhawk and the Realms make it theoretically possible.

  Ironically, 4E's Epic Destinies and other elements seem to have done the most with allowing for 'change the fundamentals of the setting' to become a part of the endgame.

I mean the physics of the settings are a lot more resistant to change than the real world. For a lot of the Ravenloft domains it's simply impossible for PCs to change the nature of the domains. Feels kind of pointless to adventure in a setting where everything snaps back into place right afterwards like an episode of a sitcom.

Quote from: Daztur;933881I mean the physics of the settings are a lot more resistant to change than the real world. For a lot of the Ravenloft domains it's simply impossible for PCs to change the nature of the domains. Feels kind of pointless to adventure in a setting where everything snaps back into place right afterwards like an episode of a sitcom.

In those sorts of settings the PCs are not enguaged in the overall metaplot as it were. Instead they are dealing with the effectively more mundane and immediate things as well as interfere in the larger plots and schemes sometimes. And in say Ravenlofts case sometimes the PCs are expressly there to screw up the darklords plots to escape or expand. They are effectively part of the darklords ongoing torment. Other times they are squashing the plots of lesser problems in the area. In planescape you are also dealing with "stuff". But over often very different matters and all too often very mundane ones of dealing with NPCs and their plots rather than the gods.

Quote from: Daztur;933705Well Ravenloft has the same problem as Planescape: it's hard for players to have an impact on the setting on a metaphysical level.

As written, yes. Whenever I ran anything in Ravenloft, the whole point was to be kickass monster slayers, and if the party was high-level enough, to discover and take out the dark lord.

Quote from: Daztur;933881I mean the physics of the settings are a lot more resistant to change than the real world. For a lot of the Ravenloft domains it's simply impossible for PCs to change the nature of the domains. Feels kind of pointless to adventure in a setting where everything snaps back into place right afterwards like an episode of a sitcom.

Never felt pointless to me. But I always understood Ravenloft to be a deep ethereal "hell" to the darklords, and the whole ordeal for the party was to be the archetypal rebuke to the temptation to power. It's very "paladin in hell" because you are fighting your own virtue v. vice battle, not just with an implaccable and nigh interminable foe, but with yourself. Falling to pride believing that the means to power shall end... whatever (a great past wrong, your own troubles, the suffering of others, etc.)... is exactly the temptation being resisted.

You are fighting a metaphysical battle to be a paragon in a very beautiful yet seemingly hopeless world. Every second your light shines defies the space (or perhas better, defines the space,). Most beings are trapped there because they are all too human; they are emblematic of the shortcomings of human nature.

Your personal change becomes metaphysical because your deeds transcend into the archetypal, if you follow and succeed the well-trod legend. You can change Ravenloft by becoming a darklord in your own right (as a retired character), or you can change Ravenloft by reembodying that legendary hope. This way the people there are not completely lost -- and it nettles the dark lords' hubris, eternally failing to learn from their pride.

It's a subtle lasting effect upon a domain. The greater cyclicality plays well into Western conceptions of everlasting torment. (The West being more partial to linearity for coproreal resolutions, and suspension -- or the eternal -- for the divine.) But the PC heroic interference (whose serendipity is often assisted by the Dread Plane itself to torment its darklord prisoners) is there to keep lit sacred judgment's flame in the face of extra-planar exemplars of cruelty.

In a word it's Pageantry, in the medieval sense. Without renewed participation, new bodies behind each mask, the flame goes out. The cycle must continue for it to be a teachable example. Which, given the ethereal is the realm of thought, memory, and tales, makes perfect sense why Ravenloft is essentially a demiplane hosting Morality Tales Pageants -- and doubles as a hellish prison for its biggest villains. THEY cannot escape their masks, they are always stuck playing themselves; nor can they escape their judgment until they face themselves.

If you wanted to change a Ravenloft domain at the metaphysical level you'd have to play it through something like Dragon Raid, the game of Christian virtues as transcendent mysteries. Could be fun. However D&D's level+loot structure is not designed to represent eschewing temporal power as a means to conflict resolution. Redemption is a very different, and likely more dangerous, way to play Ravenloft; it's more designed as a higher stakes pageant play. (Both ideas are actually really cool if you dwell on it, though.)

Forgotten Realms post-1st Ed AD&D: so much was tied into the novels. It felt like if you didn't read all all of them, some guy who's a FR historian would jump up an say "That's not canon!". Anything pre-2nd ed I'm good with.

Dragonlance: I REALLY tried to get into it. I really did. But again, it seemed to me it suffered the same issue as FR did: tied to the novels and what's "canon" or not. I've never used the modules for the setting, but from what I've read and heard, "WOO WOO! Everyone aboard the plot train!"

Planescape and Dark Sun: everything-but-the-kitchen-sink AD&D. My mid-20s self thought it was cool...at first. then I realized it's way to big to easily manage as a DM.

As far as other settings, nothing else interested me.

Quote from: blackstone;934841Forgotten Realms post-1st Ed AD&D: so much was tied into the novels. It felt like if you didn't read all all of them, some guy who's a FR historian would jump up an say "That's not canon!". Anything pre-2nd ed I'm good with.

Dragonlance: I REALLY tried to get into it. I really did. But again, it seemed to me it suffered the same issue as FR did: tied to the novels and what's "canon" or not. I've never used the modules for the setting, but from what I've read and heard, "WOO WOO! Everyone aboard the plot train!"

In FR's case that is where I sit back. Smile immensely. And say.

"Did you think those novels were canon in the published settings RPG? You thought wrongly."

And then point out I knew some of those writers and know for a fact that the books cant ever be "canon".

In Dragonlance's case thats where I sit back, smile, and not gently at all remind them that the RPG is set after the novels.

Quote from: Omega;934917In FR's case that is where I sit back. Smile immensely. And say.

"Did you think those novels were canon in the published settings RPG? You thought wrongly."

And then point out I knew some of those writers and know for a fact that the books cant ever be "canon".

That's nice, but try convincing people of this.  Seriously, the authors and creators of the Forgotten Realms could SCREAM that from the top of every mountain, into the direct faces of most of the fans, and they STILL won't believe it, and treat it as canon.

Oh, and let's not forget, they did stat out some if not all these characters, which to some people implies that yeah, no matter what people claim, these characters, races and magical items (like the Elven Moonblades) are fully canon.  To some people, (I remember the stat blocks of the Drizzle, Elmunchkin, the Spellfire lead girl, a super monk girl -Named Danica?  I think?-, Alias and Dragonbait and a couple more I can't remember their names of) the moment you put that sort of detail, that they are canon.  After all, if you put that much work into creating content, it's meant to be used as part of the game, yes?

(I don't agree with the above, but I've seen various variations of the above argument as to why the novels ARE canon over the past 20 years.)

