Which setting do you like better?

[skew]

Starting about a year ago, I started working on developing a story for a MU. The goal was to make something in the Chronicles of Darkness setting, liking using Changeling. Since then, I've ditched the CofD and Changeling stuff, and started working on my own unique world. Most of the development up until this point has been the cosmology and ancient history of the world, with the goal of setting the "live" story in this developed world.

Now, I am not saying I'm making a MU. This could end up a table top game, a story, or anything else. But it could also end up a MU! I'm tickled with the idea of learning real (as in, not MUSHcode) coding with a real project.

So, I wanted to ask you all what seemed like a more exciting setting (and potentially a more enjoyable MU). Note that both of these settings would be unique - I am surely borrowing from a lot of stuff, but they will be mostly original, and the RPG system to back them would likely be original, too.

Setting 1: The Cyber/Steam Punk Low Fantasy World (like Final Fantasy VII)
A blend between low fantasy and various cyber/steam punk elements, ala Final Fantasy VII. There would be guns powered by strange forces no one really understands, and they would be rare and expensive. Swords (and the like) would be the most common means of defense. Magic would be rare and prized, and most of the "science" of the world would be studying the magic left behind by a race of Angels that has left the world.

• Pros:
• Modernish technology in some places: crystals that can send brief messages, trains that run on mystical energy, a lot of freedom to have anything be "in theme"
• A very fictional world is easier to free from common misconceptions, biases, etc.
• I love Final Fantasy VII.
• Cons:
• A LOT of writing, and no real-world equivalent to lean on.
• Possibly low appeal, as people tend to enjoy stuff they're already comfortable in?

Setting 2: Steam Punk Magic 1890s St. Petersburg, Russia. (Disney's Anastasia meets Studio Ghibli's Castle In The Sky and yes some Penny Dreadful blended in.)
Turn of the century tech meets magic and steam punk tech. This setting isn't too far from the above, the major difference I see is in how common "technology" is, and how the life of the average person is different. There'd be fewer swords and horses, more guns and the beginnings of cars. As above, magic would exist, but would be rare and prized. There would still be left-behinds from an ancient race of angels that influence society - though modern tech would be replacing angel artifacts (Ex: Why use this ridiculously expensive communication crystal when you can send an electric telegraph?).

• Pros:
• Real world examples to lean on and more media examples to draw upon.
• Turn-of-the-century is when (imho) modern tech really came into it's own. People wouldn't need to be guessing what type of ink and pens existed, what type of paint could be used, sterilization was a thing, etc.
• Who hasn't watched Anastasia like 7 times in 7 days and went 'that'd be an awesome setting for a MUSH'?! (I have a 4 y/o daughter okay)
• Cons:
• Might be even harder to erase assumptions, biases, etc, that people bring in from RL knowledge.
• I might have to deal with: "yes, that existed at the time but no it doesn't exist here" and "no, please do not phonetically type out a Russian accent" and I might go insane.
• Isn't a fantasy setting, isn't a modern setting. People seem to prefer one or the other, and this might miss both groups entirely.

So, thanks for everyone who actually read all that! I thought I could add a poll but it says I can't, so I'll just link one: https://goo.gl/forms/Dxz4GuLufgTce36g2

Or reply, and let me know your thoughts. Add to my list of pros and cons. Tell me about the one time you played on a MU* with a similar setting and it sucked. Whatever you want!

[Coin]

If given a choice, the former. Though I would eschew Cyber and Steam Punk and go with Diesel Punk as a middle-ground, though it REALLY actually depends on your societal backdrop, really, to determine what kind of "-Punk" you wanna be using. Steam/Cyber are fundamentally different in what sort of world they typically exist in.

[Kanye Qwest]

I personally loathe steampunk but of the two I'd prefer option A. I didn't completely hate FF7.

[Pyrephox]

Option A. I find the premise really interesting, and think it'd be fun to game in. I also think it's probably a bit more flexible for the variety of outcomes you're considering than the historical setting. Any kind of historical setting requires a higher buy in up front from potential players to at least pretend to acquaint themselves with the mores/culture/context of the time.

[WildBaboons]

@skew said in Which setting do you like better?:

Who hasn't watched Anastasia like 7 times in 7 days and went 'that'd be an awesome setting for a MUSH'?! (I have a 4 y/o daughter okay)

I admittedly have never thought this when watching the movie (though i haven't done a 1/day marathan for a week). Does make me consider a re-watch to try and see what you saw for potential.

