The Campaign Builder's Guild

I think the idea of phases might oversimplify things.  There's always been lots and lots of dark fantasy being written, from Victorian gothic to Lovecraft to Peake to Mieville; and there's also been plenty of good "lighter" heroic/high fantasy out there, too - Terry Practhett, Llyod Alexander, T.H. White, Garth Nix, Phillip Pullman (well, he`s arguably darker in places)... there might be very broad trends, perhaps moreso in gaming.  I think the reason some people prefer darker fantasy is that so much lighter-toned fantasy is written predominantly for children, and writing children's lit that's still interesting to the majority of adults while definitely not impossible (Un Lun Dun and Sabriel come to mind in particular) can be difficult.  More mature fantasy tends to slip almost inevitably into at least somewhat darker (or at least grayer) territory.

Nomadic and Moonpaw-

QuoteAs for tone, by now the perceptive have probably picked up that I am a fan of adventure/exploration (the middle road between smooth and light and dark and gritty). I like awe-inspiring places and people with a knack for doing the insane, tone wise I like my bloody, hopeless fights to have a small silver lining. My tone preference for reading on the other hand is none, I will read anything (but that's a tale for another day).

There's a thread on ENWorld about DMs liking dark-gritty and players the opposite. http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/266887-why-do-dms-like-dark-gritty-worlds-players-opposite.html Somehow if that were the case I think I'd have half a shot of finding one I like as the market would have to cater to players' tastes at least once and a while.[/quote]

Y'all should definitely play in my game groups. The only thing I do that's even close to dark are my Cthulu games.  

I like to GM games that are realistically structured with farming supply chains- geopolitical struggles- no clear good/evil- no clear morality actually, but with a lot of Wow! and amusing factors- sometimes though I push this too far and scare characters- such as when I threw a bunch of 5th level characters into a D-Day invasion scenario in the middle of a massive battle between Fey exploding into pieces as lightning bolts and magic missiless burst them into faery dust, Nazi-like Sahaguin coming ashore with giant swimming pools and randomly being dusted with faery dust and morphing into creatures like the ones from GOBLINS' shield of wonder, Witches and dryads awakening trees, crack commando units of Kobolds and Lizardfolk hordes fleeing the battle and fighting each other and the characters for land-space on the edges of the swamp to settle down and reorganize-- the characters' response was "I'll do my mission here for the good of the game, but if I was this guy I'd be turning tail and running right about now." I have since then tried to tone things down a bit on the "epic" scale.

Even my Cthulu games have a lot of wonder and discovery in them.

As a side comment, I recently discovered that running Cthulu games on skype works perfectly.
--
I like to play in games that have exploration and hope, therefore, I design that way, and I GM games that way.

Quote from: SteerpikeI think the reason some people prefer darker fantasy is that so much lighter-toned fantasy is written predominantly for children, and writing children's lit that's still interesting to the majority of adults while definitely not impossible (Un Lun Dun and Sabriel come to mind in particular) can be difficult. More mature fantasy tends to slip almost inevitably into at least somewhat darker (or at least grayer) territory.

Steerpike is probably right here.
Also, it's difficult to make light fantasy interesting. Dark=more inherent conflicts.

But I like the challenge- that's why I created Gloria. :)

QuoteMany designers feel the tone of a setting is one of its most important aspects. Some might say tone is inexorably tied to theme, others that they are two different beasts. What are your thoughts on tone? Can tone be set by the designer, or does it come as much from the GM and players?

What kind of tone do you prefer in creating a setting? What about in reading? In playing? If they're not the same, why might that be? Do you enjoy lighter or darker tones?[/quote]

In creating a setting, I prefer exploration/wonder.

In reading, I prefer exploration- like that of Watt-Evans' books.

In playing, I also prefer exploration/wonder/political.

I prefer lighter tones. George RR Martin and Mieville are about as dark as I read- Stephen King's Dark Tower was just too plodding for me to enjoy. And White Wolf's "fiction" is often laughable. I've looked at Warhammer- have yet to read it, but it seems a little silly.

@light dragon

I think there was a bit of a mixup in interpretation heh. I am not a big fan of light. I most likely tend towards darker stuff than you do and I know for a fact I like things darker than SCMP does. My awe inspiring stuff has as much tragedy as hope. It's dark but it isn't steerpike dark. Basically its a fence sitter with one side being high fantasy light and the other being a grim dark pit. This is my GM side though, my player side will play literally anything (and I mean anything, from maid rpg to high fantasy, to alley cat gang wars, etc).

Quote from: SteerpikeI think the reason some people prefer darker fantasy is that so much lighter-toned fantasy is written predominantly for children, and writing children's lit that's still interesting to the majority of adults while definitely not impossible (Un Lun Dun and Sabriel come to mind in particular) can be difficult.  More mature fantasy tends to slip almost inevitably into at least somewhat darker (or at least grayer) territory.

I think this is the part I don't get: What's so bad about something written for children?  I think people get into this mindset of rejecting "childish" things in a belief that there is a code of behavior they must follow to be "adults" without actually keeping an open mind that would let them see childish things as still interesting.

(In addition I've never seen anything for "adults" as actually "mature".  The way characters resolve problems in children's ficiton is mature, the way things happen in adult fiction is childish.)

