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

[AnOminous]

Ditch-digger
Filthbeard
Bilgedrinker
Cavemonkey
Pit-midget
Mudsmith
Orc-faced dirt-dweller
Turnip-nosed shovel-jockey
Chubini (a portmanteau of "chubby mini," something that the aristocracy of the Eastern Realm used to call their dwarven slaves, who were only liberated when the empire fell, not by their own effort)
Dwerp (especially useful when dropped during discussions of higher things dwarves don't understand, such as magic, planewalking, and soap)

Why do you have so many slurs for dwarves? Are you some knife-eared cocksucker in disguise?

 

[The Ugly One]

Why do you have so many slurs for dwarves? Are you some knife-eared cocksucker in disguise?

Not my fault their most notable characteristic, their hardy constitution, comes from centuries of living in filth and drinking goblin piss.

 

[Paradox Mystic]

It's true dwarves hold grudges tighter than any other race except perhaps dragons, they won't shut the fuck up about the cave floods, muh cave floods. The cave floods never happened.

 

[Judge Dredd]

If this a game based in post-Roman/Pre-enlightment Europe, the GM can't answer a basic question about if the setting is more Dark Ages, Medieval, or Renaissance themed without chimping? That table sounds shitty and low effort so I'll gladly.

Those time periods are very different, but I think you're missing what Free League is doing.

One criticism of Free League Twilight 2000 is why is Sweden a setting along with Poland, instead of being all set in Poland. And it's obvious to me. Sweden is their home country, it's what they know, and there's an expectation of what people at their table want to play.

I hate to use a reddit term, but it's like American defaultism. Is it an oversight? Sure. Is it bad? I don't know, I don't care about Vasean. If I run a Viking game, would I be expected to explain what Valhalla and a Valkyrie is? How about an Egypt themed game or a samurai game?

 

[Illumithotty]

I hate to use a reddit term, but it's like American defaultism. Is it an oversight? Sure. Is it bad? I don't know, I don't care about Vasean. If I run a Viking game, would I be expected to explain what Valhalla and a Valkyrie is? How about an Egypt themed game or a samurai game?

Speaking in very broad and general terms, european settings written by europeans are ashamed of their history and culture. The ones who aren't are super-nationalistic and offended that you're not already aware of what King Sharkfart did back in 1469. It just feels like any European setting written by Actual Europeans is either going to completely elide the necessary history to make their setting understandable, or talk down to the reader when explaining things.

 

[p1138]

I hate to use a reddit term, but it's like American defaultism. Is it an oversight? Sure. Is it bad? I don't know, I don't care about Vasean. If I run a Viking game, would I be expected to explain what Valhalla and a Valkyrie is? How about an Egypt themed game or a samurai game?

If someone at the table really doesn't know what a viking or samurai is, yes. Same as probably not wanting someone playing a random samurai in your viking game unless you're going for some really weird fish out of water type thing. Now I don't know anything about Freeleague or what a vaesen is, but if I were a player at the table and asked... I'd kind of expect the DM to at a minimum be able to point me in the direction of it. On a quick search it seems that it's a setting for a game made by freeleague or something? If you're running it and using that setting, yeah I'd expect you to be able to give a basic run down of it instead of just shrugging or something.

 

[EleventySeven]

If you're planning a 12-18 month+ sandbox, having a consistent setting is important. Having historic parallels make the game feel more alive, and it makes it easier for players to get their head around what is happening in the world.

If you just want to play in generic fantasy, that is also fine. But if you're making something kinda unique then you need to have a general idea of what it is.

This is something I'm fixated on in my setting. I ended up considering the specifics of the tech level for Campaign 2 over the year I wasn't running a pathfinder game since there'd be a 200 year time gap after the first one in the same setting. And that's how I ended up promising my players that they'd get their own private train at some point.

Another thing I've done that may be useful to anyone making their own setting is alternative technology. Gunpowder was only ever invented by the dwarves on my world as a religious substance and a lack of easy to find niter on the planet keeps anyone else from using it. Guns are purely those compressed air ones from around the 18th and 19th centuries, and large scale mining is done primarily with huge hydraulic systems where water is used to loosen and break rock since they can't do blasting. Since armor never fell out of favor, metallurgic/material science is ahead of pace, so stainless steel is a product, thermite is in regular use, and alchemists are in a race to make synthetic adamantine and mithral. If you want to make a properly deep setting, you've got to think about the knock-on effects of the little things you do to make the setting unique.

 

[Ghostse]

Those time periods are very different, but I think you're missing what Free League is doing.

One criticism of Free League Twilight 2000 is why is Sweden a setting along with Poland, instead of being all set in Poland. And it's obvious to me. Sweden is their home country, it's what they know, and there's an expectation of what people at their table want to play.