I would lean towards setting option 1 though. I'm not a fan of the FF games, but the magitech punkish theme is always good.

I'm wary of the term "prized and rare" from a game design perspective though. The old "everyone is a Jedi or no one is" conundrum.

[skew]

@wildbaboons said in Which setting do you like better?:

@skew said in Which setting do you like better?:

Who hasn't watched Anastasia like 7 times in 7 days and went 'that'd be an awesome setting for a MUSH'?! (I have a 4 y/o daughter okay)

I admittedly have never thought this when watching the movie (though i haven't done a 1/day marathan for a week). Does make me consider a re-watch to try and see what you saw for potential.

I think it's just the time setting. There are grand galas and balls (which everyone seems to love). There's magic undertones. There's built in conflict. There's a story being played out that's stepping in and out of the "meta plot" - mostly in the form of some grifters getting sucked into a story of magic and evil and all this stuff.

That said, I think I'm realizing my two settings are "early 1800s" vs "late 1800s". Final Fantasy VI might be a better analog for Setting 1 (which, btw, wikipedia describes as steampunk @coin ).

I'm wary of the term "prized and rare" from a game design perspective though. The old "everyone is a Jedi or no one is" conundrum.

I had my doubts, but having played on a game like Arx, I think the key thing is that no one really gets powers that are not tied directly to the story and fairly controlled. Granted @Apos has said there's intents to get more of this stuff coded, I still think it's always going to be highly restricted and tied to story.

I would aim for less "these 5 people are mages" and more "anyone with access to this ritual that's willing to pay months worth of resources can do this one thing", with a blend of "a few people can do a few small things".

[Coin]

@skew said in Which setting do you like better?:

@wildbaboons said in Which setting do you like better?:

@skew said in Which setting do you like better?:

Who hasn't watched Anastasia like 7 times in 7 days and went 'that'd be an awesome setting for a MUSH'?! (I have a 4 y/o daughter okay)

I admittedly have never thought this when watching the movie (though i haven't done a 1/day marathan for a week). Does make me consider a re-watch to try and see what you saw for potential.

I think it's just the time setting. There are grand galas and balls (which everyone seems to love). There's magic undertones. There's built in conflict. There's a story being played out that's stepping in and out of the "meta plot" - mostly in the form of some grifters getting sucked into a story of magic and evil and all this stuff.

That said, I think I'm realizing my two settings are "early 1800s" vs "late 1800s". Final Fantasy VI might be a better analog for Setting 1 (which, btw, wikipedia describes as steampunk @coin ).

I don't play FF.

But oh, well, if WIKIPEDIA SAYS SO, it MUST BE. XD

[Thenomain]

Sure, @Coin, I could call my cat "Steampunk" because it's a term devoid of meaning besides that of style. The fact that some in the steampunk community have posited that it's a post-apocalyptic setting should tell you a lot.

Dieselpunk describes a time period and a reliance on technology.

Cyberpunk describes a theme of toxic system shock and the disposability of everything including people.

Steampunk describes...well, fashion.

[Coin]

@thenomain said in Which setting do you like better?:

Sure, @Coin, I could call my cat "Steampunk" because it's a term devoid of meaning besides that of style. The fact that some in the steampunk community have posited that it's a post-apocalyptic setting should tell you a lot.

Dieselpunk describes a time period and a reliance on technology.

Cyberpunk describes a theme of toxic system shock and the disposability of everything including people.

Steampunk describes...well, fashion.

This is one of those conversations we have too often.

"Steampunk's modern incarnation may be considered a reaction to the popular dystopias of [the 1980s]: the positive power of the imagination and subversion of the New Technology Is Evil trope are common steampunk themes, although recent steampunk is increasingly likely to deal with dystopian societies, sometimes even drawing upon the works of Charles Babbage to theorize humans with mechanical brains and other things rendering them cyberpunk in all but backdrop and visual trappings."

Steampunk does not "describe fashion" as its only recourse; it is just that the fashion that tends to permeate the genre is much more distinctive than others.

[Thenomain]

@coin

Very little Steampunk describes a societal impact of technology. You know, the "punk" part of this. That which does is done well, but is a very small subset of what people call Steampunk. I'd rather it be called Vernian. Or Shellian. Or Space 1889...ian?

