Tabletop Roleplaying Games (D&D, Pathfinder, CoC, ETC.)

[Tom Bombodildo]

The funny thing is that we're in a similar spot as all the blackmailed fags in Hollywood, whose only way of wriggling out of the grip of blackmail was to make homosexuality socially acceptable. Now that being discovered to have ever said "nigger" in your life, even when you were 13, is a social and economic death sentence, the only option we have is to make racism cool again. As long as it was merely an unseemly social faux pas, the motivation to reinstitute racism was never quite there.

I can guarantee you that the Trump administration, which has at least a few Millennials in it (including Stephen Miller and JD Vance), has at least a few guys who said "FUCK YOU NIGGER" in Modern Warfare 2 when they got buttblasted on Rust yet again, and are scheming on how to move the Overton window right on racism out of sheer self-preservation.

Generational Post

 

[The Ugly One]

source: got buttblasted on Rust yet again

 

[ZMOT]

Descent has become app driven shite, which is a shame as I loved the one I played (2e I believe), as it was almost DnD lite.

the app is fine. there were 3 POD expansion before, all the app does is obscure and automate the carddrawing (there isn't really another way to automate a boardgame).
it's either that or find a sucker playing the overlord, and even if he enjoys it the game is supposed to be an asymmetric players vs overlord, and the way it swings the fun for one or the other will vanish soon. none of that "cooperative storytelling" stuff.
if an app is an absolute no-go, there are 2 fanmade versions of a card-driven overlord for the base campaigns if you wanna stick to cardboard. same guy also did one for rebel assault if you want star wars.

the only real "issue" if you wanna go that far is how it feels superfluous doing the stuff the app tells you - might as well play a 100% digital version and be done with it.
journeys in middle-earth integrated it better where it's mostly used for setup and lighter bookkeeping. mansions of madness I'd say is between the two but never looked into it that much.

never was a big fan of the dnd games, for one I can simply play the real thing, and imo too expensive to what they offer.

your best option for coop is probably checking bgg and look what kickstarters they've been gushing about. than either pick up a used copy from a released one (like arydia) or back one and wait 3-5 years.
sword & sorcery goes for around 100-150 bucks these days: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/170771/sword-and-sorcery

 

[Adamska]

please don't send them to V:TM, if ran well it's a great game.

If.

In all seriousness, Vamp has been full of fucking cringe psychos like that for decades. Always has been. It's why garbage like Vamp 5e exists, and why their take on Werewolf is so shit nowadays.

 

[Snekposter]

Fuck it, time to play "How long can you last before dying of cringe?"

Saw the thumbnail with the cosplaying thot, died instantly.

 

[40 Year Old Boomer]

please don't send them to V:TM, if ran well it's a great game.

BLG has some good takes, but I really disagreed with their Sabbat video. Dude just doesn't get them. It's part cult, part gang, and GMing a Sabbat game can be very rewarding when you lean into all the various rites, especially with the ignoblis ritae that the players' pack and other packs engage may or may not engage in.

 

[LovisXVI]

BLG has some good takes, but I really disagreed with their Sabbat video. Dude just doesn't get them. It's part cult, part gang, and GMing a Sabbat game can be very rewarding when you lean into all the various rites, especially with the ignoblis ritae that the players' pack and other packs engage may or may not engage in.

Yeah, when I run the Sabbat, I really lean into the religious and street gang angle, playing up the easy and casual violence encouraged by the Sabbat culture.

 

[Imperial Citizen]

Dice Scum returns to Star Wars to explore the Corporate Sector, aka Cyberpunk's Night City on crack!

 

[Overly Serious]

I recently came across a game named Vaesen. It's by Free League and the rules are the same rough framework as their Aliens game. Which I have mixed feelings about. On the whole it works well for Aliens which is a game optimised for simple play and one-shots, regardless of whatever campaign rules they tried to bolt onto it. Vaesen has differences, some interesting, but is similar in the low level of granularity. There are only four core attributes in the game (Physique, Precision, Logic, Empathy) and there are twelve skills that derive from them. You pick your age when you create a character from three broad groupings. Younger characters get more attribute points and fewer skills. Older characters it swaps around. For a game more intended towards campaigns, the limitations of the rule system come more into play I feel. Rules-wise it's kind of the anti-Call of Cthulhu. Most things defined with very broad strokes.