Quote from: Omega;934917In Dragonlance's case thats where I sit back, smile, and not gently at all remind them that the RPG is set after the novels.

So people can only play when 'Sauron' has died, so nothing they do can actually affect the game world in a grand scope?  Some people don't want that.

Quote from: Opaopajr;934829Never felt pointless to me. But I always understood Ravenloft to be a deep ethereal "hell" to the darklords, and the whole ordeal for the party was to be the archetypal rebuke to the temptation to power. It's very "paladin in hell" because you are fighting your own virtue v. vice battle, not just with an implaccable and nigh interminable foe, but with yourself. Falling to pride believing that the means to power shall end... whatever (a great past wrong, your own troubles, the suffering of others, etc.)... is exactly the temptation being resisted.

You are fighting a metaphysical battle to be a paragon in a very beautiful yet seemingly hopeless world. Every second your light shines defies the space (or perhas better, defines the space,). Most beings are trapped there because they are all too human; they are emblematic of the shortcomings of human nature.

Your personal change becomes metaphysical because your deeds transcend into the archetypal, if you follow and succeed the well-trod legend. You can change Ravenloft by becoming a darklord in your own right (as a retired character), or you can change Ravenloft by reembodying that legendary hope. This way the people there are not completely lost -- and it nettles the dark lords' hubris, eternally failing to learn from their pride.

It's a subtle lasting effect upon a domain. The greater cyclicality plays well into Western conceptions of everlasting torment. (The West being more partial to linearity for coproreal resolutions, and suspension -- or the eternal -- for the divine.) But the PC heroic interference (whose serendipity is often assisted by the Dread Plane itself to torment its darklord prisoners) is there to keep lit sacred judgment's flame in the face of extra-planar exemplars of cruelty.

In a word it's Pageantry, in the medieval sense. Without renewed participation, new bodies behind each mask, the flame goes out. The cycle must continue for it to be a teachable example. Which, given the ethereal is the realm of thought, memory, and tales, makes perfect sense why Ravenloft is essentially a demiplane hosting Morality Tales Pageants -- and doubles as a hellish prison for its biggest villains. THEY cannot escape their masks, they are always stuck playing themselves; nor can they escape their judgment until they face themselves.

If you wanted to change a Ravenloft domain at the metaphysical level you'd have to play it through something like Dragon Raid, the game of Christian virtues as transcendent mysteries. Could be fun. However D&D's level+loot structure is not designed to represent eschewing temporal power as a means to conflict resolution. Redemption is a very different, and likely more dangerous, way to play Ravenloft; it's more designed as a higher stakes pageant play. (Both ideas are actually really cool if you dwell on it, though.)

It makes sense on an in-character level and I see the appeal. It's just not to my taste. I'm a huge fan of the butterfly theory in gaming in which even tiny things can have massive reverberations. Settings like Planescape and Ravenloft just spray a bunch of bug spray about and kill a lot of butterflies.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;934924That's nice, but try convincing people of this.  Seriously, the authors and creators of the Forgotten Realms could SCREAM that from the top of every mountain, into the direct faces of most of the fans, and they STILL won't believe it, and treat it as canon.

Oh, and let's not forget, they did stat out some if not all these characters, which to some people implies that yeah, no matter what people claim, these characters, races and magical items (like the Elven Moonblades) are fully canon.  To some people,

I'm sorry, and I'm not trying to pick on you, or even this particular example. However, I always wonder when I see something like this, "who are these people?" How many times have you actually tried to run (or seen someone else try to run) a FR campaign, and said something like, "Okay, we're going to run a game in the basic FR world, pre-Time-of-Troubles, but most of the large metaplots from the novels aren't a big part of this story." and had people scream at you about it?

Again I'm not trying to pick on you, because it would in fact really suck if that's part of your personal experiences in roleplaying. But that's such aberrant behavior that I wonder if it is something that actually happens, or just a perceived sense of judgment. My own personal experience is that most (on a 95-99% level) of all drama involving role-playing games, from people telling you you're doing something wrong, to SJW-vs.-whatever the other side would be called back-and-forth, to our recent 'best way to play WOD' thread tangent, exist exclusively in my world because I go out onto internet forums where people (self-selected to be those with passionate opinions) are encouraged to ask and answer questions along the lines of "what is your opinion on..."

But again, if you have had a player scream bloody murder at you because you didn't want Elven Moonblades in your game, my sympathies.

Quote from: Daztur;934958It makes sense on an in-character level and I see the appeal. It's just not to my taste. I'm a huge fan of the butterfly theory in gaming in which even tiny things can have massive reverberations. Settings like Planescape and Ravenloft just spray a bunch of bug spray about and kill a lot of butterflies.

I totally get that. I love the butterfly effect as well, even though it's still tied to my "painfully plausible" limitations of my own creativity. If it was not for my prepped random tables, I feel I would be painfully staid and predictable. Again, none can outdo reality for sheer pants-on-head amazing events -- nobody would believe it until they've seen it otherwise. :)

But I appreciate taking a classic storied structure and embedding an interactive game within. Sure it's got potential to follow the main legendary points for the 'good ending', but it's gonna be different in the details. Like Hammer Horror, you kinda know what you are buying into.

Why I still fail to appreciate Supers is likely for the same reason, I can't buy into their soap opera narratives and "comic logic" morality. Legendary horror might be easier because it's so much more classical in Hero's Journey structure?

Quote from: Omega;934917In Dragonlance's case thats where I sit back, smile, and not gently at all remind them that the RPG is set after the novels.

In which case, I would lean forward, roll up the FOURTEEN Dragonlance modules that occur during the time of the novels, and were meant to go along with the novels, and not gently at all, shove them right up your ass. :D

Quote from: Willie the Duck;935000I'm sorry, and I'm not trying to pick on you, or even this particular example. However, I always wonder when I see something like this, "who are these people?" How many times have you actually tried to run (or seen someone else try to run) a FR campaign, and said something like, "Okay, we're going to run a game in the basic FR world, pre-Time-of-Troubles, but most of the large metaplots from the novels aren't a big part of this story." and had people scream at you about it?

Again I'm not trying to pick on you, because it would in fact really suck if that's part of your personal experiences in roleplaying. But that's such aberrant behavior that I wonder if it is something that actually happens, or just a perceived sense of judgment. My own personal experience is that most (on a 95-99% level) of all drama involving role-playing games, from people telling you you're doing something wrong, to SJW-vs.-whatever the other side would be called back-and-forth, to our recent 'best way to play WOD' thread tangent, exist exclusively in my world because I go out onto internet forums where people (self-selected to be those with passionate opinions) are encouraged to ask and answer questions along the lines of "what is your opinion on..."

But again, if you have had a player scream bloody murder at you because you didn't want Elven Moonblades in your game, my sympathies.

