The Campaign Builder's Guild

Crystalstar tries for a lighter tone, but mostly in eliminating unpleasantness, rather than eliminating true nastiness. I guess this could be thought of as the same things a lot of settings, even dark ones, tend to "gloss over," like not worrying about hunger, disease, or stepping in dog poop. It's kind of the blockbuster fantasy movie version of fantasy, where all of the heroes are attractive, clean, and smell nice-- except for the ones that definitely don't, and there's a good reason for it.

Mare Eternus is shooting for the star wars/firefly/pirates of the carribean 1/etc tone. The best way to describe it I guess would be Swashbuckler Steampunk without as much punk. I want the morality gray, the heroes crazy, the adventures grand, and so forth.

Eschaton's on the darker end of historical fantasy, without being totally dark.

Aeolond is... I'm not sure. There is great darkness in the past and modern society stands on the precipice of continent-wide war. That's fairly dark. However there are many beacons of hope, such as the great northern crusade as well as the union of the Lowlands and Sutlands (which teetered on the brink of war)...

For players, there are taverns full of whores, the wilds teem with unnatural horrors and the gods meddle in the affairs of the brave...

So... Probably more dark than light?

Part of the appeal for me of darker worlds is that my real life is pretty cushy and danger-free.  People like to play anti-heroes and rogues because they don't get to behave amorally (or immorally) in real life without consequences (hence the appeal of the Grand Theft Auto games...); I think a similar dynamic is operating in dark worlds, where we experience the unpleasant or horrifying ("dark") as pleasurable through the lens of game-playing or fiction.  I remember talking with Silvercat about this once (if I recall, he said something about the unpleasant always being unpleasant for him - fair enough!).

Quote from: SteerpikePart of the appeal for me of darker worlds is that my real life is pretty cushy and danger-free.

Me too.  Or at least it would be, if people didn't keep telling me it wasn't.

Quote from: SteerpikePeople like to play anti-heroes and rogues because they don't get to behave amorally (or immorally) in real life without consequences (hence the appeal of the Grand Theft Auto games...)

I agree.  Perhaps people also play heroes and straight-arrows for similar reasons: Real Life is gray, so sometimes being good doesn't work out.  And you can apply the same logic to playing powerful figures, good or bad.

I guess, though, I see more fun in playing against the rules of the world, not being good or evil but being contrary to their system.  It's too easy to be "bad", there's more of a challenge in being "annoying".

Quote from: SteerpikeI think a similar dynamic is operating in dark worlds, where we experience the unpleasant or horrifying ("dark") as pleasurable through the lens of game-playing or fiction.  I remember talking with Silvercat about this once (if I recall, he said something about the unpleasant always being unpleasant for him - fair enough!).

Imagine a nearly-sane form of paranoia.

It's probably not that good, but near enough.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfFor players, there are taverns full of whores,

Does that really count toward a more grim tone, if looked from the point of view of player characters? Maybe if the the PCs are moralists - or if they are the whores in question...

Beej---Don't confuse a single continuum for a full description of morality.  We were specifically talking about a single continuum out of many, literally dark vs light, and the other cultural and emotional makeups that go into a more complicated morality overview were specifically avoided so as to avoid this conversation devolving into the pedantic.
(which I seem to do anyways.)
By the way, 'Gritty' is NOT a tone.  It is more of a mood created by tone.  


Let me throw out another continuum that is tonal and that we have danced around, one that is basal in the creation of moods like 'gritty'.
Heroic vs realistic.
Heroic in this sense deals with a clear differenctiation between the adventurer class and the regular folks, a mythic setting feel, such as the Helladic epics or the Norse.  Heroes can be larger than life and the rules of the world bend around them.  Wuxia would also fall into this catagory.
Settings with High HP, Epic levels, etc, would obviously fall into this.
The Star Wars mythos fits here too, I think.
Also, the resolutions demanded by the setting of the players in an epic setting are normally large, fairy-tale, straightforward.  Go into the mystic Orchard owned by the medusaic Gretas, and steal a bronze apple, that kind of thing.

The Realistic end of the continuum deals with more mundane issues and makes the players less 'special'.  The world is not built around the actions of the PC's, and if the PCs are to affect the world, they will spend a long time playing before this happens.  People get wounded and sometimes scarred in realistic games, and issues of food, economics, education and the poor are involved in a realistic game.  

this is part of 'gritty', but can be very hard to wrap a head around.  Celtricia has an epic history and some epic storylines, but certainly deals with minutia.  Players affect the world, but it sometimes takes a large amount of gasme play.  and players bleed and fear damage.  I wonder how other creators view this continuum?