I hate to use a reddit term, but it's like American defaultism. Is it an oversight? Sure. Is it bad? I don't know, I don't care about Vasean. If I run a Viking game, would I be expected to explain what Valhalla and a Valkyrie is? How about an Egypt themed game or a samurai game?

No I see what they're doing and why, I just consider it extremely low-effort, a bad setting, and only requiring a modicum more effort to have done in a significantly better way.

Again, if you're just creating "the mythic north" just create your own Donut Steel not-Scandanavia.

For a Viking game, yes actually. A quick primer on Valhalla and viking religion in general I would absolutely expect to be included. You don't need to reprint every single Epic about the gods, but a brief paragraph/two paragraph summary of who are the major gods, how they work into viking life.
Or in other words, there should absolutely be an explanation of why its so important for Viking warrior to die gloriously in battle.

For a Samurai Game - again, I wouldn't expect the need to have a complete 900AD to 1900AD complete dynastic breakdown of every Emperor and Shogun. In this case you'd probably be setting your Samurai game either as a political jockeying contest under a Mikado or as a game of war involving Shoguns, or perhaps combining the two, so I'd expect at least a quick primer on "This is how Samurai fit into society, this is how Samurai would act, this is what it means to be Ronin, why couldn't an out of work Samurai just become a merchant" etc.

An Egyptian game, again you don't need to cover every Pharaoh or every dynasty, but is this Bronze Age Egypt? Iron Age? Classical? I would also expect a quick run down of Egyptian religion and culture.

For a pirate game in the carribbean, you don't need to cover every technical innovation or politics but "During this this period, the English and French were are war. During this period, the English and Spanish were at war and allied with the french. During this peroid, Everyone was supposedly at a very tenuous peace" and the disposition of major Islands.

Or if you were doing a Crusader game, a very fast break down of the rough political map of the Crusader Kingdoms between crusades would be absolutely vital.

edit: You don't need to constrain players/GMs to slavish historical accuracy, but if you are setting your game in a real historical period and not just an inspired-by fantasy setting, you need to provide GMs. the tools to take real-world events and translate them into their AU; If they ignore cetain historical events, how ignoring those events will affect later ones.

Speaking in very broad and general terms, european settings written by europeans are ashamed of their history and culture. The ones who aren't are super-nationalistic and offended that you're not already aware of what King Sharkfart did back in 1469.

P. Much this.

 

[The Ugly One]

It's true dwarves hold grudges tighter than any other race except perhaps dragons, they won't shut the fuck up about the cave floods, muh cave floods. The cave floods never happened.

Who ever heard of a cave flooding when it's sealed with wooden doors?

 

[LovisXVI]

For a Viking game, yes actually. A quick primer on Valhalla and viking religion in general I would absolutely expect to be included. You don't need to reprint every since Epic about the gods, but a brief paragraph/two paragraph summary of who are the major gods, how they work into viki

Recommended reading would also help. For example if I were going to run a viking game, I would recommend/re-read Egil's Saga, since of the Icelandic sagas, the protagonist, Egil Skallagrimsson, is the most cultural and religiously conservative of them all, being an extremely staunch pagan, so he is representative more of the moores and ideals found in the Viking Age than other Sagas which take place later and often feature Christian protagonists. But you could just as easily choose a more mythical saga like Völsunga saga if it were a more fantastical game. Direct callouts and recommended secondary texts can really help with establishing the desired or intended tone.

For a Samurai Game - again, I wouldn't expect the need to have a complete 900AD to 1900AD complete dynastic breakdown of every Emperor and Shogun. In this case you'd probably be setting your Samurai game either as a political jockeying contest under a Mikado or as a game of war involving Shoguns, or perhaps combining the two, so I'd expect at least a quick primer on "This is how Samurai fit into society, this is how Samurai would act, this is what it means to be Ronin, why couldn't an out of work Samurai just become a merchant" etc.

To this point, the three Shogunates were quite different from each other, and depending on the era, the Samurai class might not even exist as an entity!

 

[Ghostse]

The cave floods never happened.

And if they did, the dwarves deserved it.

To this point, the three Shogunates were quite different from each other, and depending on the era, the Samurai class might not even exist as an entity!

Completely correct, and even when there was a strong Mikado it really varied. And there was a lot of technological and weapon development that happened post-mongol invasion. And while Japan is more homogenous than the Nordic areas circa 1800, there are still ethnic groups and various cultures you could use to deepen the setting.
And of course questioning if you're including Korean holdings & Formosa in any off the settings (or at least opening the door for a splat), technological improvements after the foiled mongol invasion, etc etc.

