Minimalist World Design

[Xeviat]

I have been on medical leave for a month on account of my terrible feet, and this time off has made me realize something: I have grand ideas but I am terribly lazy. Ish's "Pitfalls" thread made me realize a topic that could vastly speed up setting design. So I will consider this an impromptu poll:

What is most important for you to know about X in a game?

"X" refers to Races, Classes, Regions, Gods, Planes, and any other element of your setting which has multiple entries. Largely I'm referring to what you would like to know about an element in passing when you need to look over many elements to choose what to read up on more. For example, a list of gods: what would you like to know about each one so that you can pick one to devote serious energy into learning about. I realized that much of the work I've done on my setting might not be seen by my players, or that they might not care at all. Sure, it adds color to the world, but if my players don't care, then it doesn't matter. Since all of my players are currently asleep and can't be bothered, I take the question to you, my dear designing friends.

I will try to answer the question myself; I'd love to see how your answers differ.

Race: I like to know what sets them apart from me: physiologically, psychologically, and culturally.
Class: I like to know where their power comes from and what they can do in a nut shell.
Gods: Who worships them and why?
Regions: Who lives there and what is important to them? Who are their friends and enemies? A map showing all regions as well.

You don't have to only post about the elements I mentioned; there are probably others that you can think of that I missed.

[Superfluous Crow]

Race: The most important thing is their physical description, since this is what separates them from humans the most (unless they are very human-like). I've always hated how far down that description is in D&D manuals.
Class: I'm a bit saddened to say this, but i'm going to say that the class's abilities are the most important; classes are there to be played and used, so the most important thing is whether they are worth playing.
Gods: Okay, depends on how you use religion. If you have made original and unique religions then the most important thing is what separates them from all the generic ones. If you use standard generic D&D-ish gods, then the portfolio is the most important.
Regions: Generally, what the people and country are like. are they expansionists? Demon worshippers? Fanatics? Gypsies?

[Matt Larkin (author)]

While this diverges from my stance on languages in the thread you mention, I actually find defining history over the long term really important, even if the players won't see it all. I shapes how I design the nations in the modern world.

From the players perspective, history only matters within the current nation, and only in a broad sense. Only modern history is likely to have any significant impact on them, unless the plot revolves around some ancient prophecy/war/curse/whatever.

For race, I think, for me, one of the most important things is where they live, especially relative to the current campaign. To dwarves live in human cities? Do they have their own cities? Are they barbarians from some distant land?

[sparkletwist]

I agree with Phoenix. Well, I like history and more "epic" stories anyway, so I'm sort of biased. However, if everything fits together into a plausible historical context, all of the modern details seem to congeal much more readily. :)

[Numinous]

Race: Physical Description and psychology/demeanor.
Class: Abilities, place in the world, and party role.
Gods: Effect of the religion on the world, the role it plays in politics and society, as well as the general extent to which it is accepted.
Regions: Atmosphere and foreign relations, as well as unique laws and topography.

[Xeviat]

Some good ideas coming. Any others?

[Poseptune]

Question are you looking for answers from the player's perspective or the DM's perspective? I will answer from both.

As a player I look for:

Race:
If I have a concept in mind already, my eyes immediately goto the crunch. Then I ask will the racial crunch support it enough to play my concept. If the answer is yes then I look to the flavor. First the culture (beliefs and daily life), then to the physical description and such.

If I do not have a concept in mind I look to the culture first and if that sparks an idea then I look further into the race.

Class:
I look at the description of the class first and foremost. I want to see what niche(s) it is  meant to fill. If I like what I see then I look into the class further.

Gods:
When skimming a list of gods I look for alignment and their domains (even if it isn't D&D they are somewhere on the spectrum between good and evil. Their domain's can be purely fluff, if there are multiple gods then they should have something under their rule). When I pick one that seems interesting to me I look further.

Regions:
I look to the here and now, before looking to the history. What is society like there? What is the daily life of the inhabits like? What are their views on the rest of the world (neighboring nations/towns/etc...)? What is the government like?



As a DM:

Races:
I skim the culture and the history of the race to see if there is anything I can use for an adventure or quest.

Classes:
Not really a big for me as a DM, but I have scanned descriptions to see if ideas pop into my head.

Gods
Same thing I look for as a player

Regions
Same thing as a player, but I will also want to at least skim the history as well.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Oooo, I like this thread.  I've wanted to ask those question for a while now.