It's not that I've had people scream, it's more that people don't want to play the setting because of all the NPC's 'having done everything' worth doing to some of these players (Some of which were online at WoTC's old forum, but most of them were local, and some conventions I went to), it was on par with not wanting to play in a LoTR game in which they aren't allowed to try and kill Sauron, or at least without a chance of them being successful.

It's a common perception over here.

Which I freely admit is probably a tiny group of individuals, and completely anecdotal.

Personally, I don't care, and I don't use anything I don't like in my games.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;935000I'm sorry, and I'm not trying to pick on you, or even this particular example. However, I always wonder when I see something like this, "who are these people?" How many times have you actually tried to run (or seen someone else try to run) a FR campaign, and said something like, "Okay, we're going to run a game in the basic FR world, pre-Time-of-Troubles, but most of the large metaplots from the novels aren't a big part of this story." and had people scream at you about it?

Again I'm not trying to pick on you, because it would in fact really suck if that's part of your personal experiences in roleplaying. But that's such aberrant behavior that I wonder if it is something that actually happens, or just a perceived sense of judgment. My own personal experience is that most (on a 95-99% level) of all drama involving role-playing games, from people telling you you're doing something wrong, to SJW-vs.-whatever the other side would be called back-and-forth, to our recent 'best way to play WOD' thread tangent, exist exclusively in my world because I go out onto internet forums where people (self-selected to be those with passionate opinions) are encouraged to ask and answer questions along the lines of "what is your opinion on..."

But again, if you have had a player scream bloody murder at you because you didn't want Elven Moonblades in your game, my sympathies.

I've never had anyone scream about it. The one time I ran Forgotten Realms, I did have one player who was really disappointed that I wasn't an expert on the novels like he was. That sucked some of the fun out of it for me.

Personally, my biggest issue is that the novels tend to weaken the utility of the gaming products. Rather that simply provide a playground for the PCs, they have to allude to the novels for cross-marketing purposes. The adventures are often written so players can see, but not touch events from the novels. Any adventure that is designed to work around a meta-plot is one that is not designed with maximum freedom for the PCs.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935054In which case, I would lean forward, roll up the FOURTEEN Dragonlance modules that occur during the time of the novels,

Make that TWELVE modules - DL5 was a setting primer and DL11 was a cosim boardgame.

But I know what you mean. The first novel arrived in German stores only after DL4, so neither players nor DM had the feeling of playing in someone else's backyard. The modules were treated like any other module.
That changed quickly as DMs read the novels and started to feel obligated to follow the plot - despite the fact that the modules left a lot of the setting's characters and events to the whims of random rolls (the roles of Fizban, the Green Gemstone Man, etc.) or even contradicted the novels (Verminaard's demise).

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;935090DL5 was a setting primer

About the time of the novels, not after, because the novels weren't done yet.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;935090DL11 was a cosim boardgame.

Set during the time of the novels, not after.

Nope, he's still getting all 14 right up the shitter. Plus the bucket.

Quote from: Opaopajr;934829Never felt pointless to me. But I always understood Ravenloft to be a deep ethereal "hell" to the darklords, and the whole ordeal for the party was to be the archetypal rebuke to the temptation to power. It's very "paladin in hell" because you are fighting your own virtue v. vice battle, not just with an implaccable and nigh interminable foe, but with yourself. Falling to pride believing that the means to power shall end... whatever (a great past wrong, your own troubles, the suffering of others, etc.)... is exactly the temptation being resisted.

You are fighting a metaphysical battle to be a paragon in a very beautiful yet seemingly hopeless world. Every second your light shines defies the space (or perhas better, defines the space,). Most beings are trapped there because they are all too human; they are emblematic of the shortcomings of human nature.

Your personal change becomes metaphysical because your deeds transcend into the archetypal, if you follow and succeed the well-trod legend. You can change Ravenloft by becoming a darklord in your own right (as a retired character), or you can change Ravenloft by reembodying that legendary hope. This way the people there are not completely lost -- and it nettles the dark lords' hubris, eternally failing to learn from their pride.

It's a subtle lasting effect upon a domain. The greater cyclicality plays well into Western conceptions of everlasting torment. (The West being more partial to linearity for coproreal resolutions, and suspension -- or the eternal -- for the divine.) But the PC heroic interference (whose serendipity is often assisted by the Dread Plane itself to torment its darklord prisoners) is there to keep lit sacred judgment's flame in the face of extra-planar exemplars of cruelty.

In a word it's Pageantry, in the medieval sense. Without renewed participation, new bodies behind each mask, the flame goes out. The cycle must continue for it to be a teachable example. Which, given the ethereal is the realm of thought, memory, and tales, makes perfect sense why Ravenloft is essentially a demiplane hosting Morality Tales Pageants -- and doubles as a hellish prison for its biggest villains. THEY cannot escape their masks, they are always stuck playing themselves; nor can they escape their judgment until they face themselves.

If you wanted to change a Ravenloft domain at the metaphysical level you'd have to play it through something like Dragon Raid, the game of Christian virtues as transcendent mysteries. Could be fun. However D&D's level+loot structure is not designed to represent eschewing temporal power as a means to conflict resolution. Redemption is a very different, and likely more dangerous, way to play Ravenloft; it's more designed as a higher stakes pageant play. (Both ideas are actually really cool if you dwell on it, though.)

   This is one of the best Ravenloft posts I've ever seen--and I've been a fan of the setting for a quarter-century.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;934924So people can only play when 'Sauron' has died, so nothing they do can actually affect the game world in a grand scope?  Some people don't want that.

  It's kind of a shame that the IMO most gameable era of the setting--the Fifth Age--was also the most reviled.

Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;935090But I know what you mean. The first novel arrived in German stores only after DL4, so neither players nor DM had the feeling of playing in someone else's backyard. The modules were treated like any other module.
That changed quickly as DMs read the novels and started to feel obligated to follow the plot - despite the fact that the modules left a lot of the setting's characters and events to the whims of random rolls (the roles of Fizban, the Green Gemstone Man, etc.) or even contradicted the novels (Verminaard's demise).

   The first novel was released roughly simultaneous with DL5, but they got very far ahead of the adventures very quickly, to the point that the modules didn't wrap up publication until after the release of Test of the Twins.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935091About the time of the novels, not after, because the novels weren't done yet.

Set during the time of the novels, not after.

Nope, he's still getting all 14 right up the shitter. Plus the bucket.

No, man, you can't. Not the muthafuckin' bucket! NOOOOOOOOO!

:-)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;935109This is one of the best Ravenloft posts I've ever seen--and I've been a fan of the setting for a quarter-century.

