This is an Eberron-inspired world spanning setting with heavy use of fantasy counterpart cultures. However, part of making a campaign setting is covering the countries in detail. With a world spanning campaign setting using countries based on real life, this is going to be incredibly difficult due to the sheer number of countries.
So, here's my idea. Instead of covering the whole world in detail, cover a selection of 16 countries that I think would be cool to adventure in in detail, and leave the rest of the world up to the GMs who want to go to those areas. Here's the selection of countries to cover in detail that I picked, listed by the IRL cultures they are fantasy counterparts of:
Great Britain (Including Ireland)- B
Australia - B
California - B
Canada - B
Hawaii - B
New England - B
South Africa - B
Egypt - B
Mexico - B
Louisiana - B
Vinland - A
Thailand - A
Canton (a region of southern China) - A
Persia - A
Japan - A
Brazil - A
The countries with Bs are part of the British Commonwealth (With Mexico and Louisiana as special cases. They are not English speaking, they are Spanish and French speaking, respectively, and have no British colonial history. They joined up with the British for security after a revolt from Spain.), while the As are allies of the British but not part of the Commonwealth. Vinland is what you get if the Norse colonize the Mid Atlantic. In this world, Britain once was a mighty colonial power, but has since declared colonialism to have been very mean of them and made reforms to the Commonwealth to distance itself from the practice.
I also plan to offer basic information about the bad guys that Britain and her allies may have to face, which would be:
Spain
Germany
Russia
India
Arabia
These are all expansionist, and Spain is still actively colonizing stuff (Which is why Britain accepted Mexico and Louisiana into their Commonwealth. Protecting them from the dastardly Spanish makes them feel like they are atoning for their own colonial past.). There is also basic information on France, Italy, and China, which are all impoverished wastelands.
Is this a good approach to covering the world's countries in detail? Should I narrow the focus to North America (I've considered doing this, but I really wanted Australia and Africa)? Did I pick too many countries? Is the fact that the "villains" don't get as much coverage as Britain and her allies bad?
You should keep 2 things in mind:
1. Build around you campaign. There is no need for information about that other continent if your campaign is on this one.
2. What do your players like?
I don't have players yet, and the first campaign I want to use this for (I'll definitely use this setting more than once) isn't really demanding about where it takes place. It can work on any continent or even more than one. So, I have a lot of freedom in deciding which countries to describe.
Honestly this is far more complex then it needs be. Start with the home area, then work outward. You can know whats out there but you do not need to have it detailed if you will not be using it right now.
What I often do is detail the main area with vague one line to a paragraph info on what is elsewhere around it "off the map". All you need really is something like.
Spaldin: An expansionist monarchy, with vast military power that controls large portions of southeast Isgard. They have large shipping fleets and an iron grip on the eastern trade routes. They are known to have colonies in the vasgens sea and along the southern coasts of Narda
That is really all you need unless the pc's are in an area controlled by the Spaldin. And you can expand as you need it.
Honestly this is far more complex then it needs be. Start with the home area, then work outward. You can know whats out there but you do not need to have it detailed if you will not be using it right now.
What I often do is detail the main area with vague one line to a paragraph info on what is elsewhere around it "off the map". All you need really is something like.
Spaldin: An expansionist monarchy, with vast military power that controls large portions of southeast Isgard. They have large shipping fleets and an iron grip on the eastern trade routes. They are known to have colonies in the vasgens sea and along the southern coasts of Narda
That is really all you need unless the pc's are in an area controlled by the Spaldin. And you can expand as you need it.
The problem with that approach is that I'm publishing this as well as using this myself.
Good luck then as that is a ton of work for a single person. I would suggest running it a bit before expanding and publishing however.
- Separate the world from the play area.
- Focus on the play area for a ton of detail.
- Leave the rest of the world less defined.
- Remember even if it is going for publication the rest can be covered in expansions. It's a good idea to know in general what the rest of the world is like, but your players (and your buyers) want a detailed play area.
So, here's my idea. Instead of covering the whole world in detail, cover a selection of 16 countries that I think would be cool to adventure in in detail...
Watch-out for over-generalization.
I'm French Canadian, and can tell you that you may spend A LOT of energy describing this country alone in details. Never mind the multilingualism (which is more pronounced than in Louisiana), but the distances alone have created several subcultures, scattered over all types of terrains and climates save for tropical.
