The Campaign Builder's Guild

What makes a good fantasy setting good is the same thing that makes any other setting good. It has to be an effective tool for telling a story. It can go about doing that in many different ways. However, if it is not a good vessel for the story then it is not a good setting.

Quote from: Jack of HeartsThe greatness of a fantasy world is inversely proportional to the number of chainmail bikini-clad women who populate it.

I love Dynamite's current Red Sonja comics, so I'd have to go with directly proportional rather than inversely.


I think one thing that can make a setting work for me or not is a seedy underbelly/ criminal underworld element.  DS9 was my favorite of the Treks.  I rather like Discworld.  I like Fafhrd and The Grey Mouser.  Although, they both have some crime and gangs, Gotham has always seemed more interesting than Metropolis to me.

It's definitely a preference issue. I really loved Lord of the Rings and the Shannara books. I also have liked all the Forgotten Realms books I've read, and I loved the FR video games; but I haven't liked any of the D&D games I've played in it, so go figure.

Quote from: Jack of HeartsThe greatness of a fantasy world is inversely proportional to the number of chainmail bikini-clad women who populate it.

LIAR!

A sense that the people who inhabit that world feel "real", despite their fantastic surroundings. Even in the most cinematic, over-the-top settings - if it has human inhabitants, they should span the range of human behavior. Some might be saints, some might be Evil Incarnate, but most people should span the region between, and act accordingly.

Quote from: NomadicWhat makes a good fantasy setting good is the same thing that makes any other setting good. It has to be an effective tool for telling a story. It can go about doing that in many different ways. However, if it is not a good vessel for the story then it is not a good setting.

I, too, am very narrative based.  And this is another good litmus test (which may be a good way of looking at this thread...creating a Litmus test for settings) for determining the worth of a setting.  
This can, of course, be dragged into the 'What makes a good Story' rubric (and then be linked to Phoenix' book thread).  

Quote from: Vreeg's Barolo

Quote from: NomadicWhat makes a good fantasy setting good is the same thing that makes any other setting good. It has to be an effective tool for telling a story. It can go about doing that in many different ways. However, if it is not a good vessel for the story then it is not a good setting.

I, too, am very narrative based.  And this is another good litmus test (which may be a good way of looking at this thread...creating a Litmus test for settings) for determining the worth of a setting.  
This can, of course, be dragged into the 'What makes a good Story' rubric (and then be linked to Phoenix' book thread).  

Well that's really what role play is about. Whether you are a DM handling an overarching world or a player simply handling a single person within that world, you are all telling a story. As to what determines how good a story is, that is based upon those telling it. As within roleplay the tellers are also the listeners (a bit like the timeless experience of telling tales around a campfire). Thus what they think makes a good story, is what actually makes the story good. This is why it is so important for the DM and the players to each understand what the others like and dislike within a game.

For many of my later games, and sometimes during campaigns long-running, I'll take time out to ask what kinds of adventures/plots people wanted.

Some of our groups would run the gamut from high combat, to politics, to puzzles. One player was a big fan of dungeon puzzles, riddles, and bizarre traps. Another favored intrigue and relationships over all else. Some just want scenes where they can utter cool lines. Giving players what they want can make a game seem great--the world is another issue entirely.

Short Answer:
Great story telling

Long Answer:
I think I may be picky because I've read a LOT of fantasy. My favourite series to date has of course been George RR Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire. Besides absolutely fantastic story telling, the world is socially and politically complex. Each of the seven kingdoms of Westeron is unique and differentiated, and not in such a manner as to be too cliche. I mean ya there's the "northmen" starks, and the "viking" greyjoys, etc. However, things like the "house mottos" and such give each kingdom something that differentiates themselves without falling into the realm of cliche. I also like that he purposely underuses "fantastic" and "magical" elements, so that when they DO appear, they're all the more exciting.

Tad Williams is another great author (finishing off Memory Sorrow and Thorn series right now). His world is very simplistic, and falls into the "evil guys in the north" trap, but it's saved with great atmosphere and great story telling. He carved down on the number of fantasy races to basically elves and trolls (who are really more like gnomes/halflings), and throws in a few elven variations rather than whole new races (sithi are good elves, norns are evil elves, dwarrows replace dwarves but still look elvish). Again though, magic is limited and thus cool when it's found. All the real "fantasy" elements are in that "lost civilization"-style, making it all the more mystical

The problem with it as a roleplaying setting, however, is that players WANT to encounter magic. As a DM I'm always obsessed with story telling, so to me the "high fantasy" overuse of elves and such is cliche and annoys the crap out of me. However, to my players, they want to see all that crap. In the words of one of my players "this is roleplaying, not real life. I like that things are 'good vs evil,' and that there's magic everywhere and stuff. I *LIVE* in real life, I don't want to roleplay there too." In fantasy literature, the authors restrict magic to make the characters more vulnerable, and thus build more suspense. In RP, you want *some* degree of vulnerability, but I think much much less than you would have in a novel. Otherwise, their characters are weak and the player's get bored.