This is going to be a kind of a demi-review. I mainly want to say what I don't like about it because it could have been good and a lot of what I don't like about it is part of a wider trend in the industry. Something I feel is influenced by what gets termed "Theatre Kids" here, I think.

So the concept is a game of folk horror. Think ghosts, trolls, red caps, mermaids and so on. Some of the writing is pretty good in trying to convey a horror tone with things that are these days more children's book matter. It's also set in a vaguely defined 19th Century and by default Sweden. Which is a good setting for this as it has civilisation and urban centres but also remote communities, wild untamed areas, etc. It's set up so that most of the vaesen (supernatural creatures) aren't really easy to defeat in combat. You're supposed to find out what they are and what the secret means of defeating them is. Eyeballing the numbers you can fight them, but it's often a bad idea and the damage and injury rules are pretty punishing.

Now the first of my issues with it is the revisionism. As I read through the sample adventures, characters and rules examples. I began to raise my eyebrow at the number of female doctors, chemists, business owners there were. And indeed near the start of the book there's the now nearly obligatory side bar about this being a game and not including uncomfortable themes and dispensing with historical "injustice" and "inequality". I find history fascinating, I like to portray it accurately in my games and make the world feel real. This sort of sanitisation puts me off. Especially when the writers go out of their way to push things that are incompatible with history. If someone wants to play a female doctor in the game or a female jungle explorer who has safaried in Africa, they can. But I want that to be part of their story. Maybe the wealthy socialite woman gets away with galavanting around Kenya wanting to see lions because she is a wealthy socialite woman. Maybe the female Doctor disguised herself as a man to be accepted and is a Victor/Victoria type character. These characters could be fun. But I dislike the sanitised history and the normalisation of this stuff. The Arkham Horror system does exactly the same.

Of course I can disregard that and change NPCs if I want to use their adventures. And I am aware that some sorts of groups want their fantasy version. To me that's a hug-box but I can technically change it for my group even if the game leaves a slightly soapy taste in my mouth. Adding stuff that isn't there is harder...

So the game refuses to pin down almost any details for timeline or history. It says you can set your game at any year in the 19th Century you want to and to not get hung up on details of what was invented when or what happened at what point. It says if it's good for the story for Russia to be occupying Finland, just do it. I hate that and I find it lazy. Why not give me at least a timeline of significant events and inventions. Then I can decide. Then I can make the setting come alive for my players. Tell me Beethoven just performed his new "Moonlight Sonata" or that India is revolting against British rule or dynamite was just invented. Give me information that lets me pick a year that's fine. But some lazy "just include everything" and "don't worry about accuracy" stuff is everything I hate. They include a map of the "Mythic North" and there are no borders around the countries. Presumably because that would pin things down to something specific but if I've got a big map of some lumpen landmass and someone asks me "so is that in Norway or in Sweden?" all I can do is search around for Christiania and say "well I guess it's nearer there than Stockholm... So Norway I guess?"

It's all part of some great big woolly glop that turns me off.

The vague and hand-wavy attitude extends to the rules as well. Vaesen have three types of magical abilities classed as "Enchantment, Curses and Trollcraft". The distinctions between all three are very hazy. They all are left very open-ended so a vaesen with Enchantment might turn the food you're eating into worms or make everybody in the inn fall asleep. Those aren't listed sub-powers of Enchantment or abilities of specific vaesen. It's just a carte blanche to the GM to make up things that feel atmospheric. I think Curses allow a resistance roll but the general distinctions between them are all very ill-defined. And you'd think "trollcraft" was to do with making magic items or such but it is actually the ability to warp reality. How is that different to an enchantment? Hard to say really.

The whole thing - setting and rules - really gives me a feel that it's more just a vehicle for people to sit around and describe cool things. Far more co-operative storytelling than a game. Which also brings things onto "Mysteries" and part of what tipped me over into making this post.