[blockquote=Silvercat Moonpaw]I think this is the part I don't get: What's so bad about something written for children? I think people get into this mindset of rejecting "childish" things in a belief that there is a code of behavior they must follow to be "adults" without actually keeping an open mind that would let them see childish things as still interesting.
[/blockquote]I`d actually agree with you, for the most part - too many people dismiss children`s literature (I wouldn`t necessarily consider myself part of "the majority of adults").  That said there`s still some children`s lit I like and some I don`t.  A lot of children`s lit tends to be very creepy without being excessively "dark" (Alice, The Witches, Coraline) in the sense that they don`t actually include a lot of gore or sex or death in them, but still manage an edge of the grotesque - this tends to be my favorite stuff because I`m just a sucker for this aesthetic.

EDIT: Maybe I`m starting to conflate dark and mature too much.  Perhaps those works are still dark (dark but also "childish").  What would you guy say?

Stories made for children need not be lighthearted. Actually a whole lot of original folklore are cautionary tales meant to scare 'em straight.

So what are some examples of really good, light-toned fantasy out there?  Sword in the Stone?  Would the Prydain Chronicles count?  I mean they've got death-lords, zombies, and plenty of bloody fighting.

Something Light and Good...
Piers Anthony: Xanth (Good or at least decent until around book 16)
Robert Asprin: MYTH Series
Lawrence Watt:-Evans- Ethshar Series.

Tone encompasses a lot.  I'm hearing a lot of usages in the responses.  In literature, Tone is part of technique used to evoke mood and emotion, If I am remembereing rightly.  Thought I'd get that in first.   So Tone is used to create mood, it is NOT mood.

In a similar vein, the setting and the game are two seperate, related things.  So while the game can be heavily influenced by the players, the setting is affected less by the players.  The setting and many elements may be written and completed before there even is any play.  So while a good GM continues to create and add onto a current setting based on what the players seem to like, the 'Play' affects the 'Game' which influences the 'Setting'.

And while this is an antimechanical thread, the mechanics chosen are the RPG equiv. of a literary technique.  Low HP rules give a feeling of mortality, Fantastic amounts of player races give a feeling of wonder and alienness, divine magic rules can be used to increase the importance of faith, etc.

'Dark vs Light' is one of the most important tonal scales/continuums.  Both in terms of the presence of same, the amount of same, the power of them, and the purposes behind these dichotomies.  Some would use the term good and evil, and these help, but are not the same.  
Once again, a world that uses the mechanic of alignment is going to find their world a lot more easily understood by players and readers, whereas those of us that do not use these rules leave a more muddy 'tone' to our game.  
Players and readers tend to notice the absence of light more in tonality than the presence of darkness.  Evilness and bad fortune is concrete in play, but if there is no place of true safety or succor, than the players have a very strong visceral response to this, I find.  No save haven is a fearful concept.

'Old vs New' is another important tonal cue to set, one that GM's seem to think that is easy to evoke, but that is in reality quite challenging.  On the other hand, shiny newness is often a great tone to set as well, one that lends hope to a setting.  Star Trek is always a great example of this, brash optimism and the hope of technology inferred through clean, bright spacecraft and an unbreakable demonstration of team unity.
Celtricia has always tried to convey the tone of the inexorable tide of time, layer upon layer of history as a silent spectre looming over the action of each character.  The
"the underlying struggle between the civilization of today against the Sins of the Past"
as it is called.

"Lighthearted vs Serious" is another important tonal issue.  What is going on in the world?  Are the players going to be fighting generic mook-orcs, rescuing princesses, stealing from the rich and helping the duke protect a city, or are they going to be collecting taxes for the duke, negotiating with a humanoid tribe for water rights to a river and helping rebuild a shattered theives guild from the ground up?  

More later.

Quote from: LordVreegPlayers and readers tend to notice the absence of light more in tonality than the presence of darkness.  Evilness and bad fortune is concrete in play, but if there is no place of true safety or succor, than the players have a very strong visceral response to this, I find.  No save haven is a fearful concept.

This is a very interesting (and I bet, important) observation. Would this be the setting structure equivalent for "breathers" between more climactic scenes in a narrative? What kinds of things can be used in the role of safe havens - places, characters, events? Is there a need to inject a truly positive tone into these elements, or would it suffice to simply downplay the general grittiness of the setting? Should safe havens be treated as reasonably static features (according to the story/campaign's needs) or can they be fragile, temporal shelters that offer little more than temporary ease?

Quote from: Ghostman

Quote from: LordVreegPlayers and readers tend to notice the absence of light more in tonality than the presence of darkness.  Evilness and bad fortune is concrete in play, but if there is no place of true safety or succor, than the players have a very strong visceral response to this, I find.  No save haven is a fearful concept.

This is a very interesting (and I bet, important) observation. Would this be the setting structure equivalent for "breathers" between more climactic scenes in a narrative? What kinds of things can be used in the role of safe havens - places, characters, events? Is there a need to inject a truly positive tone into these elements, or would it suffice to simply downplay the general grittiness of the setting? Should safe havens be treated as reasonably static features (according to the story/campaign's needs) or can they be fragile, temporal shelters that offer little more than temporary ease?

Hmm, I do think that "breathers" could certainly affect tone. If the group has a place to lay low and recover even if it is a run down shack in some slum it is going to feel more easy going than a setting where its constant conflict one incident after another.

Quote from: NomadicHmm, I do think that "breathers" could certainly affect tone. If the group has a place to lay low and recover even if it is a run down shack in some slum it is going to feel more easy going than a setting where its constant conflict one incident after another.

Although the tone's going to feel darker even with a breather if there's a good indication there's more conflict coming soon or otherwise pointing out the breather is temporary.

True but it will still be lighter than if it didn't have a breather at all.