What are your setting elements?

[Eclipse]

Agreed, 100%. While I do understand the fear of darkness, I'm tired of fear becoming and meaning contempt and hatred and villification. Healthy fear can breed respect, and it's not hard to envision a darkness-as-protector motiff to a setting. *marks down for use*

I'll ponder more my answer on the big question, but I had to chime in on this.

[LordVreeg]

Hm.

Some interesting sub-themes here.  There seems to be a healthy hatred of the cliche developing.  
[blockquote=Gilladian]On a more personal level, I quit reading when I run into anime, mecha, science in my fiction, psionics and anything relating to DROW.[/blockquote]  This cracked me up.  I also kind of agreed.  There are elements of genres that seem to find there way into too many places, and I think I am sick of them as well.

[blockquote=SilvercatMoonpaw]The other sense is in terms of how it flows: a smooth world doesn't get hung up on the deadliness of combat or the various consequences of court intrigue. [/blockquote]   Oopsie.  Celtricia is a no-no for you to visit...Not a smooth setting at all, though I never thought of it that way.  Which is why this thread is so cool...

And this also garnered a chuckle...[blockquote=SA]I'm quite jaded by most fantasy settings (the ol' Tolkien-Morecock shtick), and find it hard to be inspired by much fantasy because its familiarity makes it that much less fantastic. There's no hard and fast rule about this - the combination of qualities can vary, so long as I'm surprised.[/blockquote]  There is a very discernable sourness in my mindset when i get that 'here we go again' feeling in a setting.  [note]Which Might explain why the bugbears are the smartest PC race in my setting. [/note]

[blockquote=SilvercatMoonpaw]There are lots of other elements that are similarly mistreated: cold, chaos, death. None of them are inherently evil, and I like to see them as accepted elements in a setting.[/blockquote]  I again must agree, though I also understand why many primitive setting may fear death.  I have had to explain a million times why necromancers in my setting are not necessarily evil, that for some of them communing with the dead can be a good or holy act...

ANyhow, intersting way of looking at a setting.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Celtricia is a no-no for you to visit...Not a smooth setting at all, though I never thought of it that way.  Which is why this thread is so cool...

I'm way too much of a "Saturday morning cartoon" person.  Real life contains enough of that sort of negativity.  I don't need my fix of it in fiction, I can open up a newspaper if I want any of that.

I also understand the reason why people are afraid of the dark, but to me that sort of thinking should go out the window when one actually has time to sit down and reason out a setting.  Darkness itself is not what we really fear, it's what's in the darkness.

[Moniker]

So, what's an example of a "pretty and sparkly" setting?

I'm not sure I can think of one that covers both elements equally well.  I've never found a published setting even close to this.  Comedy animé like "Slayers" and "Those Who Hunt Elves" have pretty done well, but not quite sparkly enough.  Animé and animé-inspired things often have the right sparkly, but generally are just too hung up on people falling over their own knives to be pretty.

An example of a "pretty/sparkly" game setting would be Blue Rose. It's basically romantic adventuring; think of it as the Disney version of d20. It has some interesting story elements, but focuses entirely too much on good guy/bad guy tropes.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

An example of a "pretty/sparkly" game setting would be Blue Rose. It's basically romantic adventuring; think of it as the Disney version of d20. It has some interesting story elements, but focuses entirely too much on good guy/bad guy tropes.

Oh, I own Blue Rose.  Boring setting.  Not because the people of Aldea don't have great big prejudices, but because they're just too nice, and then the guys they fight are still that level of being evil that means you can't respect them.  It would work better if the people in Aldea could get along while doing some bickering and then Jarzon and Kern weren't cookie-cutter villains.

[Gilladian]

LC: I rather like what I've read of your Jade Stage setting. You're obviously a skilled writer and have some really creative ideas to express. I haven't read a great deal of your setting, though, so I can only say "I think I'd like playing in your world".

As far as pretty/sparkly vs dark/grim, I think I fall more on the pretty/sparkly side, but as I like a healthy dose of realism as well, my "perfect world" would be pretty and sparkly up to a point, but would then have to have some dirt somewhere; or what's the point of adventuring? I like quests that will improve my piece of the world, not just polish the silver, if you know what I mean.

[SDragon]

Xiluh, I think, has two main elements. One is an exotic element, and the other is a natural element. It's certainly "pretty", due to the exotic element, but I'm not so sure I'd say it's "sparkly", or even "clean".

I think a good example of these two elements would be The Jungle Book, only without bears that sing and dance. Xiluh doesn't have the shiny, sparkly, smooth feels of a more "civilized" setting, but between the bright colors and great sense of wonder, there certainly are tones of "pretty", and even "warm".