I like my games to be actual games - you can win, you can lose, you're expected to play smart. For the classic Dungeon exploration sort of game, that's fairly clearly defined. You fight things and if you beat them you win, if you die you've lost. If you live and the trans-dragonborn-tiefling-they/them fellow party member dies, then you win twice. But how does my mentality stack up against a "Mystery" style game like Vaesen. The book says things about "if the players fail to find this important clue, find another way to give it to them." Now there's an element of sense to that - it also says to provide more than one way to get critical information and that's reasonable game design. Players are simple creatures I have found. You don't want your beloved adventure to come to a halting stop in the first act because they failed to find the murder weapon. It's good to think of more than one way to solve a mystery. But I don't like going so far as to turn the whole thing into something you cannot fail.

When I've run games like Call of Cthulhu, I've done two things. One is to make solving stuff a way to increase your chances. "Oh, you arrived at the ritual site but never figured out that the Professor was the cult leader? Yeah, he's here too now and you're going to have to deal with him as well". And "well done on figuring out they were Dark Young and preparing those molotovs". So you have that "increase your chances" that still presumes the final confrontation but makes solving the clues meaningful but keeps failure an option. The other thing I've tried to do is not have a static climax and a flexible timeline, but to create a timeline of what will happen if they fail and where. It has on occasions led to anti-climactic adventures but I see that as a necessary risk to have... risk.

Vaesen has the concept of a "Catastrophe" in its Mystery design chapter. It's what will happen if the PCs fail. I'm okay with that and do something similar myself. But I still struggle with the general feel of this game being more a led story-telling.

It's also a bit of a weird one as a game in that it has a kind of half-campaign baked in. There's a chapter detailing the city where the game is based but it goes further and details the base of operations for the group complete with a list of special rooms and advantages they unlock as the campaign goes on. It details the NPC that brings them together as a group and there's a secret society to which they all belong. All PCs have "the Sight" that lets them see the invisible vaesen around them. You can dispense with all of this of course as GM, but it's a big part of the setting. It's an odd thing - half Vampire: The Masquerade with its metaplot hints and half-videogame in its list of things you unlock in your base. It's not bad but if you don't want to use it you're dropping a fair bit.

Anyway, the game is a little bit of a disappointment to me to be honest. There's also one last thing which I particularly dislike. I'll put it in spoilers because the book says this is a big deal that the players must not know. But frankly, it's not something I would include in the game in the first place.


The book says that the Vaesen derive from human belief and depend on it and are shaped by it. To the point that a giant might appear because people believe there is one. Hence the rather heavy-handed pushing of themes of industry and science vs. magic throughout the book. I've a suspicion the metaplot they hint at is supposed to be some sort of thing where players are set up to have to decide between preserving the monsters or letting them fade away.


For me that completely undermines the horror in the game and is also a very banal and very modern take on things. I dislike it greatly.

Anyway, thank you for coming to my sped-talk. I hope you enjoyed. Please click on Like and Autism.

 

[Fuck Bankers]

I hate that and I find it lazy. Why not give me at least a timeline of significant events and inventions.

I think this is what makes Cyberpunk and ACKs work so well. I don't think you need 10+ (or 100+) pages of lore to be able to play even a sandbox game. you need a timeline, and a regional map, and some NPCs. In my own austistic setting I have the map I posted plus about 30 bullet points starting with 12,000 YBP with creation, then an Eden period, then an Atlantis period, then a Good elf period, then a Dark elf evil period, then an beastmen period, then a Roman/Jesus period, then a European migration period, then medieval, then early-modern HRE.

If someone wants to play a female doctor in the game or a female jungle explorer who has safaried in Africa, they can. But I want that to be part of their story.

I fully agree, if you're gonna do girl power do it all the way. If your setting is during major periods of war especially civil war, there will be more women in prominent roles because a lot of men will have died.

I dislike the sanitised history and the normalisation of this stuff.

They're just useful idiots, doing what they're told.

The whole thing - setting and rules - really gives me a feel that it's more just a vehicle for people to sit around and describe cool things. Far more co-operative storytelling than a game.

A lot of new people hear great stories from people's games that they've played. So they want to have those kinds of stories. New GMs think they have to write these great stories that players will "experience". They don't realize that those are the stories that came out of playing the game. Choices that they've made, and consequences for those choices. Many people are used to stories being something that you experience, not help write yourself.