As for me:
Races: What they look like and anything cool they can do.
Cultures: A few key style an behavior elements.
Classes: I play class-less now, so this is N/A.
Gods: What they deity over and how they are portrayed in art.
Regions: Name and a few facts someone who's visited/lived there might know.
Planes: What they look like and any function they serve.

[Ishmayl-Retired]

Races
Why are they different from Humans?  What cultural purposes do they have?  Do they fulfill any particular roles in society?  What are their relationships with other races? (All of these basically fall under the "Culture" category of the race, which I believe is most important)

Classes
What is their theme?  What party role do they fill?  What can they do on level 1?  What can they do on level 20? (The last two I feel are important because it represents the strengths of the class at its weakest, and at its (mostly) strongest)

Gods
What do Gods do in this setting?  How relevant are they?  What makes God X different from God Y?  How much influence do the gods and religion have on politics?  Are they real?  (Note, the last question is just for me as a DM - as a player, belief is fine... as long as it grants spells! :))

Regions
How large is the region, and what role does the region play in world/continental/nationwide/large scale events?  Is the region and its culture(s) based off real-world regions and cultures?  If so, how is it different (and fantastical)?  What races are dominant in the region?

[Thanuir]

Exactly enough to be able to GM/play in the setting and improvise details consistently.

Races: Appearance, usual motivations (that is, their role in the setting or as player characters), abilities
Of the list above, only motivations should take significant space. Appearance is easily communicated by comparisons, as are abilities.

Classes: Not among my favourite design choices.

Regions: What can PCs do there? If PC action happens on political level, politics matter. If on a "band of mercenaries"-level, just tell where and what kinds of jobs they can get. General description like "mountainous with lots of caverns and underground cities" may take a sentence or three. Planes are simply a special case of regions.

Threats: What creates pressure in the setting and forces player characters or NPCs to act RIGHT NOW? Tell enough to build a game of arbitrary length around them.

Conflicts: Who are involved, what do they want, what can they do, and why might PCs be involved? Again, enough to build a game around the conflicts.

[Snargash Moonclaw]

Interesting line of thought proposed here. It's probably growing quite apparent that my approach to world design is certainly not "minimalist" although I try to maintain an awareness of the principal in regard to what is presented to players. Much of what I'm putting in my setting wiki is for DM consideration only - containing a lot of spoilers should players read it. For my own sake in running the world I try to develop a very complete and consistent background framework - there's a lot of info that I want to pin down in my own mind in order to ensure continuity no matter what the players throw at me. I encourage a very player driven story line in which it is evident that there is a whole lot going on in the world around them and it is up to the characters to choose what matters to them and what they want to explore in greater depth. This does make the fact that I will write out a great deal of material which players will never see a foregone conclusion. Even so, that unseen material influences the development of plot lines the players choose to pursue and player actions can likewise affect how the greater framework unfolds, whether this is deliberate or inadvertent. In play I develop extensive back-stories for my characters and as DM I encourage my players to do the same. While crunch is a vital necessity, it is not the focus of my gaming style. Even when developing a pretty crunchy character I am still more interested in why the character has chosen to hone their particular abilities to such a degree and how they choose to utilize them in the world rather than the scope and power of their abilities.

As for specific facets, the crunch is, I think, a given among priorities, but equally vital is the flavor that the crunch provides the basis for (some granolas are better than others. . .) Therefor, I look to present at minimum the following:

Races: Xenoculture rules the day for me. If we simply look at physical characteristics and abilities, elves (for instance) would just be slender, very long-lived humans. What makes them different is the effects these things have on their culture. The simple fact that some races see in the dark means that they literally view the world differently from humans. It follows that they will therefore respond to and interact with the world in a different fashion. Dwarven hardiness and immunity to a multitude of toxins will permit them to enter environments and engage in activities without a second thought which humans wouldn't conceive of doing. It follows that a large portion of typical dwarven diet would prove deadly to other races. Given that their natural (subterranean) habitat supports far less biomass than the surface they would have to be much less particular about consuming this much more limited food supply. If they couldn't eat things which would kill humans the race would have starved into extinction long ago. While much of this sort of underlying rational need not be immediately presented to players, the defining conclusions that such lines of thought lead to are pertinent. Hence, an overview of racial values, customs and behaviors along with how they perceive their place in the world is an absolute necessity for playing the race.

