This was inspired by some of the comments on the Evil Orcs thread. The issue of world building seems to be behind a lot of the debate there, and I am wondering what people consider deal breakers and deal makers as players in another person's setting. What ruins suspension of disbelief for you? What helps maintain it?

For me the biggest thing is a world that isn't interconnected in any way. Places where you start in one town, and move to another community five miles south and it is as if they don't breath the same air.

Lack of history is another. I don't need the GM to spell out the history for me, but if its clear he just put things on a map and didn't think about how they got there, it kind of irks me.

We have had a few discussion on world building before.

I am a lazy DM usually I just create everything on the fly, but I draw from 30 + years of gaming experience and geekiness so basically its very hard to see the joins.

When I do build a world such as I am doing now as a companion to my Latest fantasy heartbreaker I start bottom up. My degree is in Geography and Anthropology so I have a pretty decent toolset for this.

Start with the geography determine the racial origins map that progression out, then determin languages elements. Use the language elements to build the geographic names. Work out the history impose that ontop of the linguist/cultural forms and then map out the current political and cultural mappings.

The key is to create places that are fun to adventure in so my current world has some barren wilderness to the northwest, then a slew of waring kingdoms that were once a great empire united by a single religion, then a narrow sea scattered with islands and pirates, then a southern continent with city states that are themselves founded on a now disappered 'empire' of an elder race now extinct. then from the East we have the migration of a new human racial group with an active religion that is butting up against the city states.

I currently have no non-humans although I am toying with Lizardmen in a possible marshy area tot eh Southwest of the sothern continent.

(I know everyone hates reading other folks world build notes so I will stop there )

The point is that you should be able to feel the history of the place through the cultures and linguistic naming of the places. My northern kingdoms will have similar cothing, customs, festivals some of which will present as fighting styles and weapons (knights effectively) the south will be different more of a patchwork as its more recently populated. Players don't need a history lesson to understand that these 3 kingdoms are similar and share some history that is separate to this city state etc.

Cultural groups need to have motivation. Wars need to have a cause.
I don't want to populate a swathe of land with 'bad monsters you can kill to get stuff' because I want the world to feel old and worn, but you do need places to explore (my northwestern wilderness).

Most importantly the world needs to fit the sort of games you want to play in it. I like political games and city games. I don't like Hexcrawls. the sample games i suggest will be putting the PCs in a Free Company or having them try to build up a small norther kingdom. or living as thieves int eh souther city states etc.

I have a methodical step by step here.

http://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2009/08/how-to-make-fantasy-sandbox.html

But the simple is answer is that you need to break it down into chunks you can manage. For some that means starting out with a town, wilderness, and a dungeon, for other it means using my steps.

Last do things for a good reason and not just because.

Jeff Rients and his like of gonzo gaming. It may seem nonsensical at first but the difference is that he deliberately likes that style and gear his games around it. And has players that like it as well.

But it is not cut and dry because people are people and interests change. So in the end it boils down to being aware of your players and doing things for a good reason and not just because.

Estar,  are there any setting features or approached to object to as a player?

I don't like really gonzo stuff in my games, unless it's Rifts or Gamma World.

I am also not a fan of the Known World style settings, where a desert sits 20 miles from a tundra and Scandinavian style mountains and fir forests. Especially when all 3 cultures are so completely different from each other.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;478627For me the biggest thing is a world that isn't interconnected in any way. Places where you start in one town, and move to another community five miles south and it is as if they don't breath the same air.

Lack of history is another. I don't need the GM to spell out the history for me, but if its clear he just put things on a map and didn't think about how they got there, it kind of irks me.

I would get behind those two.

Generally, I'm annoyed when I get a feeling that the game world only exists in the PCs' immediate vicinity. A feel that it's a narrative device rather than a 'real' world that exists beyond the PCs' reach.

I like to not know everything about the world. I like to be surprised. I like to have NPCs tell me stories that turn out to be completely wrong or slanted. I like to have a feel of a "used universe" where people do stuff, places aren't pristine all the time, buildings and people have histories of their own you can find out if you want to, that kind of thing.

I hate Schrödinger GMing, that kind of world illusionism made of false choices like if you turn right or left, it doesn't matter, you'll get the encounter with the brigands the GM has prepared for you anyway.

I've played with terrific GMs, some of them my friends, who ended up doing exactly that thinking they were very subtle and we wouldn't notice. I did. I notice this kind of pattern of GMing really, really fast, and it annoys the hell out of me, because there no longer is a point in me playing in the first place.

Quote from: Benoist;478673I hate Schrödinger GMing, that kind of world illusionism made of false choices like if you turn right or left, it doesn't matter, you'll get the encounter with the brigands the GM has prepared for you anyway.

I've played with terrific GMs, some of them my friends, who ended up doing exactly that thinking they were very subtle and we wouldn't notice. I did. I notice this kind of pattern of GMing really, really fast, and it annoys the hell out of me, because there no longer is a point in me playing in the first place.

I agree. These are my two biggest gripes.