But how does my mentality stack up against a "Mystery" style game like Vaesen. The book says things about "if the players fail to find this important clue, find another way to give it to them." Now there's an element of sense to that - it also says to provide more than one way to get critical information and that's reasonable game design.

My ACKs campaign starts with a mystery, "where are these zombies coming from?". There aren't many, but the captain of the guard knows and closer to the source there are more people who know. There are 4 quests on the jobs board, 3 of which will have hints about the zombies but aren't about them directly. The last will have the baroness tell the players to help the captain of the guard.

So I think having 3-4 sources of knowledge that know different things is all you need for mystery. Even better if those 3-4 sources have conflict between them.

Vaesen has the concept of a "Catastrophe" in its Mystery design chapter. It's what will happen if the PCs fail. I'm okay with that and do something similar myself. But I still struggle with the general feel of this game being more a led story-telling.

If they fail make it worse, hold on to it, and after a different campaign or one-shot come back with new PCs make make them clean up their mess.


I probably won't buy it, but if I find a PDF then I'd think about running it for a one-shot and I might at some point in the next 30 years.

 

[Ghostse]

by default Sweden.

Out. Its already astronomically gay.

So the game refuses to pin down almost any details for timeline or history.

On one hand I get not being tied down in minutia, but on the other hand while you don't need a month-by-month break down on the region at least give some direction based on decade or make "epochs" like "Napoleonic", "Early Victorian", and "High-Victorian". This would also potentially set up better campaign potential where you could have heirs take over as they deal with lingering effects of these creatures - or lean into the unnatural arts like life span expansions. Especially since Character Age seems to matter (wow. Ageist much? Big yikes)

This is one of the things I hate about this low-effort shit. If you are setting something in a historical period put in some effort to make it conform to reality. If you aren't, make your own setting even if its a gay AU.

Also: just imagine if they took this slip shod approach to some "indigenous" population. You'd have people losing their shit.

This is going to be a kind of a demi-review. I mainly want to say what I don't like about it because it could have been good and a lot of what I don't like about it is part of a wider trend in the industry. Something I feel is influenced by what gets termed "Theatre Kids" here, I think.

The reason you see shit like this highs concept "lol idk think of the theming bro" is because its low-effort and low-math. There is no need to really balance it out except for glaring defects. So you cna just crank this stuff out, have some art, nad maybe if you're lucky someone will take some ideas from it for the D&D campaign.

 

[Brain Problems]

the app is fine. there were 3 POD expansion before, all the app does is obscure and automate the carddrawing (there isn't really another way to automate a boardgame).
it's either that or find a sucker playing the overlord, and even if he enjoys it the game is supposed to be an asymmetric players vs overlord, and the way it swings the fun for one or the other will vanish soon. none of that "cooperative storytelling" stuff.
if an app is an absolute no-go, there are 2 fanmade versions of a card-driven overlord for the base campaigns if you wanna stick to cardboard. same guy also did one for rebel assault if you want star wars.

the only real "issue" if you wanna go that far is how it feels superfluous doing the stuff the app tells you - might as well play a 100% digital version and be done with it.
journeys in middle-earth integrated it better where it's mostly used for setup and lighter bookkeeping. mansions of madness I'd say is between the two but never looked into it that much.

never was a big fan of the dnd games, for one I can simply play the real thing, and imo too expensive to what they offer.

your best option for coop is probably checking bgg and look what kickstarters they've been gushing about. than either pick up a used copy from a released one (like arydia) or back one and wait 3-5 years.
sword & sorcery goes for around 100-150 bucks these days: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/170771/sword-and-sorcery

Gloomhaven/Frosthaven are very popular and have so much content it will warp whatever shelf you let it gather dust on. They're closer to fantasy dungeon crawl SWAT simulations than perhaps what some people might be looking for but they're honestly loads of fun and extremely well made. Plus there are digital versions for both* right now. There's also Claustrophobia which I haven't played but I think might fit.

*Frosthaven is out in, may Allah forgive me for uttering the phrase, Early Access

 

[Henri Barbusse]

It says you can set your game at any year in the 19th Century you want to and to not get hung up on details of what was invented when or what happened at what point. It says if it's good for the story for Russia to be occupying Finland, just do it. I hate that and I find it lazy.