Classes: What role do they serve in the cultures where they occur? Once you look at the abilities of the class the most immediate concern becomes why these abilities are valued. How do others perceive and interact with those who possess these abilities? One thing that I've frequently seen in canon which I think makes no sense is a general pattern of classes being primarily reserved as the purview of a minute handful of misfits (aka adventurers) in the world. Oddly, PC fighters somehow receive a great deal of intense combat training that is evidently denied to the (NPC) members of various militaries (being relegated to the weaker warrior NPC class) which have the most use for the skills and would be the common sources of this training. Invariably, nearly everyone else in the world, when they do train in these special character classes rarely develop notably high levels of skill in their chosen professions to which they dedicate virtually all their time and effort; while PCs, only training occasionally in the midst of all their other activities, consistently far outstrip their attainments! Establishing the role of a class along with the nuts and bolts of how it functions squarely and clearly within the setting milieu then provides the actual framework for how the class is played.

Gods: Over all - How active are they in the affairs of their world? What sort of alliances, factions, etc. do they form among themselves and what conflicts occur as a result? What constraints does the setting's cosmology place upon and (how do they) shape the above?

Specifically - How do they interact with/support their followers' activities and actively oppose the activities of their rivals and enemies and their followers? What are their basic personalities, ethos, values and goals? How are these expressed through the beliefs and external forms of their religions? How are they viewed by their followers and by those of other religions? Again - what basic conclusions are derived from the crunch (relative power, alignment, portfolio and domains) as affected by the particular characteristics of the setting? I think I provide a good example of what I'm referring to here in  Panisadore:Deities .  Note that even with very brief entries for each god an extensive pantheon will compile into a large body of information.

Regions: Basics of environment and climate. Significant races, cultures and organizations present, basic government(s) and religion(s), how these interact with each other - basic structure/forms by which politics and trade are conducted (open forums, backroom  dealings, bribes/favors, factional allegiances, etc.). Legal concerns directly affecting PCs and their activities. Bare bones of history as it applies to the formation of the above and specifically influences major current events and changes in terms of their likely affect(s) upon PCs and their activities. What influences can PCs exert upon the further development of the above? (Some of that information would only be known to the DM until PCs are able to perceive the results of their actions after the fact. Even then PCs may remain quite unaware of the causal influences they have had upon the evident developments.)

[LordVreeg]

[blockquote=SM]Interesting line of thought proposed here. It's probably growing quite apparent that my approach to world design is certainly not "minimalist" although I try to maintain an awareness of the principal in regard to what is presented to players.[/blockquote]  
My reasoning for not joining this interesting convo.  I would not know minimalist if it ate my toe...

[Xeviat]

Thank you for the great post Snargash; this is for both you and Vreeg: I'm not suggesting that we design entire worlds minimalistically, I'm searching for ways of successfully compiling a minimalist presentation so that players new to a setting or game can digest it all quickly.

For instance, in my current setting outline chapter 1 is for races. There will be large write ups for each race, and I will probably retain some form of my cultural stat rules I used in 3E. But, I want the first page of the chapter to give a basic, yet detailed enough description of each race so someone can read just one page before having an idea of what races interest them, rather than requiring them to read through a 20+ page chapter. Likewise with all the other chapters.

I feel this is especially important to more original settings. In a classic setting, when a player reads "Dwarf" or "Halfling", they'll typically get an image in there head and know what they're getting into. If a setting designer has changed some of the cliche things about those races, that needs to be known immediately. If a setting designer is using races entirely of their design, it is even more important for players to be able to get a quick picture of the races in their head.

There have been some great ideas out of this thread.

[Snargash Moonclaw]

Agreed. It's very easy to overwhelm players with TMI, especially at first glance. As a regional example my Malenorian Empire file is way too large for initial player perusal, even edited for spoilers. When describing a unique race, e.g. the Khurorkh, I've simply followed the format used in the PH for the sake of consistency. Other races will still have some specific write-ups regarding aspects peculiar to my setting. I try not to significantly change any of the essential descriptive information of the races as canon, but do seek to provide unique rationals for those characteristics and different cultural developments arising from them. Dwarves in my setting are very different in many ways from what people might expect even though everything in my description of them remains consistent with the material in the PH.

[Tombowings]

I try not to significantly change any of the essential descriptive information of the races as canon, but do seek to provide unique rationals for those characteristics and different cultural developments arising from them. Dwarves in my setting are very different in many ways from what people might expect even though everything in my description of them remains consistent with the material in the PH.

This is a great idea. Even though it is so simple, I think a lot of DMs could value from it. DM's: don't mess with what the players expect, it only leads to problems. Keep the dwarves dwarfy; keep the elves elvy; make sure that the players benefit from any changes made and those changes don't clash with the expected norms of that races (instead, add to the player's expectations).