Quote from: LordVreegBeej---Don't confuse a single continuum for a full description of morality.  We were specifically talking about a single continuum out of many, literally dark vs light, and the other cultural and emotional makeups that go into a more complicated morality overview were specifically avoided so as to avoid this conversation devolving into the pedantic.
(which I seem to do anyways.)
By the way, 'Gritty' is NOT a tone.  It is more of a mood created by tone.

I don't know that I'm confusing dark vs. light with the spectrum of morality so much as saying the distinction between dark and light takes so much into account that it's almost meaningless... two dark settings or two light settings can be as different from one another as night and day. A setting where a tiny frontier town fights encroaching wilderness with horrible things in the forest is very different from a thriving capital city rife with corruption, greed, and class struggle. Bright optimistic settings run the gamut too... shining knights fighting dragons/dark lords or anime heroines fighting war with the power of love or a utopian post-scarcity alliance making first contact with newly discovered species. I went on the morality and human nature tangent because it's the aspect my setting will focus on. Sure there are some pretty consistently dark bits... my combat system is written so bad things happen when people fight... but even that acts as encouragement for diplomatic solutions, and may actually lighten some parts of the game in a roundabout way.

Saying a setting is dark or light first of all seems a very limited view of things, second can be easily contested (with the exceptions of the "anime heroines" naivety, any of these can be flipped dark to light or the reverse), and thirdly doesn't take into account variability over time. My setting has lots of stuff in it, and how dark or light it gets depends largely on where and how closely the players choose to look, and how they choose to act on what they see. I like variety. My setting is neither dark nor light, but that doesn't make it a uniform grey. I see it instead as being colorful.

Beej, that's the artist in you.  
But the statistician in me looks for continuums.  Saying it is light or dark is PURPOSELY limited, to avoid errors.  I understand it is limited, but that is purposeful so that when we all have a conversation about our settings, we are all talking about the same thing.  

Another tonal modifier can be the size and spread of civilization. A thriving nation filled with cities is going to feel alot different than a frontier world on the edge of lawless lands.

Mare Eternus uses this aspect to push its frontier feel. There are sprawling cities yes but there is so much open and underexplored/unexplored space full of promises of wealth and danger. If anything the cities help reinforce this point since once PCs step outside they can quickly feel the aloneness as it contrasts with the bustling cities.

Quote from: NomadicAnother tonal modifier can be the size and spread of civilization. A thriving nation filled with cities is going to feel alot different than a frontier world on the edge of lawless lands.

Mare Eternus uses this aspect to push its frontier feel. There are sprawling cities yes but there is so much open and underexplored/unexplored space full of promises of wealth and danger. If anything the cities help reinforce this point since once PCs step outside they can quickly feel the aloneness as it contrasts with the bustling cities.

In effect you are describing the Points of Light approach - beacons of light separated by wilderness that is as vast as it is dangerous.

Sometimes I have an over-all tone in mind.  Usually I do not.

I think Island City started as I want to use the mechanics and proper nouns of White Wolf's original World of Darkness setting but without such an oppressive atmosphere.  You could run it dark, if that's the bent of your nature and there are dark elements because it's sort of fairy tale/ mythic, but the emphasis is on hope, wonder, whimsy, and awe.

Someone asked about Tone. It was a Friday Forum Philosophy topic.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfIn effect you are describing the Points of Light approach - beacons of light separated by wilderness that is as vast as it is dangerous.

If we're already in this topic, I might address this point. What I like about "points of light" approach is the fact that it mixes up a stable civilisation with vast and unknown wilderness. It's the approach I'm taking in Olam - world is very young and while due to magic, Gods, and technology (progress of which is sped up by gods of wisdom and intellect) sapient creatures can spread all around the world, they didn't have time to tame most of the world - so between the cities you will find rare roads surrounded by wilderness on all sides.

What I don't like about that approach is how it treats the "monster" races. Paraphrasing the 4e PHB, the civilisations of those races are not points of light because those people are evil. WHY? Why are they considered worse than humans? Because they look ugly to humans? Ah, because they're evil, you're saying? But you're the god-darn creator of this world, you MADE them evil! That's the approach I'm NOT taking: the so-called monsters are just as civilised as humans, as long as they're sapient and natural.

And as for the tone itself... I feel like I said too much on the shoutbox. In short: I'm sick of grimdark settings, because I have literally nobody to like there. Those places are so full of bile, they're literally impossible to live in without killing yourself.