[Bill Volk]

What do you guys look for in settings as a player? How about as a DM? Are these different from what "reads well" in a sourcebook or a forum like this one?

[Epic Meepo]

What do you guys look for in settings as a player? How about as a DM? Are these different from what "reads well" in a sourcebook or a forum like this one?

As a player, setting doesn't matter. As long as I have the freedom to create an interesting character background, I'm happy.

As a DM, I want latitude. As long as I can run three different games with three different themes in different regions of the setting, I'm happy.

Generally, that means I'm not a big fan of sourcebooks that "read well." I don't want a fancy backdrop that reads like a novel and oozes with themes and ongoing story arcs. I want an encyclopedia listing dozens of interlocking pieces, each of them interesting on its own merits. And preferably, it comes with framework - a map, a cosmology, a history, or something else - through which individual pieces can be referenced and tied together, as needed.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

I pretty much have the same preferences as a player as I've stated for simple reading.  The difference is that I'm willing to be a bit more lenient.  The thing about being a player is that you can hope for some funny antics among your fellow gamers and/or the GM, meaning that even a setting that wouldn't fire my imagination is tolerable.

I still prefer worlds were there isn't going to be a focus on all the cr*p people regularly put each other through (war, intrigue, prejudice).  A bit for background is okay, but I'm in this for spy or action adventures and not Saving Private Ryan.

[LordVreeg]

I pretty much have the same preferences as a player as I've stated for simple reading.  The difference is that I'm willing to be a bit more lenient.  The thing about being a player is that you can hope for some funny antics among your fellow gamers and/or the GM, meaning that even a setting that wouldn't fire my imagination is tolerable.

I still prefer worlds were there isn't going to be a focus on all the cr*p people regularly put each other through (war, intrigue, prejudice).  A bit for background is okay, but I'm in this for spy or action adventures and not Saving Private Ryan.

MMM.  Very good way of putting that.  Fantasy as fantasy, not as a gritty reality turned on it's head.
I tend to use my setting to explore issues like religious freedom and racism and the complexities of good and evil.  But I can certainly see using gaming to get away from all that crapola as well.

I do have to totally agree with you on the interaction comment.  My gamers may be old, but they have almost all have wicked senses of humor.  And that really can supercede the game (in a a good way) in terms of enjoyment.  As an example, We have a very masculine necromantic priest who has a very feminine tiara that he has to wear to use.  Nothing like the group leader, from the Guild of Torturers, no less, looking at you and telling the group that, "it's time to get pretty."

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

MMM.  Very good way of putting that.  Fantasy as fantasy, not as a gritty reality turned on it's head.

To be honest, I have no idea what you mean by "gritty reality turned on its head".  I think I agree with it, though.  For me it's just a sheer disbelief that anyone can be stupid enough to get bent out of shape by all their flipped-out thoughts.

[beejazz]

For the "dark and gritty thing" I tend not to like either of the two extremes.

I don't like a bunch of despicable heroes whether they succeed or fail. And a totally dark world does get hard to care about.

On the same note I don't exactly think peace (or whatever they happen to want) is something you hand to players on a silver platter, nor do I like the good vs evil equals us vs them mentality.

I tend to prefer that middle ground, where the players are adventurers and opportunists and roguish scoundrels seeking their fortune. Not at the expense of "innocents" but often at the expense of anyone and everyone else... Likewise not necessarily facing oppressive or horrible opposition, but taking risks and accomplishing things that normal folks might never even try.

In other words, the world is crazy and a little effed up, but with some hard work and a little luck, you can do crazy awesome things in it. Hope instead of peace. Color instead of black, white, or gray.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Another reason to adventure in a world where things are mostly good is that it makes actually being a "hero" more of a challenge.  I think.  It's just that it occurs to me with a darker tone all you need is to be just a little bit nicer.  With a light tone you really do need to shine.  (And heck, the lighter the tone the more fun it actually is to be bad once and a while.)

[SDragon]

As a player, my preferences are even more fickle then a pop diva. My preferences tend to be whatever is best suited to whatever my character-concept-of-the-week happens to be. (right now, that would be the high seas and political intrigue of a good swashbuckling adventure) That said, I'm usually laid back enough to accept whatever I'm given, and I try to work within that.

As a GM, I tend to be much more generous. Since I tend to be very whim-based as a player, I try to use settings flexible enough to cater towards the whims of my players. Unfortunately, that so far has only given me the opportunity to use a few bottom-up settings, but I hope to find a system-neutral (read: no setting-specific rules) setting flexible enough for just about anything my players could throw at me.