The Campaign Builder's Guild

I have found that there are two extremes in creating fictional settings. Some people like to build them before any action takes place (see: most projects here, most published settings when used in RPGs), others like to build them as action takes place (see: Conan's setting when written, most RPG settings when originally created).
I think there are benefits for both. Pregenerated setting gives confidence (to the GM) and easy gaming (for not needing to improvise the large stuff), as well as consistency.
Improvising a setting gives greater freedom to players and more work for the GM while running, but less prep. Consistency may become a problem, depending on the GM's skill.

What are other pros and cons of both? Why do you prefer the one you do?

I used to improvise a lot, building the world as i went along.  However due to the cons you mentioned, I have decided to build my settings ahead of time now.  Mainly however, I build the big things, and let towns and heroes, along with other little things develop in play.

I do a lot of improv. When I started Sundown up a few days ago, I designed the entire thing as I went along. No pre-prep at all besides a secret reason for creating the setting... :)

I don't know where I fit in on this poll.

To tell the truth, I rarely play at all.  Most of the enjoyment I get from D&D is simply from letting my imagination flow and from creating.  When I do play, it tends not to last a very long time and I usually don't GM.

However, I do occassionally GM for a while.  When a certain friend of mine returns home from basic this fall, we hope to get a group started (we haven't played together for about three years.  We used to play together, marathon style.)  When I do GM, some things are planned to the very last, completely useless detail (in the true fashion of someone whose mother is very likely OCD) and other things don't even occur to me until I start playing (and I am forced to makes them up totally as I go along.)

I can't really say this is the best way...the only other way I have tried is using pre-made adventures or doing an entire campaign improv.  For the latter, you need to be very creative (and when I say very creative, I mean bordering on insanity).  The former is also enjoyable.  Most of the details are already there for you and you can focus more on actual roleplaying.

Perhaps it should also be mentions that about 75% of my gaming experience is online, mostly on RPOL.net.

Play has undeniably shaped the direction of the Jade Stage, but that's not to say that my writing has been an entirely (or even largely) improvisatory exercise. It's more a case of ideas gained during play prompting and guiding numerous and constant revisions of my written material.

(Interestingly, my play experience is remarkably similar to what Black Jack Davey describes: I write much more than I actually play, usually don't DM nowadays, and play most often online.)

I am an advocate of less-than-complete certainty in writing.  I feel it's important for a setting to have a few questions that are left unanswered. Characters in the setting can have some tough philosophical issues to ponder (just as we do with our unanswerables in real life), and individual DMs can tackle the issues I leave mutable, if they so choose.

Quote from: Luminous CrayonI am an advocate of less-than-complete certainty in writing.  I feel it's important for a setting to have a few questions that are left unanswered. Characters in the setting can have some tough philosophical issues to ponder (just as we do with our unanswerables in real life), and individual DMs can tackle the issues I leave mutable, if they so choose.

Well said.  I agree with this point.  The problem is, if you post settings like this online, people often get annoyed.  People always seem to ask for answers to the questions that you leave open.  In my experience, telling people that some things are left intentionally mysterious only further irritates them.

I never ever ever ever ever stop building. I can have everything... EVERYTHING in place before a game starts and STILL improv new ideas in play.

Quote from: beejazzI never ever ever ever ever stop building. I can have everything... EVERYTHING in place before a game starts and STILL improv new ideas in play.

That's about the same thing I do, I think.  I have all kinds of background stuff made, but a lot of the game I just make up as I go.

I create info as needed. Most of my information has been crafted when I've worked on the fiction that will take place in my world, or during prep time for a game. I will improvise within a game if I have to, but I quickly add it to the cannon.

I've played around with the idea of writing fiction in my world to flesh it out a bit.

first off, Xiluh is the first world ive created, and so far the only one.

i wouldnt say i have the experience to create a world any more then getting a lot of major points down, then improv'ing the rest. after a few various campaigns in it, i can examine the various events and use those as inspiration for expanding the setting.

That sounds like a fun way of doing things.  I've done something like that before.

Has anyone had the prep they have made obsolete a cool idea from a player? (That was the reason for me reducing my level of detail to minimum.)

In fact, nowadays I tend to go with the No Myth (http://www.drizzle.com/~dans/rpg/no-myth.html)-style. Summary: if it has not been made public, it is not determined yet. That way, I can integrate all cool player ideas as they come, without negating anythign previously established, which I find distasteful.

I think most good long-running games come from a setting and characters that gather meaning as the game goes on. It's kind of hard to explain. When anything happens in a given tavern, the impression/image of that tavern is changed for the players, and that creates depht.
If tavern A has lots of dark events in there, it will get associated with dark events, for example. PCs meet a stranger there. Will they trust him, given the history?

I'm rambling. Oh well.

It suits me best when I detail my setting to the full, but provide enough variety that virtually all playing styles can be accounted for.  In fact, even though both Dystopia and Concordance are rich settings with large histories and mythologies, my players nevertheless sometimes find that there are a few too many options, and don't know where to start.

And then sometimes I'll make an entire setting based entirely off ideas suggested by players: Concordance, for example, was an idea my friend had, and I'm fleshing it out so that he can DM in it with a gaming group I've never even met.

I guess I just have a lot of free time...