Stop it, you're making me blush! :o

Quote from: Christopher Brady;934924So people can only play when 'Sauron' has died, so nothing they do can actually affect the game world in a grand scope?  Some people don't want that.

Too bad for them and their small little minds.

You think after Sauron is gone its all hugs and kisses forever? Just because one evil plan has been stopped in absolutely no way means that more wont crop up. And possibly worse that what just ended.

Try thinking. It helps in RPGs.

Quote from: Omega;935509Too bad for them and their small little minds.

You think after Sauron is gone its all hugs and kisses forever? Just because one evil plan has been stopped in absolutely no way means that more wont crop up. And possibly worse that what just ended.

Try thinking. It helps in RPGs.

Some players want to do the big things, they want to save the world, and quite frankly, I'm not going to insult them by telling them they can't.  It is a fantasy game after all, we do what we think is fun, and forcing people into something they don't want isn't fun.

Maybe instead of forcing, we should keep an open mind for other people?  After all, this is a cooperative group activity.

Quote from: CRKrueger;935054In which case, I would lean forward, roll up the FOURTEEN Dragonlance modules that occur during the time of the novels, and were meant to go along with the novels, and not gently at all, shove them right up your ass. :D

And I'd point out Im running the Dragonlance campaign setting. Not the AD&D modules. And probably call you a moron for not paying attention to the campaign pitch.

Now if I were running the module series thats a totally different matter. Never seen them other than a glance at the first one way back. But from what everyones ever said about them I assume they follow the books.

Ravenloft never appealed to me at all.  It might not suck, but I could never get into it enough to find out. Liked the original module though.

Ditto for Spelljammer. D&D in spaaace! Nah.  And I like science fantasy.

I thought Forgotten Realms was cool when I was a 16 year old kid.  I got over it pretty quickly though. 1e box was pretty good but it went downhill from there.

All the "historical" settings Kara Tur, Al Qadim, Metzecca (or whatever, I probably spelled all of those wrong) left me flat.

Planescape did not suck, but I didn't find it particularly playable.  It was well done, but it was too much invention and weirdness.  I liked it for Greyhawk background material but not so much as a campaign setting.

I recently pulled out the old Planescape stuff from my basement and gave it a read.  Good grief is that horrible drivel.

Quote from: Old One Eye;935558I recently pulled out the old Planescape stuff from my basement and gave it a read.  Good grief is that horrible drivel.

I am starting to feel disenchantment with Planescape myself. Strange. I used to really, really, love it and its concepts. I tried to start up a campaign recently but I could just not go on longer than one adventure since it just bored me to read those books. Boring factions, boring plots, boring places, boring people etc. I think the pseudo intellectual gimmick with all that relativist nonsense made the whole thing feel pointless. Rather than riddled with opportunities it felt very stiff and constrained. And I finally realized that I actually like the 4e cosmology much better. I still like Sigil, modrons, demons&devils yada yada. But I do think that getting rid of the factions, the cant, and the pretty-but-depressive art, special snowflake plannar rules and the constrained old cosmology was actully good in the long run.

Quote from: Madprofessor;935552Ditto for Spelljammer. D&D in spaaace! Nah.  And I like science fantasy.

I thought Forgotten Realms was cool when I was a 16 year old kid.  I got over it pretty quickly though. 1e box was pretty good but it went downhill from there.

All the "historical" settings Kara Tur, Al Qadim, Metzecca (or whatever, I probably spelled all of those wrong) left me flat.

Planescape did not suck, but I didn't find it particularly playable.  It was well done, but it was too much invention and weirdness.  I liked it for Greyhawk background material but not so much as a campaign setting.

I'm gonna make my pitch here. I owned Spelljammer for several years after it came out. After reading it - I thought "WTF is this shit?" I ended up after running a near half-decade-long campaign of 1e Forgotten Realms run into a rut. I decided what the hell and go full-gonzo and made the transition to Spelljammer with my PC's.

It was beyond fun. In fact, Spelljammer allowed me to use Kara-Tur, Al-Qadim and Maztica, alongside Greyhawk and Dragonlance simultaneously. It's gonzo-over-the-top crazy sure. But Spelljammer has it's own thing going on that made D&D into a crazy Star-Wars game with Elven Imperials, and independents, and world-spanning crime cartels and Star Trek like mysteries. It's quite fun once you let go and embrace the wildness of it.

Quote from: Old One Eye;935558I recently pulled out the old Planescape stuff from my basement and gave it a read.  Good grief is that horrible drivel.

If you'd like to get rid of that horrible drivel, I'd gladly pay to take it off your hands.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;934924So people can only play when 'Sauron' has died, so nothing they do can actually affect the game world in a grand scope?  Some people don't want that.

Kind of like Lord of the Rings was all meaningless, because people were only fighting Sauron, who was only ever just the henchmen of the actual Big Bad of the setting?

:rolleyes:

Quote from: Tristram Evans;936609If you'd like to get rid of that horrible drivel, I'd gladly pay to take it off your hands.

Wait! Me too! Share and share alike! :)

Quote from: Old One Eye;935558I recently pulled out the old Planescape stuff from my basement and gave it a read.  Good grief is that horrible drivel.

I was never enchanted with Planescape to begin with. It totally neutered the outer planes of the sense of "Realm of the gods" and "The afterlife" and just made it into London and a bunch of wacky alien worlds with wacky aliens doing wacky alien things. Or just another themed town to visit that could have been dropped into the realms and no one would have noticed.

Quote from: Omega;936724I was never enchanted with Planescape to begin with. It totally neutered the outer planes of the sense of "Realm of the gods" and "The afterlife" and just made it into London and a bunch of wacky alien worlds with wacky aliens doing wacky alien things. Or just another themed town to visit that could have been dropped into the realms and no one would have noticed.

Sure did. It was one of the worst examples of an intellectually-bankrupt TSR trying to rip off concepts from White Wolf.

For me:

1. Dragonlance, for many of the reasons already cited.
2. Harn, mostly because of just enough strange made-up jargon to annoy.  I don't know what the fuck a "Serela" is, is that a bishop? A vicar? An abbot? It's just close enough to real-world stuff to pique my interest but that shit takes me right out of it.
3. Planescape, because of the factions and the Lady of Pain.  Don't want gods in Sigil? Say they full-stop can't enter and priestly powers don't work.  Done.  The factions were just goddamned silly, they would have made more sense if they had been political parties vying for position in a satirical Parliament.
4. Ebberon, because 3.5 D&D is no place for the pulps.  It just doesn't work, and plus there was no sense that this was an actual industrial society.  It just had some of the trappings like a Ren-fest style Victoriana Faire.

Quote from: RPGPundit;938208Sure did. It was one of the worst examples of an intellectually-bankrupt TSR trying to rip off concepts from White Wolf.