How nice of them to give you the permission to set the game before Finland was occupied by Russia in 1809. I agree, it's lazy and I blame the aversion of historians in the last few decades to attempts at putting together a coherent history of anything.

They include a map of the "Mythic North" and there are no borders around the countries. Presumably because that would pin things down to something specific but if I've got a big map of some lumpen landmass and someone asks me "so is that in Norway or in Sweden?"

Norway and Sweden being in a personal union for most of the 19th century is another one of those details you shouldn't get hung up on, after all. Only Norwegians would try to claim Norway is in any way distinct from Sweden. Though if I had any actual social justice clout, I'd try to get the devs cancelled for Swedish imperialism.

 

[Judge Dredd]

Vaesen

I came across reviews of this when looking into free league stuff, and I have a dumb question none of them have answered.

Are the players meant to read the Monster Manual?

A YouTuber I like reviewed a bunch of a the adventures, and each of them seem to follow a similar format. As the players investigate, they learn the monster looks like A, has ability B, is targeting Cs. Therefore, it must be entity X, and we can defeat it by doing ritual Y.

Some even seemed designed to make you think it's entity X, but is actually entity Z behaving in an unusual manner due to plot.

The jump from ABC > X > Y seems to require knowledge of all the different Vaesen that players don't normally have. But I struggle to think how they get there without some heavy handed GMing.

Why not give me at least a timeline of significant events and inventions.

I'm in the minority here, but I hate that. Homebrew or published setting, doesn't matter. I don't care about your 1000 years of kings and rebellion and whatever the fuck unless it has a direct baring on the game. If there has been 1000 years of elves and dwarves fighting back and forth across the land, then just say so. I doubt it makes much difference if the dwarves took the castle in 759 or 762.

There are also plot holes caused by time lines. Fallout being a famous example where it's been over 200 years since the bombs dropped, but people are still living in rubble and eating pre-war dried beans.

 

[Henri Barbusse]

I came across reviews of this when looking into free league stuff, and I have a dumb question none of them have answered.

Are the players meant to read the Monster Manual?

A YouTuber I like reviewed a bunch of a the adventures, and each of them seem to follow a similar format. As the players investigate, they learn the monster looks like A, has ability B, is targeting Cs. Therefore, it must be entity X, and we can defeat it by doing ritual Y.

Some even seemed designed to make you think it's entity X, but is actually entity Z behaving in an unusual manner due to plot.

The jump from ABC > X > Y seems to require knowledge of all the different Vaesen that players don't normally have. But I struggle to think how they get there without some heavy handed GMing.


I'm in the minority here, but I hate that. Homebrew or published setting, doesn't matter. I don't care about your 1000 years of kings and rebellion and whatever the fuck unless it has a direct baring on the game. If there has been 1000 years of elves and dwarves fighting back and forth across the land, then just say so. I doubt it makes much difference if the dwarves took the castle in 759 or 762.

There are also plot holes caused by time lines. Fallout being a famous example where it's been over 200 years since the bombs dropped, but people are still living in rubble and eating pre-war dried beans.

In theory, yes, but that game supposedly takes place within real history and during a period of massive social upheaval even in relative backwaters like Scandinavia. Even a vague timeline of industrialization and urbanization would be a ton of help. Supernatural horror in the early 19th century is Lord Ruthven blending into society seemlessly because no one is able to collate information found in multiple countries. In late 19th century, we have the heroes coordinating with telegraph and using railroads to catch up with Dracula. It's a huge difference that that game turns into vague sameness and tells the GM to "figure it out yourself, lol". If someone's making a historical setting, their conception and knowledge of that setting should go beyond "no internet".

 

[Ghostse]

Gloomhaven/Frosthaven are very popular

Are they? I know Gloomhaven has some traction but when I got my Gnolls to pad out my villain minis, I liked them enough to see if there were other monster units i could buy, or anything about the system they were meant to used for, and could find absolutely fucking zilch - nothing about armies, units, rules.
NM, i am a dumbass I was thinking of Frostgrave

I'm in the minority here, but I hate that. Homebrew or published setting, doesn't matter. I don't care about your 1000 years of kings and rebellion and whatever the fuck unless it has a direct baring on the game. If there has been 1000 years of elves and dwarves fighting back and forth across the land, then just say so. I doubt it makes much difference if the dwarves took the castle in 759 or 762.