I was trying to keep my sperg to a moderate length. (I also can never keep even the major shogunates straight in my head.)

And while there is nothing wrong with an "Appendix N" (and in fact more games should have one) there should be enough detail in the game book itself for me to either extrapolate or at the very least whet my appetite to explore those supporting documents.

 

[BIG BILL HELL'S]

And if they did, the dwarves deserved it.

...and here's why it's a good thing.

 

[p1138]

And while there is nothing wrong with an "Appendix N" (and in fact more games should have one) there should be enough detail in the game book itself for me to either extrapolate or at the very least whet my appetite to explore those supporting documents.

This is the kind of world building that D&D used to have with their settings books, that they haven't done in ages. Most other RPGs on the market(including a bunch of those from the 80s, and even plenty of the stuff sold today) either don't bother or do a piss poor job. Even if it isn't high fantasy, scifi, cyberpunk, etc. my character in a game should have a basic understanding of how a baker in a village might react to him showing up to buy a loaf of bread because of his ethnicity, clothes, class(as in economic) difference, how my character is paying for bread(what can be used as currency), what types of bread should be available, etc. Even for larger purchases it should be enough to reasonably inform a player how they might need to go about acquiring something like a horse or maybe if a local lord exists or doesn't exist to gain favor with after dispatching some bandits or whatever.

It's literally the meat and potatoes of how a "world" can function and I find it kinda necessary for anything beyond "I'm playing a fighting man that swings a sword in a dungeon" type of game unless the party of players is only expected to interact with themselves in a non-hostile manner.

edit: And to clarify, if that means the DM informs me that the game takes place in an equivalent of... 1560's France or whatever, fine I can go look up 1560's France on my own spare time before the first game session to get an idea of what that means if the DM doesn't want to spell it all out but at least I can do that if I'm provided the information and save the DM having to explain incredibly mundane bullshit. Samurai in early 17th century Japan? Cool I can go look that up on my own without needing to ask the DM shit like what people eat for lunch or an acceptably normal hairstyle might be. Which leaves the DM more time to deal with the actual game portion.

 

[Overly Serious]

I feel someone confused the issue slightly when they said that Vaesen should do three different eras the way Cthulhu does. There's honestly no great need for that. A point in the 1800's is fine for something that has a somewhat limited scope for campaigns anyway. And a GM that wishes to do something different can. The issue is that it explicitly states that you should take anything from the 1800s as you like - political territories, inventions, beliefs - and "build your own Mythic North". It says things like "if a character wishes to type her novel on a typewriter, then the typewriter will have been invented".

They present it as freeing but the reality is that it's lazy. You can disregard what you don't like easily. What is hard is creating an authentic historical setting without help.

And when @Judge Dredd says he dislikes detailed timelines because it means you get "continuity lawyers", I care not a jot. A GM should not fear his players, his players should fear him. A player coming to the table who knows the time period well and using that to constructively make his character more authentic or helpfully tell me when I'm not sure - "you'd have been able to send a telegraph between these cities at this point" is an asset. If same player starts trying to derail things with minutiae or gotchas, well that's why I buy hardback books over PDFs.

 

[p1138]

And when @Judge Dredd says he dislikes detailed timelines because it means you get "continuity lawyers", I care not a jot. A GM should not fear his players, his players should fear him. A player coming to the table who knows the time period well and using that to constructively make his character more authentic or helpfully tell me when I'm not sure - "you'd have been able to send a telegraph between these cities at this point" is an asset. If same player starts trying to derail things with minutiae or gotchas, well that's why I buy hardback books over PDFs.

That is absolutely an asset to have a player that can fill in a blank. Again, takes more bullshit off the mind of the DM. Hell, a competent player that actually properly understands a setting can even act as an additional NPC when appropriate(also helps preventing the DM from having to talk to themselves) as the random drunk in a tavern, the assistant of a blacksmith/tailor/whatever with some spontaneous storytelling.

But you don't need a hardback book over a PDF to shut someone up unless you need to beat them with it. In which case, that's what the sock with some rocks in it is for. But at that point if it's happened more than twice and you've spoken to them about it each time, just boot them from the fucking table. A player that's so much of a problem you need to even joke about hitting them upside the head to shut them up is likely not an asset.

 

[Adamska]

I feel someone confused the issue slightly when they said that Vaesen should do three different eras the way Cthulhu does. There's honestly no great need for that. A point in the 1800's is fine for something that has a somewhat limited scope for campaigns anyway. And a GM that wishes to do something different can. The issue is that it explicitly states that you should take anything from the 1800s as you like - political territories, inventions, beliefs - and "build your own Mythic North". It says things like "if a character wishes to type her novel on a typewriter, then the typewriter will have been invented".