Not quite. Its just cleaving to the alignment wheel with factions that at times seem unrelated to what they are aligned to. (and some might say the rip off was the other way around.) The main problem with Planescape is that it simply should have been a separate campaign world instead of touted as the outer planes. 2e Ravenloft. was drifting that way too as they added more domains.

More a sign that TSR was just bankrupt as they were at the time repurposing various old submissions for other games. The Star Frontiers cyborg rules dropped into a Gamma World module for example.

Eh, such is.

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;938387For me:

2. Harn, mostly because of just enough strange made-up jargon to annoy.  I don't know what the fuck a "Serela" is, is that a bishop? A vicar? An abbot? It's just close enough to real-world stuff to pique my interest but that shit takes me right out of it.

Totally agree about the lingo-jargon of Harn. You can't cast magic, you have to know SheK-Pvar. oooh.

 I love the earthy-ness of Harnworld, but the phony language integrated into both the game system and the world kills it for me.  I know other gameworlds and fantasy authors do this, but the funny-talk from out of left field just doesn't fit with the realistic medieval tone of Harn. Place names and personal names would be one thing, but Harn goes a step too far in trying to get us to talk in a made up language.

Part of why I dislike 4th ed Gamma World. They tried to turn the early naming conventions into a language.

d20 GW had some rules for language drift. But kept it optional and not intrusive.

Quote from: Omega;938424Not quite. Its just cleaving to the alignment wheel with factions that at times seem unrelated to what they are aligned to. (and some might say the rip off was the other way around.) The main problem with Planescape is that it simply should have been a separate campaign world instead of touted as the outer planes. 2e Ravenloft. was drifting that way too as they added more domains.

I fail to see how making Planescape a prime material world would help anything.  

The main problem with Planescape is that the factions loom extremely large and are clearly the main organizations with which to interact.  But, they are all so damn steeped in junior high angst pseudo-philosophy that there are no goals or motivations the DM can use.  

This group believes everything will erode to entropy in the end so why bother.  That group believes in doing fish-malk chaos all the time.  This group thinks you should spend all your time just sensing things.  

It is might near the perfect example of how not to create factions.  To bash any of them into an organization in the milieu that is useful, I have to normalize them into having relatable motivations and goals on my own.  The setting cares about faction flavor, but at the table I need faction utility.

Quote from: Old One Eye;938624I fail to see how making Planescape a prime material world would help anything.  

Because that is what it essentially is allready. Its just another rime material plane setting. Demons? Angels? They might as well be new alien races. Gods and the afterlife? Where? An afterthought at best. Nigh totally unused otherwise till near the end 2e.

Quote from: Madprofessor;938546Totally agree about the lingo-jargon of Harn. You can't cast magic, you have to know SheK-Pvar. oooh.

 I love the earthy-ness of Harnworld, but the phony language integrated into both the game system and the world kills it for me.  I know other gameworlds and fantasy authors do this, but the funny-talk from out of left field just doesn't fit with the realistic medieval tone of Harn. Place names and personal names would be one thing, but Harn goes a step too far in trying to get us to talk in a made up language.

Harn and Harnworld got so close to an amazing product but choked on this one point. The amount of love and effort that have gone in that setting is incredible, and the products (maps, detailed manors, etc.) can be kind of jaw dropping. And then you sit down to play and have to contend with all the dreck that resulted from them renaming every fucking thing in medieval europe. It's like Steve Martin's complaint about the french language: 'they have a different word for EVERYTHING!'

I kinda agree about Harn. And yet it doesn't bother me with EPT (note: I have never really gotten the opportunity to play more than a few sessions of EPT, so I am talking just about reading the books), which clearly has a lot of its' own language.

Perhaps the difference between Harn and EPT is that Harn is clearly medieval europe, whereas EPT is its own thing. So when you present me with a medieval english town and a catholic church, but insist on calling the town 'vlarglaglistan' and the church 'eeeeeeeepglick!!!!!!', if feels like you are just being an idiot. But if you use those words in an other-worldly setting I don't really recognize, I'll go along with it.

Dragonlance. My friends thought it was cool as hell, but aside from the maps I thought it was useless. No, worse than useless. They got me to play the song (a module with sheet music? oh fuck me to tears!) on the piano. Not only was it a pile of shit (and not just because I suck as a musician) but the girl I was dating saw what I was doing and I couldn't have looked like a bigger dork if I had been playing Rush. Jesus Tittyfucking Christ!

Quote from: Elfdart;939541Dragonlance. My friends thought it was cool as hell, but aside from the maps I thought it was useless. No, worse than useless. They got me to play the song (a module with sheet music? of fuck me to tears!) on the piano. Not only was it a pile of shit (and not just because I suck as a musician) but the girl I was dating saw what I was doing and I couldn't have looked like a bigger dork if I had been playing Rush. Jesus Tittyfucking Christ!

You played a Dragonlance song from a module on piano?  Fucking nerd!  :)

Does anyone have a link to this music?  I need to hear this now.

Quote from: Elfdart;939541Dragonlance. My friends thought it was cool as hell, but aside from the maps I thought it was useless. No, worse than useless. They got me to play the song (a module with sheet music? of fuck me to tears!) on the piano. Not only was it a pile of shit (and not just because I suck as a musician) but the girl I was dating saw what I was doing and I couldn't have looked like a bigger dork if I had been playing Rush. Jesus Tittyfucking Christ!

Aww (grnfp... snicker) awwww (hee heeee haaa) awwwww!
/wipes away tear
That was a majestic piece of "D&D Cock Blocked Me!" Bring it in, man, bring it in. Hug it out, there's no shame in the tears... (of laughter)!
:D

Quote from: Opaopajr;939559"D&D Cock Blocked Me!"

Cockblocked us all at some point or another, I suspect; and like every insecure person in an abusive relationship, we still loved it.

(Though admittedly my experiences were nowhere nearly as egregious.)

Quote from: RunningLaser;939558You played a Dragonlance song from a module on piano?  Fucking nerd!  :)

Does anyone have a link to this music?  I need to hear this now.

I assume it was from here:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61gUgKVSkqL.jpg)

Quote from: Tristram Evans;939574I assume it was from here:

I don't know if it was repeated in that book but the sheet music was in (some, not all) the original modules.

Remember: DL was AD&D's attempt at Tolkien, and the Hobbit and LotR were full of poems and songs.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;939574I assume it was from here:

(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61gUgKVSkqL.jpg)

I think it was from the very first module.

As a group, we didn't use modules at the time, so the whole hatedom over Dragonlance thing kinda went over my head. I remember reading the first trilogy of novels and thinking, "well those certainly weren't Shakespeare/Tolkien, but they weren't remarkable positively or negatively, given my expectations for schlock." The books that came later slowly got terrible, but again, to be expected. It wasn't until I got onto D&D Usenet in like 1990 that I realized that there was such a hate-hardon for DL.