There are also plot holes caused by time lines. Fallout being a famous example where it's been over 200 years since the bombs dropped, but people are still living in rubble and eating pre-war dried beans.

You are very in the minority, yes.

There is a difference between a setting abstracting out "In this entirely made-up land Elves fight Dwarves, and 5000 years ago the gods fought a war, the origins of these events are almost cetainly never to actually feature in play so maybe we don't need to know the order of battle every time the Dwarves have beseiged the Elf capital" and abstracting out "This 100-year period the campaigns will be taking place is a real world location with an actual history that could just be summarized and reprinted but we are far too lazy for that and also concerned in 7 years we'll have been found out to have done a racism by saying Wakanda didn't have a Swedish colony."

And while you are spot on about the issues with Fallout where despite several time skips they are dedicated to maintaining a "the apocalypse happened in recent enough memory TV dinners are still good" again, there is no such issues with this because its actually real history.

@Henri Barbusse has it completely nailed. If thye just wanted a "mythic north" they could have just made their own Nordic donut steel, but even if they did that it would feel really lame and day to not have new intentions actually be new and groundbreaking instead of "I dunno maybe you want to telegraph some dudes, so go for it".

 

[Fuck Bankers]

I came across reviews of this when looking into free league stuff, and I have a dumb question none of them have answered.

Are the players meant to read the Monster Manual?

A YouTuber I like reviewed a bunch of a the adventures, and each of them seem to follow a similar format. As the players investigate, they learn the monster looks like A, has ability B, is targeting Cs. Therefore, it must be entity X, and we can defeat it by doing ritual Y.

Some even seemed designed to make you think it's entity X, but is actually entity Z behaving in an unusual manner due to plot.

The jump from ABC > X > Y seems to require knowledge of all the different Vaesen that players don't normally have. But I struggle to think how they get there without some heavy handed GMing.


I'm in the minority here, but I hate that. Homebrew or published setting, doesn't matter. I don't care about your 1000 years of kings and rebellion and whatever the fuck unless it has a direct baring on the game. If there has been 1000 years of elves and dwarves fighting back and forth across the land, then just say so. I doubt it makes much difference if the dwarves took the castle in 759 or 762.

There are also plot holes caused by time lines. Fallout being a famous example where it's been over 200 years since the bombs dropped, but people are still living in rubble and eating pre-war dried beans.

A timeline helps put ancient things in different places in the game world. So in my ACKs campaign I know the dwarven mine is X years old, the magic artifact Y, the aqueduct Z. Older factions are "institutionalized" and newer factions are marginalized. The problems come when you have a lore dump. Lore is mostly there for the GM to make the world feel real. The founding of a great house should only be something monks, scholars, and the current heads of those houses would know. It isn't as necessary as the broad strokes, but it makes the world feel more real.

GMs should also leave enough blankspace to fill in when needed.

The only lore my players get are a 150 word summary at the beginning of session 1, after making player characters. The rest is there for them to learn (if they want to) and to help me make the game world.

 

[Judge Dredd]

I liked them enough to see if there were other monster units i could buy, or anything about the system they were meant to used for, and could find absolutely fucking zilch - nothing about armies, units, rules.

Can help here.

Gloomhaven I know least about, other than it's DnD-lite dungeon crawl board game with a deck management element and legacy mechanics. Frostgrave is a skirmish war game with NPC monsters running around. It has various spin offs.

I'm not sure why people sing the praises of Reaper and Wizkids when Northstar and Wargames Atlantic exist, but that's just me. One of the few perks of being British I think.

Anyway, the monsters they do. I can highly recommend their cultist set if you liked the Gnolls set.

They do demons,

cultists 2*, along with various humans in 1 and 2*. Oathmark has the usual dwarves, elves, orcs, and undead. Ghost Archipelago has tribals and snakemen. The snakemen look weird tho. There is a cultists 3 coming out at some point.

Many of their sets have 2. These are usually female variants, so cultists 2 is female cultists, soldiers 2 is female soldiers, etc.

Another thing people do is kitbash them with their sci-fi minis. Usually putting sci-fi bits on the fantasy stuff to use them as chaos stuff, but you could go the other way.