Thought maybe I'd post a few examples of what I meant

A Song of Ice and Fire, George RR Martin:
-Fantasy Scale: low fantasy, very little magic, almost no non-human races, nearly no influence from gods
-Campaign?: Most PCs wouldn't like it. What DOES work though is the level of political intrigue, the complexity of the characters and nations (none are truly evil, only shades of gray). Different warring factions would allow for plenty of plot hooks as well

Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, Tad Williams:
-Fantasy Scale: medium. Gods mentioned, but little influence. Magic is present, but not to main characters. Fantasy Races include elves and variations (sithi, norns, dwarrows), and Qanuc (kinda like halflings who live in the mountains).
-Campaign Setting?: Again, restricting magic to "the bad guys" and "super NPC" elves would be boring for PCs. The world itself is rather bland too. However, fantastic descriptions pull you right into the setting, which can help make one overlook any other flaws in the world.

David Eddings:
Fantasy- Again, all humans. Lots of magic, direct influence from gods
Campaign?-Very much generic fantasy. Certain races are evil, certain good. Certain gods are also evil, certain gods good, and the good gods rule the good peoples and vice versa. People of a certain race act according to stereotypes, and are predictable. Throw in a few extra fantasy races though, and you end up with a very generic fantasy setting much like the D&D standard setting, which seems to work well for roleplaying...so who knows...

Quote from: GaranthA Song of Ice and Fire, George RR Martin:
-Fantasy Scale: low fantasy, very little magic, almost no non-human races, nearly no influence from gods
-Campaign?: Most PCs wouldn't like it. What DOES work though is the level of political intrigue, the complexity of the characters and nations (none are truly evil, only shades of gray). Different warring factions would allow for plenty of plot hooks as well

Although there are Song of Ice and Fire/A Game of Thrones RPGs, so apparently someone decided there are enough interested people that it's worth it. ;)

Hmm. I like lots of different types of fantasy. High fantasy, if done differently from the norm - i.e. Eberron - can be interesting. I despise comedy relief races like halflings and gnomes, but they CAN be NON-comedy relief races (again, see Eberron). I also like LOW-fantasy, realistic worlds (like ASOIAF) but I don't think I'd like to play in them. Finally, I like fantasy that mixes with other genres, such as sci-fi.

Also, chain-mail-bikini-clad girls are fine by me.

How about one of heresies, where faith pseudo-real gods lead two powerful nations to collide head-long into strife?

One where inquisitors of a foreign nation stalk the land against the will of the king?  A setting where nobody is safe, because the king himself has a counter-inquisition at his command.  This is a realm where brigands band together to rape the countryside in the name of Greed and Freedom, besieging villages with no defense of their own but a steady heart and a ready brush-hook.

A king (because no fantasy setting is complete without a monarch; it's one of the oldest forms of government), angry with the way another religion has changed his nation, takes up arms and throws out the priests of certain foreign gods, while retaining priests to a god he considers acceptable -- one much like the gods of the old tales.  Now he is dead, killed by his own drunkenness and a deep garden pond.

His son, now king, reigns on the throne with steely will and vicious temper.  His neighbors to the south, home of the religion his fore-father threw out, is too busy with internal strife and their own more pressing heresy to oppose him as he sends picked men to weed out all traces of the now disposed faith within his lands.

But he is blind to the location of a select few faithful launching their own inquisition, undermining his reign.  A plague has set in, devastating the people of the borderlands and driving them to the point of madness; forcing them to join the roving bands of brigands who plunder and burn.

The faithful of the dark gods, maddened and twisted glory-seekers backed by their malignant bodi warriors, reinforce the most powerful and bloodthirsty bands, lending them supernatural strengths.

The king, at the behest of the people, has thrown out the magi guild, executing the leaders and banishing the rest as filthy and unnatural wielders of borrowed powers.  He has installed the rare few priests of his new belief as the leaders of the new faith, and has granted them their own lot of legal rights.  He has declared witches and their ilk illegal and subhuman, ordering they be hunted down lest they too subvert the people like the now-exiled priests.

In Ouroboros, nations rise.  In Ouroboros, nations fall.  In Ouroboros, violence never sleeps.

M.

My thinking on "not very fantastic" fantasy vs. "at least sort of fantastic" fantasy is that I think fantasy should be at least like the myths and legends from ancient times: heroes go on fantastic adventures involving magic (especially some sort of weapon or trinket) and/or far away lands of wonders, and more often than not fight some form of evil/monster.

How often do you see complex societies/politics in those stories?  I can't recall any.  But I can recall it in Real Life.  So when I encounter that complex stuff in my RPGs I get dragged out of the fantasy the same way people say they get dragged out by lack of logic or inconsistencies.

Cheo, some interesting ideas. But ideas cannot in and off themselves make a setting great or poor. It's how you implement them, who's playing, and a bunch of other subtle factors. Sometimes things that sound fun on paper (and make good reads) can lose their appeal in play.


I like settings based on reinterpretation of myth (obviously). But I think any statement of what fantasy "should be" gets into dangerous territory.

QuoteHow often do you see complex societies/politics in those stories? I can't recall any.

You mean besides Norse myth? And Hindu myth? And Japanese folklore? And arguably Celtic myth? Arthurian legend?

I can see Greek myth as being rather straightforward politics, though. I could go either way on the Tibetan Gesar stuff. Australian aboriginal is complex, but not political.

Either way, I think it's a rather broad statement.