Similarly, I'm sure that describing the United States in detail would be a daunting task, and countries like India and China would be harder still.
I thinks it's fine to take cues from IRL nations, but I'd encourage you to make your own countries in terms of cultures and politics.
'findel
What if I started with just New England, California, and Canada?
Two 'small nation' sized regions and one big one? That's reasonably sized. Also, when creating this initial core zone you'll want to set a few rules for your overall world - since the astronomy, calendar, and plane-wide laws of magic will be the same everywhere the PCs go.
Local things worth a little detail - weather, plant life, and animal life. To reduce the amount of time you (or other GMs using your setting) have to expend in explanations that don't advance the story, it's best to use plain old Earth weather/plants/animals unless the critter/weather is a key, distinguishing part of your campaign. Also, economics - you don't need lots of detail, just an idea of what caravans/ships would be shipping into Dulsetania and what they'd be carrying back out. A few other cultural details such as wardrobe and national holidays might be worth mentioning if you have the space.
Some things worth plenty of detail - a timeline (major events only up until about 100 years past, then less-important stuff can start showing up.) Politics (including the dominant race of each nation, the government system they use, and their interaction with any raiders, bandits or nomadic tribes in the region). Centers of population and ruined former centers of population. Dominant religions (and a few minor ones or even cults). Also, you'll want to either establish a 'thematically appropriate zone' for certain classes (I'm thinking particularly of the Cavalier, Ninja and Gunslinger but there are others) or ban them (remember, the ban can always be lifted if you later expand and a culturally appropriate homeland becomes available.)
Thanks for the advice. I'm seriously considering limiting it to North America for now.
|
I'm doing a RPG setting called Res Publica. It uses the US states for regional sizes.
The Forest of Perceived Utterances is the geographical size of Hawaii and the Hateful Forest is the Size of Rhode Island. The scale is a 56 square mile /8 mile diameter per hex.
And yes I am once again mapping using MS Word.
|
This is an Eberron-inspired world spanning setting with heavy use of fantasy counterpart cultures. However, part of making a campaign setting is covering the countries in detail. With a world spanning campaign setting using countries based on real life, this is going to be incredibly difficult due to the sheer number of countries.
So, here's my idea. Instead of covering the whole world in detail, cover a selection of 16 countries that I think would be cool to adventure in in detail, and leave the rest of the world up to the GMs who want to go to those areas. Here's the selection of countries to cover in detail that I picked, listed by the IRL cultures they are fantasy counterparts of:
Great Britain (Including Ireland)- B
Australia - B
California - B
Canada - B
Hawaii - B
New England - B
South Africa - B
Egypt - B
Mexico - B
Louisiana - B
Vinland - A
Thailand - A
Canton (a region of southern China) - A
Persia - A
Japan - A
Brazil - AThe countries with Bs are part of the British Commonwealth (With Mexico and Louisiana as special cases. They are not English speaking, they are Spanish and French speaking, respectively, and have no British colonial history. They joined up with the British for security after a revolt from Spain.), while the As are allies of the British but not part of the Commonwealth. Vinland is what you get if the Norse colonize the Mid Atlantic. In this world, Britain once was a mighty colonial power, but has since declared colonialism to have been very mean of them and made reforms to the Commonwealth to distance itself from the practice.
I also plan to offer basic information about the bad guys that Britain and her allies may have to face, which would be:
Spain
Germany
Russia
India
ArabiaThese are all expansionist, and Spain is still actively colonizing stuff (Which is why Britain accepted Mexico and Louisiana into their Commonwealth. Protecting them from the dastardly Spanish makes them feel like they are atoning for their own colonial past.). There is also...
I have interest in writing a new world, unfortunately I find it very difficult to do it alone. I am noticing right now that without at least a second person, my ideas are stale and the time spent building is much slower than I would like.
Do you have anyone else helping you or are you trying to do this alone?
I have interest in writing a new world, unfortunately I find it very difficult to do it alone. I am noticing right now that without at least a second person, my ideas are stale and the time spent building is much slower than I would like.
Do you have anyone else helping you or are you trying to do this alone?
I work alone with advice off of these boards.
One is the loneliest number that you'll ever do.I work alone with advice off of these boards.I have interest in writing a new world, unfortunately I find it very difficult to do it alone. I am noticing right now that without at least a second person, my ideas are stale and the time spent building is much slower than I would like.
Do you have anyone else helping you or are you trying to do this alone?