Wargames Atlantic has giant spiders, lizard men, giant alien bugs. ogres, werewolves, and generic villagers and guards. Usually you need to provide your own bases if you go WGA.

From there there's various historicals. Fireforge put out some 28mm samurai that got rave reviews, and crusaders literally called the Deus Vult range.

No good source of aberrations yet.

never was a big fan of the dnd games, for one I can simply play the real thing, and imo too expensive to what they offer.

I didn't like how most of the game took place at tile edges.

In general, games like Descent offer DnD in a board game package, which isn't nothing. It's easier to sell people on a board game than a RPG, and there's no expectation to act in character. and the more constrained rules mean they don't have to wrap their head around the "rulings" part of DnD.

A great example of this dichotomy is the Arkham games. There's me, who reads the flavour text. And those that go "erm... blahblahblah... roll muscles."

 

[Adamska]

They could've just did what Call of Cthulhu did and have three different epochs based on periods; it's why you have 1890s, 1920s, and then a modern setting. You could do late Gustavian, where the kings became tyrants before burning themselves in the Napoleonic Wars. Strife is strong in the country, Finland gets lost, and the bloodier mystic monsters walk the night, in a less developed period to boot. Then you do the Age of Union (equates to early Victorian like @Ghostse suggests), which is the closest Sweden and Norway got to staying fused, where it would be burned in the failure to aid Denmark against Prussia. And finally the Age of Industrialization, where social tensions between the lower house and upper house of the Riksdag are high from farmers and the wealthy clashing, and sportiness and athleticism is pushed, as well as the slow growth of industry.

I don't like wooly settings either, and they could've easily just done this if they really wanted to provide options for the game. It'd allow you different ideas, techs, and plays with society as a whole.

The book just seems like a cop-out to get government money, since the Nordic Countries are begging for more stuff being made by them.

 

[Ghostse]

A timeline helps put ancient things in different places in the game world. So in my ACKs campaign I know the dwarven mine is X years old, the magic artifact Y, the aqueduct Z. Older factions are "institutionalized" and newer factions are marginalized. The problems come when you have a lore dump. Lore is mostly there for the GM to make the world feel real. The founding of a great house should only be something monks, scholars, and the current heads of those houses would know. It isn't as necessary as the broad strokes, but it makes the world feel more real.

GMs should also leave enough blankspace to fill in when needed.

The only lore my players get are a 150 word summary at the beginning of session 1, after making player characters. The rest is there for them to learn (if they want to) and to help me make the game world.

Agreed.

I will usually dynamically expand content. I'll have a general idea about the game world and big events in the distant/recent past which the players will get short summary of when the campaign starts, very broadstrokes "these gods don't like these gods. These are main factions in play and how they relate".

I'll usually have some notes and some ideas on the timeline. I will also freely borrow from real history, fiction, and previous campaigns for fleshing out things in the background.

But beyond that, I only expand things as the players have cause to care about them. If the players start to get involved in running jobs for the mayor, they might discover his Fixer/Militia Captain is a hero from the last war. If they start working on rooting out the local undeath cult, the War In the Heavens might get expanded.
But its not stuff I completely pull out of my ass.

However that's for a dynamic campaign I'm letting the players influence. If this was a setting that I was packaging up, this stuff should be spelled out in autistic detail so it can be upto the GM how much or how little detail they want to include in their game.

Oathmark has the usual dwarves, elves, orcs, and undead. Ghost Archipelago has tribals and snakemen. The snakemen look weird tho. There is a cultists 3 coming out at some point.

Many of their sets have 2. These are usually female variants, so cultists 2 is female cultists, soldiers 2 is female soldiers, etc.

Another thing people do is kitbash them with their sci-fi minis. Usually putting sci-fi bits on the fantasy stuff to use them as chaos stuff, but you could go the other way.

Wargames Atlantic has giant spiders, lizard men, giant alien bugs. ogres, werewolves, and generic villagers and guards. Usually you need to provide your own bases if you go WGA.

From there there's various historicals. Fireforge put out some 28mm samurai that got rave reviews, and crusaders literally called the Deus Vult range.

I've looked at the WGA town guard & towns people. I think its one of those "a solution for a problem I don't really have".

I might look at the samauri and crusaders though.