Nah, I just thought that having eras would've provided more ideas and allow you to play a game that varies a lot more based on what technology and knowledge in general exists. A similar variation would be to do something based on the Voluspa or other Eddas for one era, one during the Kalmar Union, and one during the Norway-Sweden mid 1850s.

Basically by having a few, not too many options, it gives the GM and players options to play with. It also means you can tell different tales.

Will you play Harald, Gytha, and Tostig fighting the Grendelfolk tormenting the Geats? Or perhaps you're merchants trying to make the Amber Road yours and you run across wood sprites causing issue? Or hell, ornery miners setting up a union in the north having to worry about rowdy trolls who seek your shit.

Stuff like that. If you spent some of that waffling on setting on locking a couple of basic ones, it really helps set a tone and helps the newbie a lot.

 

[Overly Serious]

Nah, I just thought that having eras would've provided more ideas and allow you to play a game that varies a lot more based on what technology and knowledge in general exists. A similar variation would be to do something based on the Voluspa or other Eddas for one era, one during the Kalmar Union, and one during the Norway-Sweden mid 1850s.

Basically by having a few, not too many options, it gives the GM and players options to play with. It also means you can tell different tales.

Will you play Harald, Gytha, and Tostig fighting the Grendelfolk tormenting the Geats? Or perhaps you're merchants trying to make the Amber Road yours and you run across wood sprites causing issue? Or hell, ornery miners setting up a union in the north having to worry about rowdy trolls who seek your shit.

Stuff like that. If you spent some of that waffling on setting on locking a couple of basic ones, it really helps set a tone and helps the newbie a lot.

Hell, if you used some of that egregious white space they surround all the text with it would help! Yeah, sorry - I didn't mean to be wholly dismissive of the idea. I guess my point is more to the fact that Cthulhu is a giant sprawling setting with a lot of depth and can afford to do Cthulhu Now and Cthulhu By Gaslight. Whereas Vaesen really is more someone's mini-campaign drawn out into an entire game line. It doesn't have the depth needed to do something large and sprawling, imo. You could but the rules are quite shallow and it would be very much on the GM to build a big collaborative fantasy story out of the premise.

Beowulf the RPG could be a lot of fun. Though for me, ever since I saw the CGI madness that was the 2007 film with Ray Winstone and Crispin Glover and Angeline Jolie, I've never been able to get Ray Winstone's ringing cockney voice out of my head: "I ahhm Beowulf. Ahhn I harve come to kill yer monstaah!"

Looking it up now for the date, I see it was written by Neil Gaiman which explains a lot.

 

[Henri Barbusse]

And when @Judge Dredd says he dislikes detailed timelines because it means you get "continuity lawyers", I care not a jot. A GM should not fear his players, his players should fear him. A player coming to the table who knows the time period well and using that to constructively make his character more authentic or helpfully tell me when I'm not sure - "you'd have been able to send a telegraph between these cities at this point" is an asset. If same player starts trying to derail things with minutiae or gotchas, well that's why I buy hardback books over PDFs.

The Ars Magica base book says that if a player has specific knowledge and is bothered by lack of accuracy about that topic (such as specific cuts of medieval clothing based on social class), the GM should put them to work. And Ars Magica is supposed to be a rotating GM system (which always ends up as one player GMs 70% of the time, another player GMs 20% of the time, the remaining 10% is one of the other players running a short adventure when the other two want/need a break), so if a player is bothered by not enough accuracy in medieval clothing, telling him to run an adventure about it is perfectly fine and within the scope of what the rules expect.

 

[AnOminous]

It's true dwarves hold grudges tighter than any other race except perhaps dragons, they won't shut the fuck up about the cave floods, muh cave floods. The cave floods never happened.

Nonsense, I've flooded the caves many, many times. A couple times with magma. One of those times a flying forgotten beast caught on fire from that and flew up into the fort, on fire and pissed off, to wreck it completely.

And when @Judge Dredd says he dislikes detailed timelines because it means you get "continuity lawyers", I care not a jot.

If someone found something that broke the timeline, I'd generally just retcon it, with some excuse like the historians of the time were as reliable as Suetonius.

 

[Henri Barbusse]

Nonsense, I've flooded the caves many, many times. A couple times with magma. One of those times a flying forgotten beast caught on fire from that and flew up into the fort, on fire and pissed off, to wreck it completely.

If someone found something that broke the timeline, I'd generally just retcon it, with some excuse like the historians of the time were as reliable as Suetonius.

Suetonius was 100% reliable when it comes to spicy rumors and that's why Caligula is an extremely historically accurate movie.