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;9383874. Ebberon, because 3.5 D&D is no place for the pulps.  It just doesn't work, and plus there was no sense that this was an actual industrial society.  It just had some of the trappings like a Ren-fest style Victoriana Faire.

Can't say anything about 3e because I didn't run the setting then, but I've effectively been running James Bond in 5e Eberron, so I disagree to some extent with your point. The omnipresence of 1-3rd level magic at most levels of society simulates the increasing convenience and luxury of early modernity quite well in my opinion.

There's only two settings that never did anything for me. One being Dragonlance. Between the railroady modules, and the feeling (at least to me) of things being locked in and the PCs not having much say in the world. Just doesn't appeal to me. The second being Planescape. The whole concept just doesn't really do much for me. I know a lot of people dig it. But it's just not really my cuppa.

Dragonlance.

The idea of dragons allowing little gnat riders to be their "master" just didn't pass the logic test for me. And much of the rest of the setting also fell apart upon scrutiny too.

When I bought the Monstrous Compendium for AD&D 2nd edition for Dragonlance. I honestly found the contents pretty uninspired.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;940060Dragonlance.

The idea of dragons allowing little gnat riders to be their "master" just didn't pass the logic test for me. And much of the rest of the setting also fell apart upon scrutiny too.

When I bought the Monstrous Compendium for AD&D 2nd edition for Dragonlance. I honestly found the contents pretty uninspired.

Yeah, Dragonlance fucking blows.

Now, Ravenloft was fucking awesome! If Dragonlance is my least favorite D&D setting, then Ravenloft is my most favorite.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;940060Dragonlance.

The idea of dragons allowing little gnat riders to be their "master" just didn't pass the logic test for me. And much of the rest of the setting also fell apart upon scrutiny too.

When I bought the Monstrous Compendium for AD&D 2nd edition for Dragonlance. I honestly found the contents pretty uninspired.

Its more like a close partnership. Or at least was at one point.

And yeah the MC was so lackluster. But then so was the Spelljammer MC and a couple of others. For me at least the MCs were more miss than hit.

Quote from: Ronin;940058There's only two settings that never did anything for me. One being Dragonlance. Between the railroady modules, and the feeling (at least to me) of things being locked in and the PCs not having much say in the world. Just doesn't appeal to me. The second being Planescape. The whole concept just doesn't really do much for me. I know a lot of people dig it. But it's just not really my cuppa.

If you have the time, I'd like to touch on that.

Now, I am very much not a DL expert. I've read 4-8 novels, had the 1e hardcover book, and (well after the fact) read the classic adventure modules and said, "yep, those are in fact just as railroad-y as everyone says they are." So, outside of those classicly railroad-y modules, is the rest of the setting more PCs-unable-to-effect-the-world than any other? I mean, beyond 'this kingdom is at war with that kingdom" and if the PCs want to end the war or something, the DM has to deviate from the printed canon, because that's true with any setting that sets up a current state of the world. Is there anything specific to the DL setting that makes it hard for the PCs to have any real influence?

It's weird, 90% of Dragonlance I loved.  Didn't play the modules, though I think one of my friends did.  I remember one thing bugged me the most, probably silly, was the use of steel as currency (think that was it).  When I think of Dragonlance though, I think of the art of Elmore and have fond memories.

Quote from: RunningLaser;940140It's weird, 90% of Dragonlance I loved.  Didn't play the modules, though I think one of my friends did.  I remember one thing bugged me the most, probably silly, was the use of steel as currency (think that was it).  When I think of Dragonlance though, I think of the art of Elmore and have fond memories.

I liked the first series of books, when I was like 12. And those Elmore covers were just amazing. Absolute classics.

(http://www.larryelmore.com/core/imgs/prints/DRAGONLANCE-Dragons-of-Autumn-Twilight.jpg)
(http://lcrazzy1.narod.ru/image/fantasy/larry_elmore/Elmore_Larry_014_Dragons_Of_Autumn_Twilight.jpg)
(http://www.larryelmore.com/core/imgs/prints/DRAGONLANCE-Dragons-of-Winter-Night.jpg)


Tried rereading the books when the annotated edition came out in my early 20s. Couldn't do it, wish I hadn't tried because it tainted those childhood memories, much like watching cartoons from the 80s rereleased on dvd. On the other hand, Chronicles of Prydain still holds up as an adult.


As to Planescape, like anything with a very specific  tone and aesthetics, its going to appeal to some people and not to others, and I think all great things in life are like that. On the other hand, reading some of the comments on the last few pages its very obvious quite a few people(including Pundit) either never actually read the game or simply didn't "get it", since they seem to be confusing Sigil with the Planes, or under the impression the Planes themselves had been altered from the 1e Manual of the Planes.

Elmore's art is inspiring. His classic pose compositions, color, and attention to detail awed me when young and inspires me to dabble in amateurish scribblings now older. His lush work is one of the big saving graces of any product in my eyes. I own up to my bias here just like I own Brom is Dark Sun and DiTerlizzi is Planescape/Changeling the Dreaming.

That said, I do feel blessed I missed out on Dragonlance novels, modules, and all growing up. Taladas continent content looks really cool and Leaves of Last Home Inn is filled with fleshy setting characterization. I don't have soured nostalgia or contemporary shopping fumbling to find the good stuff.

I think I lucked out on avoiding the worst of DL. :)

Quote from: Willie the Duck;940134If you have the time, I'd like to touch on that.

Now, I am very much not a DL expert. I've read 4-8 novels, had the 1e hardcover book, and (well after the fact) read the classic adventure modules and said, "yep, those are in fact just as railroad-y as everyone says they are." So, outside of those classicly railroad-y modules, is the rest of the setting more PCs-unable-to-effect-the-world than any other? I mean, beyond 'this kingdom is at war with that kingdom" and if the PCs want to end the war or something, the DM has to deviate from the printed canon, because that's true with any setting that sets up a current state of the world. Is there anything specific to the DL setting that makes it hard for the PCs to have any real influence?

I guess its just the impression, or feel I get from it. (Clearly your milage may very) I'll be honest I have never read a dragonlance book. Perhaps the modules I have read have colored my judgement.

Oh, and lastly Elmore for the win! I love his art. It screams D&D to me personally. Of course, I started out with the Mentzer Basic set with the Elmore cover. Might explain a lot.:)

Quote from: Opaopajr;940385I think I lucked out on avoiding the worst of DL. :)

Same here. I have the original 6 books and some of the 3 followup compilations. And after that mercifully missed everything. One of my players has the retelling of the first three books where about everyone is killed and it soured him to the whole setting.

For me, Dragonlance.

