There's a Ralph Bakshi animated film called "Wizards" that had an interesting fantasy setting. You could use it as a launchpad for a "post humanity" fantasy setting in which humans finally whack themselves and a new world emerges, one that has had enough of science and technology.

Another idea for a fantasy setting might be one in which some scientific experiments with quantum strangeness basically creates a new condition where rational scieitific laws cease to operate and what could be described as magic takes it's place.

Fantasy is about transcending boundaries while still feeling familiar enough that it seems somehow real. It's a balancing act. In that way it's like its predecessors, the myth and the fairy tale. If you want to make a new fantasy setting worthwhile, you have to transcend the boundaries set down by previous fantasy settings, while not going so far off the map that people can't relate to it. And people are always in the market for the sense of wonder that comes from being dared to push their self-imposed boundaries.

Not having elves, orcs, etc., is a good start. Those no longer challenge people to think outside the box; they are the box. Next, think about the other assumptions inherent in most fantasy. You'll find that most settings assume a medieval mindset and/or technological level. Why is that? They also tend to be monarchist and elitist in their political assumptions. Again, why? Considering modern people's social context, is it even possible for that outlook not to become a parody of itself? Fantasy religions, although ostensibly polytheistic, nevertheless are rife with Christianizing assumptions about how religion and morality work. Again, is that good/bad/irrelevant? Pinpoint the things that are taken for granted because nobody has thought to question them.

And so on and so forth, keeping in mind that the question is what's important. The answer can develop organically as your Muse drives you to further refine your vision.

No, there's no room for another fantasy setting.  We've got a proven pattern of commercial success and viability; all attempts to go beyond that barrier fail, and often with much destruction in the doing.  We're saturated, and until that bleeds off (or, less likely, the room expands) only fools and fuckwits will bother trying to tilt at that windmill.

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerNo, there's no room for another fantasy setting.  We've got a proven pattern of commercial success and viability; all attempts to go beyond that barrier fail, and often with much destruction in the doing.  We're saturated, and until that bleeds off (or, less likely, the room expands) only fools and fuckwits will bother trying to tilt at that windmill.

As forceful and eloquent as your argument is, I'm curious about one aspect.  you said "often with much destruction in the doing." Could you expound upon that a little? I'm interested in learning what destruction is done by introducing a fanatasy setting.

Quote from: James J SkachAs forceful and eloquent as your argument is, I'm curious about one aspect.  you said "often with much destruction in the doing." Could you expound upon that a little? I'm interested in learning what destruction is done by introducing a fanatasy setting.

I suspect he was not referring to destruction of an external nature, but more an internal one.

In other words, a great many individuals have bankrupted themselves,  convinced that their version of "not-D&D" was going to take over the market.

It's such a common phenomenon that there's even a technical term for it, which I'm sure you've all heard before, the "fantasy heartbreaker".

Quote from: RockViperI think some RPG authors worry too much about being original and not focus enough on creating a good setting.

Or good system.

I have this issue with several independently published games. When looking clever in your peer group becomes more important than functionality, you have a recipe for a truly shitty game.

Beyond the vanilla there's always room for the awesome. Proof: the work of many people, including our very own David (e.g., abc) and James Hargrove (e.g., vs. Elves).

links pls?  i would like to check them out

Sorry to jump in the conversation, but something always strikes me when talking about setting and things like metaplots ...

People talk about how a setting is or not original, by its content (what is the setting). And then, if the setting has some kind of success, the author tends to think "I'll write down a novel later ..."

But what about writing a setting in a different way ? How about having it being original in its container (the way it is written, as opposed to its content) ?

Am I the only one who believes that the setting "design" didn't change over time ? That the way they are written might not the best to be exploited for rpg ? That the duality setting/novel might be an error ?

It always amazes me to see that all settings are still written in the same old way.

I'm not sure what you mean by written in the same old way?

If had to take a guess what he is talking is...

Overview with intro adventure.

Regional Splatbook 1
Regional Splatbook 2

rinse and repeat.

Basically all variations of info dump plus splat.

QuoteIf had to take a guess what he is talking is...

Overview with intro adventure.

Regional Splatbook 1
Regional Splatbook 2

Well, this is pretty much it !!! I mean, you've got lists of characters, culture ... typical chapters, always present, always written in the same way (more or less), having always the same elements. You know, a setting book !!!

Quote from: Pierce InverarityBeyond the vanilla there's always room for the awesome. Proof: the work of many people, including our very own David (e.g., abc) and James Hargrove (e.g., vs. Elves).

Aw, shucks. . . thanks, man! It's nice to know that people are reading that (especially since I've commited to a revised and expanded version).

There's always room for another fantasy setting. So go for it!

Not sure this would warrant its own thread, and since its related I'll ask it here.

You've seen those African tribes where people stack rings around their necks over the course of years, successivly adding layers until their necks are stretched to some prodigious height. My question is this: since that would presumably stretch the vocal cords as well, would it make their voices pitch upward as their grew older until they were fairly tinny?