Topic: Genre Settings

[PhillipAEllis]

G'day!

This topic has been brushed upon elsewhere, and I was wondering how we feel about genre books, such as Monte Cook's Dark Space, or the Robin Hood setting, both from RM2. Would you buy a setting? Would you buy a setting only if it were supported (as with a campaign, adventures, etcetera)? Or would you feel otherwise, maybe being ambivalent, maybe not buying them, maybe even something else.

And feel free to discuss the sorts of genre supplements you like, hate, feel indifferent to, and so on.

[chippermonks]

I voted yes: I am in love with the setting presented by Shades of Darkness. At the very least, genre settings can provide a sense of "how things work" if you are looking for a temporary theme to your game (O, my players are visiting a downtrodden village ruled by an insane demon overlord? Better check Shades of Darkness to get some ideas of how the populace acts in a given day)

[ironmaul]

I chose other as I no longer play RPG's anymore. I would buy novels or a novelette based on a genre to my liking and if that really took my fancy then perhaps I'd think about buying a short adventure setting for bit of fun with a few friends. So far ICE has two fantasy setting and three sic-fi settings so I don't think much will happen beyond the scope of other settings. That is unless you become a separate licensed entity and use RM as your default system like Defendi did with Echo's of Heaven. Actually that's the only way I think that would work.
I don't mind dark faery settings or stuff like Once Upon A Time. Steampunk is interesting I could get into that but honestly I don't see myself getting back into playing RPG anymore...I'll just continue to snorting graphite.

[rdanhenry]

Depends on the genre. Plus, of course, is it any good and can I afford it.

[jdale]

It would have to be not good but great. In general I'd rather use my own setting. I would prefer to buy pieces that I can fit into my setting than something complete.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Yeah, that.

I'm in the "maybe" column, because when I see a pre-made world I tend to pick through and find out "what's wrong with it," in other words what I would do differently. So "maybe" translates into "if I could 'port it into my own setting without too much tweaking."

[rdanhenry]

Yeah, I was looking at the genre part, missed the "setting" bit. I would be interested in a Steampunk sourcebook or any of a number of other genres, but the more material that was defining a specific setting, the less my interest would be.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Well to be fair, the reason I put quotes around "what's wrong with it" is because it's only "wrong" in terms of "not MY way." But then if I'm the GM, the guy who tells the Gods what to believe, there is actually a valid argument to be made in favor of having the arrogance to equate "not MY way" with "wrong."

 

So I wouldn't be too surprised if that's a problem RPG writers run up against on a regular basis.

[RandalThor]

I voted yes, mainly because I have in the past, but with the obvious caveat of: if I like it. (Duh.)

[arakish]

I voted yes.  I will buy a genre setting if for no other reason than for some ideas.  The only one I actually played that I purchased was Dark Space. 

rmfr

[intothatdarkness]

Is this a discussion of genre books, settings for said genres, or both? I'd like to see good genre books for RMU, and some of those would likely need setting products (depending on the genre, of course). Not necessarily a full world setting, but an area that GMs could use to kickstart their games and maybe flesh out and expand (as well as provide stages for future module products).

[VladD]

I'd be seeing this done in the following way:

Slowly release a few genre/ setting books; see which sells more, or generates more interest and then develop and maintain that setting.

RM has a long, and partially successful history of releasing source books; such as vikings, dark space, shades of darkness, time riders and robin hood. I played a good many of those earlier ones and its thoroughly enjoyable, but somehow the ultimate setting of JRR Tolkien stuck as the best one for my players.

Personally I'd be interested in getting on board of a successful comic like Girl Genius and write the book for that  steam punk setting, or something like RM Rome and expand it; because that is such an interesting period.

[Cory Magel]

I voted maybe.  I buy random bits and pieces from various settings regardless of the setting (and sometimes even genre) and plug parts of them into my own setting.  I have vinyl maps that are D&D towns/cities, I have the full Ptolus PDF and large vinyl map, I have a large map of Ahnk-Morpork printed on foam-core that I'm filling in the details of myself to use as the characters primary home base.

I wouldn't use a setting as-is unless it was DAMN good and I didn't have to wait years for it to become so.  I mean fleshed out to point of absurdity (Ptolus almost fits the bill).

[Urbaman]

Don't know how to vote; It'd be YES.
Yes to genrebooks (steam, horror, history, modern, ...) and to settingbooks for ideas to steal for my own ones.

Cheers,

[mocking bird]

Maybe as well.  In general if our group goes to a different system I will pick up some.  I have numerous ones rarely if ever used.  I don't see myself picking up one just for the sake of doing it unless we might be using it in gameplay - like our current Pathfinderish game or if we play Dark Heresy series games again.  I also have numerous never read AD&D pdf's.  Like others have mentioned - I don't think we have ever played anything right out of the box.

[tillon]

I said yes but only if it was Shades of Darkness and only if they put out more....I love that setting and it never went any were.

[intothatdarkness]

I ended up voting Yes, but only if genre books are supported. I do think it's a mistake to tie a genre book permanently to a setting (you can't use our Steampunk stuff unless you buy Londonium Gaslight, for example), but I also think you need to put at least some setting and support stuff out there if you want a genre to really take off. In some cases running a good genre campaign requires a fair amount of historical background/knowledge (Outlaw and Pirates from RM2 spring immediately to mind), and there's only so much that can be put into one book. Having a good generic setting (a town, set of islands, etc.) can really help people get going with those products.

[GrumpyOldFart]

My problem with setting books of any kind has always been the problem of "the box." I've been saying for decades that no GM can build a box so big or so well sealed his players can't crawl out of it somehow. And in fairness, the same kind of relationship applies between GMs and sourcebook, setting and RPG writers (I offer the RMU playtest threads as Exhibit A to support that hypothesis). But the problem is compounded from the GM's point of view if he relies on the sourcebook/module/whatever, because when his players crawl out of the author's box, the GM is kind of stuck in the middle with no support.

On the other hand, if he has to go spontaneously world-building outside the box anyway, he may as well have saved his money.

So the problem is how to make the players want to stay in the box drawn by the author, without players or GM being actually railroaded into it.

[intothatdarkness]

Part of that is really dependent on the setting, IMO. In espionage or military themed games it's relatively easy to keep players in the "box." But those games also demand that the "box" be a good one with plenty of detail and focus to keep the players engaged. It also demands that guidelines be provided so that when/if players stray out of the "box," the GM isn't left totally in the lurch.

A good box is actually more of a stepladder with handholds. I happen to think they can be done. They also serve a valuable function by providing examples for new (or unsure) GMs. Not every GM springs fully formed from the brow of the rulebooks, after all. They, like players, need help and examples. The trick is to make sure that the rules can stand on their own without too many links to a specific setting. This works better in more modern settings, obviously, but can have application to fantasy as well.

[GrumpyOldFart]

Part of that is really dependent on the setting, IMO. In espionage or military themed games it's relatively easy to keep players in the "box."

I think that's because such settings are mission oriented. You go in, you do the job, you get out.

I happen to think they can be done.

So do I, I'm just stating the problem. "A good box" is, 1) "walled" with persuasion rather than rules or attempts to make the edges impassable, 2) filled with interesting stuff in the center to keep folks away from the walls in the first place, 3) modular, so you can hook on other boxes when you want, and 4) generic enough that it can be "plugged in" to more than one setting within the genre.

That way when the players get bored and decide to go outside the box, there's a reasonable chance of having another suitable box on hand for them to go into.