It's probably better than my experiences indicated, but those experiences have shaped my image of the setting.

Chief reasons:
1) The old module series was too much a slave to the setting fiction, making them seem railroady and heavy-handed.
2) Kender.

Tracking the moon phases was a PITA.  Wizard tests were a PITA.  Dragonlance was actively a PITA to run even with homebrew adventures and ignoring kender/gully dwarves/crap gnomes.

The only good part of Dragonlance was Taladas.

Quote from: RPGPundit;941704The only good part of Dragonlance was Taladas.

In the 90s I ran a plot arc that took about 5 years to play out, fighting Chthonic entities known as the Worm Gods, which were giant planet sized worms that ate planets. Players played Gods fighting against them. Krynn was one of the first casualties, being completely eaten by them. :D

... and the Gods lifted nary a finger.

Quote from: Opaopajr;941869... and the Gods lifted nary a finger.

Even the Krynn Gods were sick of that place.  Total planetary annihilation was worth seeing Fizban snuffed. :D

Quote from: RPGPundit;941704The only good part of Dragonlance was Taladas.

And Dragonlance Adventures since the default was after the war. But could cover during, or even Huma's era.

Quote from: Ronin;940058There's only two settings that never did anything for me. One being Dragonlance. Between the railroady modules, and the feeling (at least to me) of things being locked in and the PCs not having much say in the world. Just doesn't appeal to me. The second being Planescape. The whole concept just doesn't really do much for me. I know a lot of people dig it. But it's just not really my cuppa.

Placescape just seems like a setting that's more made for being read than for being played. Absolutely loved the art so was always happy when articles about it popped up in the Dragon magazine as a kid and even bought some Bloodwars cards mostly for the art but never even considered running a campaign in it.

Yes, Bloodwars, the TSR card game even less successful than Spellfire! With DiTerlizzi (recycled but whatever) art on pretty much every card it was a shame it never did better.

Quote from: Larsdangly;938938Perhaps the difference between Harn and EPT is that Harn is clearly medieval europe, whereas EPT is its own thing. So when you present me with a medieval english town and a catholic church, but insist on calling the town 'vlarglaglistan' and the church 'eeeeeeeepglick!!!!!!', if feels like you are just being an idiot. But if you use those words in an other-worldly setting I don't really recognize, I'll go along with it.

This. So much this.

Annoyed the everliving fuck out of me when I read Last Light of the Sun in which not-Vikings were attacking not-England and for the life of me I could never keep not-Rome, not-Jerusalem and not-Constantinople straight. If you're going to make a historical setting just use historical names and don't sweat the details. Nobody gave a fuck when I sent a party into the (geographically ludicrous in retrospect) catacombs of Venice and made all Basques halflings and the Swiss dwarves because why not?

I'm really coming around to using as few made up names for big picture stuff since it's so much easier to get a handle on. Been watching Avatar with my son and the term "Fire Nation" has confused nobody ever.

Good one! It reminds me of one my favorite obscure games: Flintloque. It is basically europe in the napoleonic wars, but with all kinds of goofy fantasy substitutions. It is also gleefully ridiculous and fun.

Quote from: Larsdangly;942488Good one! It reminds me of one my favorite obscure games: Flintloque. It is basically europe in the napoleonic wars, but with all kinds of goofy fantasy substitutions. It is also gleefully ridiculous and fun.

Just ran a 14th century version of that. It's so much easier when you don't have to explain to anyone what "France" is.

Quote from: Larsdangly;942488Good one! It reminds me of one my favorite obscure games: Flintloque. It is basically europe in the napoleonic wars, but with all kinds of goofy fantasy substitutions. It is also gleefully ridiculous and fun.

huh, there's an anthropomorphic miniature wargame by that name, wonder if there's any relation.

Quote from: cranebump;932140Eberron. Warforged and lightning trains. :-/

Same!
I really tried to get into the setting because my friend ran the crap out of it, but there was still a lot of crap in it.
I just could not get into Eberron. I thought it was dumb and took me right out.

Quote from: RPGPundit;941704The only good part of Dragonlance was Taladas.

Taladas was my favourite part of DL and was created by the underrated David 'Zeb' Cook, who wrote a number of my favourite early modules (Isle of Dread, Dwellers of the Forbidden City).

DL gets a lot of flack these days as everyone remembers how rail roady Dragons of Despair was but going back and re-reading you'll find by the mid-point they've changed their approach and PCs and NPCs can die at anytime, major battles can be lost, etc.

More importantly Dragonlance Adventures I think is full of good, distinct setting material. I particularly like the approach to magic with the white, red and black orders, relationship to the moon cycles, etc.

I think the endless series of novels and nerds obsessing about making their play at the table agreeing with nonsense ideas like 'canon' hurt the setting more than the actual content produced for it.

In terms of Planescape, obviously the suits at TSR loosened up about the use of devils and demons as a lot of the setting was about the Bloodwar. City of Dis by Steve Perrin is a pretty good module based around that setting.

FR was ironically the weakest setting in 2e D&D but also the most popular. There is some gold in the mountain of material produced for it though, the Skullport supplement for instance is wonderfully imaginative and packed with adventure hooks. Highly recommend it for use in any homebrew as it can be pretty easily dropped anywhere.

I mostly just make up my own settings, but...

Forgotten Realms: Land of the Mary Sues.  I hate that shit.  Anything important has and will be done by an in canon character.  Don't bother trying to be the greatest wizard in the land, you will NEVER top Elminster because Word of God says so.

Eberron: this one pisses me off, because WotC announces this big contest where they say anyone can enter to determine what the new setting will be, and they get all these people to send in ideas (which WotC now owns), and then they announce that the winner is someone who works for the company!  The way they dealt with that pisses me off.  (I will admit that much of what I HAVE read is of the setting does interest me, and that just pisses me off even more.)

Dragonlance:  This one gets a pass from me.  My original D&D group, one of the few non-dysfunctional groups I've been a part of, had a guy in it who was dyslexic, was in high school, but couldn't read past the third grade level when we started playing D&D.  After a session he said that it was a lot of fun, and was looking for something to read that was of the same spirit as the game.  I lent him the Dragons of Autumn Twilight.  Last I heard he had gotten a PhD in comparative literature.

Ghostwalk: they only did ONE book!  BASTARDS!

Quote from: remial;943373I mostly just make up my own settings, but...

Forgotten Realms: Land of the Mary Sues.  I hate that shit.  Anything important has and will be done by an in canon character.  Don't bother trying to be the greatest wizard in the land, you will NEVER top Elminster because Word of God says so.

Mary Sue WIZARDS you'll find anyone that was a true world shaker, and not part of the Drizzle's circle of friends (and even they've all done relatively minor things compared to being accepted into being a Gods 'Chosen'), has been an 'arcane' magic user, first and foremost.  The 'Seven Sisters', Khelben Blackstaff, the aforementioned Elmunchkin, any time an 'important' character came up in the Realms it's been a Wizard.