I wish I had a couple other people. I really do.
I would not mind writing with someone. I would need to meet them in person and we would need to have a confidentiality agreement, but I am someone very interested in writing a world. Are either of you interested and do either of you live in the Midwest?
No. Sorry. I don't live there. Plus, I may move soon.
What if I started with just New England, California, and Canada?
How are they connected? New England and Canada fine, but how do you bring California into it without detailing everything in-between?
0.o? This seems kinda interesting, but I'm a little confused.
If this is supposed to be some alternate history where the British common-wealth reformed and began incorporating colonial interests into its politics, then there's a whole slew of implications regarding how history theoretically moved forward.
For example: Mexico could still revolt from mother Spain, but the regions of Califorinia, the Mid-West, and Texas would probably not have necessarily split-off from Mexico, since the history of those regions of the U.S. are so intimately tied with Manifest destiny.
Louisiana was mostly uninhabited when the French sold it to Jefferson, save of course for some Native American tribes that eventually got exterminated by the white man, so for Louisiana to be a fledgling nation state nestled between Mexico and New England (Which I will broaden to not only Include as far north as main, but also as far South as Georgia), There would have to be a heavier push for colonization in that region.
This also painfully glosses over one of the more prominent (albeit declining) empires of the Colonial Era, the Ottoman Empire. One of the regions listed as part of the Commonwealth is Egypt. However, Egypt was never occupied by Britain until 1882. Before then it was an autonomous state under the protection, and owing loyalty to, the Ottomans.
etc. etc. etc.
But of course, all of these things beg the important question of "When?" If the crown decided to incorporate American issues in how it ran the colonies, and thus started it's movement against imperialism then, then Hawaii, South Africa, Australia, and other regions would either have been colonized by other powers (in the worst of cases) or have gone through some massive and quick sociological changes (Think Meiji Era Japan) as the Commonwealth opened these new regions to trade and commerce.
0.o? This seems kinda interesting, but I'm a little confused.
If this is supposed to be some alternate history where the British common-wealth reformed and began incorporating colonial interests into its politics, then there's a whole slew of implications regarding how history theoretically moved forward.
For example: Mexico could still revolt from mother Spain, but the regions of Califorinia, the Mid-West, and Texas would probably not have necessarily split-off from Mexico, since the history of those regions of the U.S. are so intimately tied with Manifest destiny.
Louisiana was mostly uninhabited when the French sold it to Jefferson, save of course for some Native American tribes that eventually got exterminated by the white man, so for Louisiana to be a fledgling nation state nestled between Mexico and New England (Which I will broaden to not only Include as far north as main, but also as far South as Georgia), There would have to be a heavier push for colonization in that region.
This also painfully glosses over one of the more prominent (albeit declining) empires of the Colonial Era, the Ottoman Empire. One of the regions listed as part of the Commonwealth is Egypt. However, Egypt was never occupied by Britain until 1882. Before then it was an autonomous state under the protection, and owing loyalty to, the Ottomans.
etc. etc. etc.
But of course, all of these things beg the important question of "When?" If the crown decided to incorporate American issues in how it ran the colonies, and thus started it's movement against imperialism then, then Hawaii, South Africa, Australia, and other regions would either have been colonized by other powers (in the worst of cases) or have gone through some massive and quick sociological changes (Think Meiji Era Japan) as the Commonwealth opened these new regions to trade and commerce.
This was meant as using fantasy counterpart cultures heavily based off of the real world, not actually using the real world, but I'm loosening up on this, so this thread is null. The idea was an empire HEAVILY based off of Britain that, in it's waning days, backed off of the racism and imperialism when it realized that it was close to collapse and needed to either do a heel face turn or fail.
The problem is that I was trying way too hard to be true to the real world. Although I am basing things off real world cultures, I need to stop trying so hard to be realistic and start being, well, fantastic. After all, this is a Pathfinder campaign setting, even if everyone does have guns, and Pathfinder is fantasy. Erefore, this thread is no longer useful. I'm still basing some stuff off of Britain, the Wild West (which needs to be unrealistic, seeing as how the real Wild West was actually less violent and crime ridden than the modern day, contrary to popular belief, and I want to capture the uberviolent myths, not the more boring real thing), New England, Egypt, and other real life countries, but I am moving very far from the ral world.
Oh I see, that would be interesting. Have fun, and good luck with your attempts at getting this published.