On top of these, masses of high level characters piss me off. By the time my character can beat four people in a fight or get a 25 on an average skill check, it kills my emersion in the setting if it doesn't seem impressive.

If every 5th guy can beat up 10 regular guys - how did they get that good and why would anyone else even try?

Quote from: Benoist;478673I hate Schrödinger GMing, that kind of world illusionism made of false choices like if you turn right or left, it doesn't matter, you'll get the encounter with the brigands the GM has prepared for you anyway.

I am not a fan of this either. To me this kind of stuff just makes my choices not matter. I feel like I am passively watching the GM read a story.

Quote from: Benoist;478669I would get behind those two.

Generally, I'm annoyed when I get a feeling that the game world only exists in the PCs' immediate vicinity. A feel that it's a narrative device rather than a 'real' world that exists beyond the PCs' reach.

I like to not know everything about the world. I like to be surprised. I like to have NPCs tell me stories that turn out to be completely wrong or slanted. I like to have a feel of a "used universe" where people do stuff, places aren't pristine all the time, buildings and people have histories of their own you can find out if you want to, that kind of thing.

Totally agree with this. When the party have spent weeks travelling over the Great Nothing to meet the Lord of the Yellow city because the NPC they saved said they would recieve vast wealth if they delivered this scroll, and the yellow city turns out to be a collection of mouldy tents and all their Lord has to offer is a scraggy old donkey and a battered map in a language no one speaks.  You definitely have to make a place feel worn.

I also love foreshadowing. One of my favourite moments as the GM is when the players meet an NPC and from a turn of phrase or a thow away comment they realise that he is someone they heard someone else make a throw away comment about 4 months earlier.

Quote from: Cranewings;478690I agree. These are my two biggest gripes.

On top of these, masses of high level characters piss me off. By the time my character can beat four people in a fight or get a 25 on an average skill check, it kills my emersion in the setting if it doesn't seem impressive.

If every 5th guy can beat up 10 regular guys - how did they get that good and why would anyone else even try?

One of my top D&D gripes is the 'always figjting orcs (evil or otherwise ) ' feature.  So wehen you are 1st level the enemies are goblins then orcs then bugbears etc etc so that you always need to roll a ten to hit and you always have to hit them 5 times to kill them even if you are 18th level.

This is key to the game I am working on now. Because I am goign for a swords and sorcery feel. There are no cultural monsters, there are bandits and their are raiders and their are bad arse mother fuckers, but you don't get an army of bad arse motherfuckers they come in pairs at best, you might get a famed bunch of bandits (like a robin hood crew) with a collection of tough nuts. City guards are always 1st level, palace guards might be 3rd the captain might be 4th or more likely he will be a first level guy with a rich uncle.
I find this doesn't work with scaling hit points so I have tweaked how hit points (and in fact all of combat ) work so a 6th level warrior can take on 5 guards. He should beat them but if he screws up on tactics and they get lucky 1 hit can cripple him.

Quote from: jibbajibba;478694I also love foreshadowing. One of my favourite moments as the GM is when the players meet an NPC and from a turn of phrase or a thow away comment they realise that he is someone they heard someone else make a throw away comment about 4 months earlier.

Yeah, I love to do this too.

Quote from: jibbajibba;478695One of my top D&D gripes is the 'always fighting orcs (evil or otherwise ) ' feature.  So when you are 1st level the enemies are goblins then orcs then bugbears etc etc so that you always need to roll a ten to hit and you always have to hit them 5 times to kill them even if you are 18th level.

That kind of stuff sucks the most when a DM wants to stick to whatever he thinks a "fair" encounter is to the PCs. So basically threats scale with the PCs invariably during the course of the campaign, and though it may have its charm in terms of 'scale' and feel of monsters as the PCs rise in power, it more often than not makes the world feel cheap and preordained to fit the PCs neatly, which plays into my dislike of feeling like the world only exists in the PCs' vicinity.

Quote from: Benoist;478699That kind of stuff sucks the most when a DM wants to stick to whatever he thinks a "fair" encounter is to the PCs. So basically threats scale with the PCs invariably during the course of the campaign, and though it may have its charm in terms of 'scale' and feel of monsters as the PCs rise in power, it more often than not makes the world feel cheap and preordained to fit the PCs neatly, which plays into my dislike of feeling like the world only exists in the PCs' vicinity.

Yup. Just as I want 6th level guys in my world to be fighting 6 guards rather than fighting 6th level guards, I also want the PCs to be aware that if a map says 'here be dragons' and they go there when they are 3rd level the dragons won't become ickle baby dragons that are a fair match for them they will be fuck off huge fire breathing horse eating dragons they they should run the fuck away from.

Complete agreement. And when I'm a lowly 3rd level who actually had the balls or insanity to go where the cross says "there be dragons", that I find myself in front of an ancient Wyrm, it might actually be, you know... fun for me to deal with the consequences of my own damn choices. Whether that's fleeing from the Wyrm, attempting to play to its ego so I can survive by being its scout or henchman for the time being, or even die and create a new character.