Forgotten Realms during 2ed era. Im not very keen on 1ed FR either but it had a certain charm despite the Fantasy-Fucking-Cosmopolitan-Capitalist-Hippie-Village vibe I get from it. The 2ed FR supplements was at large so boring I dont know what bad I should say about ut since it was so forgettable( I am sure thet there were at least some diamond amongst the dust somewhere) . I have no love for its sub-setings like Maztica or Kara-Thur either. Baldurs Gate CRPG is very dear to me but not that iteration of the realms in which it is set. 3ed era FR was not much better either.

Another would maybe be Spelljammer. I like the concept. But the setting and modules just fell flat after reading it.


Dark Sun. Really awesome illustrations on the covers. Text never lived up to them. I think this might as well had been its own game rather than an AD&D title.

Greyhawk 1ed/2ed. "The Narevhionoghptruorthn-what did you say Gary?". Dry and not very exciting to read. Sure it have all those old classic adventure modules set there but I am not talking about those.;

Quote from: Christopher Brady;943379Mary Sue WIZARDS you'll find anyone that was a true world shaker, and not part of the Drizzle's circle of friends (and even they've all done relatively minor things compared to being accepted into being a Gods 'Chosen'), has been an 'arcane' magic user, first and foremost.  The 'Seven Sisters', Khelben Blackstaff, the aforementioned Elmunchkin, any time an 'important' character came up in the Realms it's been a Wizard.

Thats actually part of Greenwoods "point" to the Realms. To take down several pegs the idea that the PCs are the center of the universe. In FR they arent. Theres a couple of other concepts he likes to use too.

Quote from: Omega;943699Thats actually part of Greenwoods "point" to the Realms. To take down several pegs the idea that the PCs are the center of the universe. In FR they arent. Theres a couple of other concepts he likes to use too.

That would be far more convincing if Elminster weren't basically the ultimate DM player character.  (With Mr. Greenwood being the DM and Eliminster his character).

Quote from: JeremyR;943707That would be far more convincing if Elminster weren't basically the ultimate DM player character.  (With Mr. Greenwood being the DM and Eliminster his character).

I remember reading a Greenwood interview in which he admitted he used Elminster in his home games as a Deus ex machina to save PCs from certain death and/or reveal secret passages in the dungeon.

I ain't protesting because it's his home game but that is lame as fuck.

I remember my first MERP game, where we were tasked with looting the Barrow Downs by Gandalf! He hung around outside for us to come back when we were too badly injured to continue and cast his high-level healing spells on us before we went back in again. We were 1st level characters going up against Barrow Wights! Any MERP aficionados can tell you that is death-wish stuff.

Didn't put us off Middle Earth though. From then on we ignored all the NPCs in the setting (unless we sought them out) and did our own thing - they never entered our orbit. The exact same thing is easy to do in FR or any other setting. Which is why i always dismiss setting NPCs as a reason to dislike a setting. Yank 'em out, ignore 'em, kill them when you reach their level, don't talk about them, remove them from your game. Whatever.

If you've got cannon nazis in your group who complain about that not being canon, get a new group or tell them to grow the fuck up.

You know, the Forgotten Realms Campaign box set (the gray one) tricked me a bit.  Looking at the subdued cover of a brooding plains warrior astride a wild horse against a cold and dreary backdrop....  hiding the fact that the realms is this wa-hoo wild and wooly batshit place of super magic.

Quote from: RunningLaser;943719You know, the Forgotten Realms Campaign box set (the gray one) tricked me a bit.  Looking at the subdued cover of a brooding plains warrior astride a wild horse against a cold and dreary backdrop....  hiding the fact that the realms is this wa-hoo wild and wooly batshit place of super magic.

Ive never seen the original set. But wasnt it actually alot more subdued than everything that came after?

Dragonlance.  God, I hated that setting.

OT question: Am I wrong for loving Spelljammer?





Because I love Spelljammer.

Quote from: The Butcher;932127I cultivate an exaggerated dislike of Dragonlance for the entertainment of the DL-loving crew in my group.

Be careful.

I only started liking Dragonlance to be a contrarian among my group and overtime my faux-like became a genuine fondness to the point it's my favorite D&D setting now.

Quote from: noman;943998OT question: Am I wrong for loving Spelljammer?





Because I love Spelljammer.

Nothing.  One man's hate is another's love.

Quote from: noman;943998OT question: Am I wrong for loving Spelljammer?

Because I love Spelljammer.

Im in an ongoing one thats been running since 2008, but didnt actually hit the Spelljammer part till 2009. So about 8 years now of weekly sessions.

Quote from: Piestrio;944002Be careful.

I only started liking Dragonlance to be a contrarian among my group and overtime my faux-like became a genuine fondness to the point it's my favorite D&D setting now.

I think its like Forgotten Realms and to a lesser degree Karameikos when it transitioned into Mystara. The early stuff is great. Wide open and not overly cluttered. But by the 2e/Loraine era they all suffered in some manner.

Im especially not fond of Mystara as it sucked every ounce of openness and "make of it what you will" from Karameikos. I think its ok on its own if you like a really cluttered landscape. But it stopped being Karameikos. Which I guess was the point.

I think the Gazeteers are great, mostly just an outline of culture and city and lots of NPCs detailed with loads of adventure hooks. I don't see how that sucks the 'openess' out of it.

Quote from: noman;943998Because I love Spelljammer.

I also love Spelljammer. Goofy fun. Giant Space Hamsters. Hippo men. Slaver spiders.  Mindflayers and genocidal racist Beholders. What's not to love?

Actually, I do remember that Kingdoms of Kalamar annoyed the hell out of me because it seemed to forget that magic exists in the setting. A general (or was it an emperor) falls off of his horse and dies. Nobody thinks to raise him from the dead? A general dies of something like pneumonia while on campaign because apparently cure disease is hard to cast. This was in the same book that noted NPC of levels ranging up to 17--including clerics--living all over the land.

Quote from: Piestrio;944002Be careful.

I only started liking Dragonlance to be a contrarian among my group and overtime my faux-like became a genuine fondness to the point it's my favorite D&D setting now.

  Ah, but which Dragonlance? Original modules, Weis & Hickman novels/DRAGONLANCE Adventures, Taladas, Tales of the Lance, Fifth Age, or War of Souls/3.5 era? :)

   My relationship with Dragonlance is a long, tempestuous and conflicted one, so I'm familiar with the differences, but broad and subtle, between the various iterations. All shared worlds have those kinds of shifts; Dragonlance and Ravenloft are just the ones I'm familiar with in the D&D context.