...I don't get it. Why is it considered more difficult to have to change the name of Khelben into something that fits my campaign better than to have to change the name Acora-Shin?...
Because people, especially 'Netfolk, like to complain about everything. Spend a day, just a day, on any messageboard and you'll find it to be true. Hell, people in general like to complain and rather than wait for someone to ask them their opinion on something 'Netfolk just put their complaints out there knowing someone is bound to read it.
Sadly, most 'Netfolk complainers around here can't ever be pleased. In your example, if Dragon printed very flavorful Realms articles the anti-Realms readers would be very vocal in their complaints. If Dragon never printed a single Realms article the Realms-lovers would also complain very loudly that they're being ignored. Same for Greyhawk, Eberron, "Generic Stuff", anything really.
In the end, the fine folks at Dragon & Dungeon are damned if they do, damned if they don't...at least around the messageboards and letters departments.
I say they should just write what they enjoy and think'll sell. Lest we forget, the folks at Paizo are gamers, too. They're not out to stuff month after month of useless gaming material down our throats, despite the constant complaints to the opposite here. I know, no matter what, there'll always be something for me in the magazines, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that thought.
- Chris Shadowens
|
Not all setting specific stuff is difficult to use in a "generic" campaign. To find a good campaign specific article you needn't look any farther than the Crimmor article. Crimmor could be dropped into almost any campaign world as it was presented. There were a few idiosyncracies that I didn't like about the article, and a few things I would have changed in terms of how it was presented if I had been the editor, but in some sense we had a city ready to use.
Now, an issue that included information that was difficult to use in my campaign was #335. First of all, two of the features weren't game relevant anyway. One was an interview with Ed, and one was a piece of fiction. The longest feature was on a bard college which could be used with some modification. However, it was "deeply tied" to the Realms, with references to a handful of powerful people that have known interactions with each other.
In some sense, the specific setting already defines the relationships the NPCs have with each other, while in a "generic" article I get to define them. Sometimes the relationship is what is important between them, but it is easier to "find" the right character in my game world if I know the important relationship between them...
It is difficult to explain without using concrete examples, but usually a generic article requires a few changes to "fit" into a campaign world. However, the article usually does a good job of focusing on what's important and providing suggestions for changing the unimportant details.
Unfortunately, I'm on battery power, and I'm about to run out of juice. More another time.
I've found I actually enjoy adapting stuff for use in my campaign, because it usually generates a burst of creativity that results in more depth to my own campaign.
I've found I actually enjoy adapting stuff for use in my campaign, because it usually generates a burst of creativity that results in more depth to my own campaign.
You know it.
Peace and smiles :)
j.
|
|
The powerfull people/organisations? Either replace them with things from your own campaign, or even ignore them completly and treat it as just a harmless college and not being overrun with countless spies.
You asked the question. Generic articles don't require as much work to change, since the characters and histories involved don't depend upon each other to the same degree that setting specific material does.
The information in that article, in my opinion, was insufficient to "drop" into a campaign as a "harmless bard college". Even if I chose to do that, that would involve "dropping" more than half the article. As long as that would be the case, my preference is for non-campaign specific stuff.
I understand why you want specific material, but don't pretend you can't see my point. Ignore it, fine. State your own view, fine, but my opinion has an much validity as your own - they're personal opinions.
I hope the majority (and the editors) come to side with me.
If we had 3 issues a year like #335, I guarantee I wouldn't subscribe.
|
|
The things that make a setting unique also tend to interfere with its adaptability to other games. This is the nature of something that is specific. A campaign setting that involves dragons will be harder to use in a campaign that doesn't have dragons. You can substitute a different monster, but nothing else is quite like a monster.
Forgotten Realms is generally considered a high magic world. Using material for that setting (in a low magic game) involves removing most of the magic and removing references to that magic. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnt. Sometimes an article is too connected to the world - it works in high magic but doesn't in low magic.
That doesn't mean that generic is better. It does mean that generic doesn't use the same "baseline assumptions". Usually, a generic article goes a little further in offering suggestions for how to make it work.
I think the MMIII is a great example of this. It provides generic information on each monster, but then explains how they might fit into both Eberron and the Forgotten Realms.
Sometimes a campaign specific article relies heavily on the relationships between major characters. That is much harder to recreate in a generic setting since the appropriate characters might not share the same relationship. In the bard article, the importance of Khelben is certainly significant. Without such a figure in the campaign world, it involves more work to adjust...
Something can be campaign specific and still be widely useful, sometimes without changes. I suppose that a generic article could be difficult to use in any campaign setting. Still, my impression is usually that campaign specific articles are not as useful to me personally as are the generic articles.
I also find that my level of frustration with published worlds often exceeds my enjoyment of an otherwise decent article, particularly with "canonical timelines" that can contradict the actions of my PCs.
I really like it when the "how to adapt" sidebars are included. If you're in a hurry (or don't have a lot of time to prepare), these sidebars really help out.
I really like it when the "how to adapt" sidebars are included. If you're in a hurry (or don't have a lot of time to prepare), these sidebars really help out.
Totally agree. The 'How to Adapt' sidebars are great.
I think the question of specific or general settings misses the point completely. In the hobby of model railroading there is a term known as "kit-bashing." Basically you take a kit and from the parts you make something else completely from it.
More or less almost everything is going to require a little "kit-bashing" on the part of the DM to get it into their campaign, even those who run a specific setting, because player interaction may have cause the campaign world to vary from the expected published scenario.
Thus the question is how "kit-bashing" friendly is it? How much work will the DM need to bash it into his or her existing campaign? The more work required by the majority of the DM's the more they won't like it, unless of course they are convinced that the worth is somehow worth it because it is a must have to throw into their campaign worlds.
|
Thus the question is how "kit-bashing" friendly is it? How much work will the DM need to bash it into his or her existing campaign? The more work required by the majority of the DM's the more they won't like it, unless of course they are convinced that the worth is somehow worth it because it is a must have to throw into their campaign worlds.
I agree, this is the real question (and it was put much better than I would have).
However, if an issue is advertised as containing "A Forgotten Realms City" and interview with "A Forgotten Realms author" and "A new bardic college for the Forgotten Realms" it still does tend to put me off buying it.
It's as if I feel "Its all Realms stuff, none of it is written with me in mind so I won't bother with it." I suppose it just goes to show that I'm not rational in my decison making.