Dungeon Fantasy needs a bare-bones setting

Fish · 12-23-2008, 04:00 AM

I don't think that Dungeon Fantasy needs to be nailed to any one specific setting. It would be very nice, however, to have some well-established generalities in a wide-open setting that players could become familiar with.

Why?

Fiction (and RPGs) usually take place on the boundaries of the "rules." Some players simply love having rules to bend, or to break, or to dance around. For instance: you're the dwarf who hates working with metal, or you're the dark elf who isn't really evil, or the long-lost king who doesn't really want the crown, or the quiet unadventuresome little fellow who gets dragged off into a battle against armies and dragons. You're the werewolf who's a vegetarian, you're the last in an ancient race of druids, you're the only one who knows where the valley of the long-lost secrets lies. You're the wizard who isn't very good at magic, you're the barbarian who isn't very handy with a sword, or you're the only person ever to survive the death and destruction of your village. You're the only alien of your race to serve in Starfleet; you're the youngest starship captain; you're the only known member of your race.

On the frontier where the rules break down, that's where stories happen. Gamers like having archetypes and rules, because that's how you make interesting characters. Why would a gamer want to be an uninspiring interchangeable Elf with a capital E, when he could be the Elf Who Doesn't Want To Be Immortal?

There's two ways to go with any setting. First, you can make all characters of a given type more or less identical. Star Trek is a setting of this type, where almost all Klingons (or Ferengi, or Romulans, or Cardassians) are virtually indistinguishable. A setting gives the player a basis, a foundation on which to build. It gives the world definition and direction.

But who were the most interesting characters in Trek? Spock, Data, Worf, Garek the tailor, Odo. They were unique. They defied their archetypes (or as in the case of Odo, he had no archetype, at least at first).

That's why, I think, a bare-bones setting is of some use. It gives players ideas, both in things they can be, but also ways they can be different.

Will SJ Games create such a bare-bones setting for GURPS Fantasy? No, because I doubt it'd sell... settings and rules and archetypes are desired by players, not necessarily by the GMs who want to run games. I like GURPS because I can run any setting I want, at any time. I don't like it, because every new setting is a buttload of work to create (but ever so satisfying to get it running).

12-23-2008, 04:00 AM	#11
Fish Join Date: Sep 2007	Re: Dungeon Fantasy needs a bare-bones setting I don't think that Dungeon Fantasy needs to be nailed to any one specific setting. It would be very nice, however, to have some well-established generalities in a wide-open setting that players could become familiar with. Why? Fiction (and RPGs) usually take place on the boundaries of the "rules." Some players simply love having rules to bend, or to break, or to dance around. For instance: you're the dwarf who hates working with metal, or you're the dark elf who isn't really evil, or the long-lost king who doesn't really want the crown, or the quiet unadventuresome little fellow who gets dragged off into a battle against armies and dragons. You're the werewolf who's a vegetarian, you're the last in an ancient race of druids, you're the only one who knows where the valley of the long-lost secrets lies. You're the wizard who isn't very good at magic, you're the barbarian who isn't very handy with a sword, or you're the only person ever to survive the death and destruction of your village. You're the only alien of your race to serve in Starfleet; you're the youngest starship captain; you're the only known member of your race. On the frontier where the rules break down, that's where stories happen. Gamers like having archetypes and rules, because that's how you make interesting characters. Why would a gamer want to be an uninspiring interchangeable Elf with a capital E, when he could be the Elf Who Doesn't Want To Be Immortal? There's two ways to go with any setting. First, you can make all characters of a given type more or less identical. Star Trek is a setting of this type, where almost all Klingons (or Ferengi, or Romulans, or Cardassians) are virtually indistinguishable. A setting gives the player a basis, a foundation on which to build. It gives the world definition and direction. But who were the most interesting characters in Trek? Spock, Data, Worf, Garek the tailor, Odo. They were unique. They defied their archetypes (or as in the case of Odo, he had no archetype, at least at first). That's why, I think, a bare-bones setting is of some use. It gives players ideas, both in things they can be, but also ways they can be different. Will SJ Games create such a bare-bones setting for GURPS Fantasy? No, because I doubt it'd sell... settings and rules and archetypes are desired by players, not necessarily by the GMs who want to run games. I like GURPS because I can run any setting I want, at any time. I don't like it, because every new setting is a buttload of work to create (but ever so satisfying to get it running).