Slightly unpopular opinion: All official lore is crap and should be generally ignored. (Even the stuff I kind of like) If I want to play in a world where what I can do is limited by the generic, inoffensive, middle-of-the-road, crowd-pleasing writers at some corporation I’ll just play a AAA video game. The ability to be participatory in the creation and evolution of the in-game world is what makes TTRPGs different from consumer media. Why would you give that part up, but still leave yourself with all the cognitive load?
This is probably why Greg Stafford, the guy most responsible for Runequest and Glorantha’s deep and wide lore came up with his sort of prime directive: “Your Glorantha Will Vary”. He presented his version of the lore but wanted people to re-write it to their hearts’ content.
There was a bit too much of it, but that actually was the reason I included the ‘even the ones I like’ part. Old WoD didn’t pull its punches, and generally was not middle-of-the-road.
I disagree. I think having a base to work from is helpful, both to players and DMs.
For example I don’t want to create a pantheon of gods. I might want to create a few unique gods within my setting, and if they conflict I’ll change some rules accordingly, but I want something to build off of. Similarly if a player wants to create a paladin or cleric they can just pull from the standard list.
Also if the official lore is fun, it’s more fun to build off of. I’ll enjoy reading it more and I’ll enjoy using it.
Absolutely agree. I set a game in the real(ish) world once, so it was a setting where everyone knew the base “lore.” It was so nice! I could reference things, name-drop countries, and introduce old grudges without having to exposition it all. People just got things. We’ve since done enough games on the sword coast that that works too, now.
Slightly surprised I didn’t get more disagreement.
A prebuilt system has one benefit: the players and DM come to the table with a shared set of expectations. This is crucial for things like adventurer’s league, where the players are all strangers, more or less engaging in a tournament without winners, each using the others to get their RPG rocks off, and can be useful to skip the mechanical design level of play-making. It also makes sense for a corporation to try to hit that lowest common denominator to maximise their audience.
However, I maintain, if no one at the table is creative enough to want to world-build beyond that, they might as well all just stick with consumer media. Those who don’t feel the drive to create aren’t suited to DMing, and a table without a DM is a hetero orgy without a woman.
I’m running a campaign now and jmit takes place in the Underdark. Guess what, they worship Lolth and are pretty evil. I’ve got some Duergar down there too. I took ideas of the Drow city straight from the Into the Abyss module. I didn’t use the exact city, but it was my base of ideas.
Additionally I’ve taken ideas from the Acquisitions Incorporated book and made the item “Orrery of the Wanderer” a key part of my story. The reason I did that was because I found it to be an interesting item with interesting lore.
Look at it like Legos. If someone handed you a big crate full of Legos you could build something really cool. In fact you could build anything.
However if, instead of a big crate, someone handed me three medieval sets and a ninja set. If I build them exactly as instructed, I still get a cool set. Sure I would have a hard time making a WW2 fighter out of the medieval and ninja sets, but that’s ok. And if I tweak the sets a little I still get something that is my own.
Slightly unpopular opinion: All official lore is crap and should be generally ignored. (Even the stuff I kind of like) If I want to play in a world where what I can do is limited by the generic, inoffensive, middle-of-the-road, crowd-pleasing writers at some corporation I’ll just play a AAA video game. The ability to be participatory in the creation and evolution of the in-game world is what makes TTRPGs different from consumer media. Why would you give that part up, but still leave yourself with all the cognitive load?
This is probably why Greg Stafford, the guy most responsible for Runequest and Glorantha’s deep and wide lore came up with his sort of prime directive: “Your Glorantha Will Vary”. He presented his version of the lore but wanted people to re-write it to their hearts’ content.
Old world of darkness lore slapped though
There was a bit too much of it, but that actually was the reason I included the ‘even the ones I like’ part. Old WoD didn’t pull its punches, and generally was not middle-of-the-road.
I disagree. I think having a base to work from is helpful, both to players and DMs.
For example I don’t want to create a pantheon of gods. I might want to create a few unique gods within my setting, and if they conflict I’ll change some rules accordingly, but I want something to build off of. Similarly if a player wants to create a paladin or cleric they can just pull from the standard list.
Also if the official lore is fun, it’s more fun to build off of. I’ll enjoy reading it more and I’ll enjoy using it.
Absolutely agree. I set a game in the real(ish) world once, so it was a setting where everyone knew the base “lore.” It was so nice! I could reference things, name-drop countries, and introduce old grudges without having to exposition it all. People just got things. We’ve since done enough games on the sword coast that that works too, now.
Slightly surprised I didn’t get more disagreement.
A prebuilt system has one benefit: the players and DM come to the table with a shared set of expectations. This is crucial for things like adventurer’s league, where the players are all strangers, more or less engaging in a tournament without winners, each using the others to get their RPG rocks off, and can be useful to skip the mechanical design level of play-making. It also makes sense for a corporation to try to hit that lowest common denominator to maximise their audience.
However, I maintain, if no one at the table is creative enough to want to world-build beyond that, they might as well all just stick with consumer media. Those who don’t feel the drive to create aren’t suited to DMing, and a table without a DM is a hetero orgy without a woman.
I’m also surprised and disagree again.
I’m running a campaign now and jmit takes place in the Underdark. Guess what, they worship Lolth and are pretty evil. I’ve got some Duergar down there too. I took ideas of the Drow city straight from the Into the Abyss module. I didn’t use the exact city, but it was my base of ideas.
Additionally I’ve taken ideas from the Acquisitions Incorporated book and made the item “Orrery of the Wanderer” a key part of my story. The reason I did that was because I found it to be an interesting item with interesting lore.
Look at it like Legos. If someone handed you a big crate full of Legos you could build something really cool. In fact you could build anything.
However if, instead of a big crate, someone handed me three medieval sets and a ninja set. If I build them exactly as instructed, I still get a cool set. Sure I would have a hard time making a WW2 fighter out of the medieval and ninja sets, but that’s ok. And if I tweak the sets a little I still get something that is my own.