The Difference Engine does do steampunk very well because it's two cyberpunk authors re-imagining Neuromancer in the 1800s, and one of those writers has their very livelihood based on viewing sociology through the lens of science-fiction. Gibson pretty exclusively writes stories about people's interactions with a larger world. Two punk writers being anachronistic.

But otherwise most of Steampunk isn't really punk, and except for having grounding in Victorian era, barely even steam. Firefly is more Steampunk than a lot of what's out there. Western Steampunk, but very punk. So yeah, we'll be talking about this for a while.

[skew]

I've honestly never seen thought about the cultural implications of steampunk. I have surely thought about cyberpunk, but to me, steampunk was defining rapid advancements in technology, and a sci-fi-like technological jump that was applied backwards. Which is to say, some people going "wouldn't it be cool if we could have had steam powered pens and coal-fired walking spiders.

In this story... I am planning for the "steampunk" elements to play out in ways that clash with the other forms of technology.

There is the "old ways", which cherish the artifacts left behind by the angels. Some of these artifacts are used widely, some are locked away for safe keeping. There are factions that want to expand their use, as it's a "gift". There are those that want to stop their use, as use increases the risk of breaking, then we lose the gift. There are yet other groups that wish to replicate, copy, reproduce those artifacts - that is the group that will likely be in the lead.

This reproduced/copied angel tech will name a name, "New Tech" or something like that. I'm awful with names. There will be a lot of feelings about this, but by and large it will likely be the most widespread technology, followed closely by salvaged, repurposed, or still functional angel tech.

The other grouping of technology will be the modern methods of science. Based on this poll, people seem to prefer a lower scientific level, so I might aim for 1800 instead of 1900. Steam engines exist, but in their basic form. Some ideas of modern medicine (sterilization) might exist. But I intend for this group to look a lot more like what people think of when they say steampunk. Whirring gears, brass, etc.

These groups will clash - angel tech vs steam tech, oh my! There will be religious elements to it all. There will also be those that go "what if we put an energy crystal into a steam engine!" and start to merge the threads.

I think it'll play out nicely!

[Coin]

@thenomain said in Which setting do you like better?:

@coin

Very little Steampunk describes a societal impact of technology. You know, the "punk" part of this. That which does is done well, but is a very small subset of what people call Steampunk. I'd rather it be called Vernian. Or Shellian. Or Space 1889...ian?

The Difference Engine does do steampunk very well because it's two cyberpunk authors re-imagining Neuromancer in the 1800s, and one of those writers has their very livelihood based on viewing sociology through the lens of science-fiction. Gibson pretty exclusively writes stories about people's interactions with a larger world. Two punk writers being anachronistic.

But otherwise most of Steampunk isn't really punk, and except for having grounding in Victorian era, barely even steam. Firefly is more Steampunk than a lot of what's out there. Western Steampunk, but very punk. So yeah, we'll be talking about this for a while.

Not sure how much steampunk you've actually read, but there's a lot of stuff out there that does do justice to the "punk" aspect.

[Lemon Fox]

Setting 1! Absolutely!

[Kestrel]

Mmm, steampunk.

I would play in either one of these settings, however my vote goes for #1.

The main reason for me is that I know next to nothing about St. Petersburg, and would worry about botching Russian culture/geography/politics etc. were I to play in a Russian setting.

@skew said in Which setting do you like better?:

The other grouping of technology will be the modern methods of science. Based on this poll, people seem to prefer a lower scientific level, so I might aim for 1800 instead of 1900. Steam engines exist, but in their basic form. Some ideas of modern medicine (sterilization) might exist. But I intend for this group to look a lot more like what people think of when they say steampunk. Whirring gears, brass, etc.

Definitely nothing to do with the tech for me. I actually like the tech described in #2 better, but the angel tech (and the fact that it's not set in Russia) in #1 more.

In fact, if you could merge both settings, I say go for 'high'-tech (relatively, for a steampunk setting), low-fantasy. And definitely play up those religious themes, love me some religious fiction.

[skew]

@kestrel I ought to make that clearer. #2 wasn't meant to literally be set in Russia. I was merely using it as an example. A big, old city.

But the rest is good advice! I definitely think low-fantasy is better, as I described again. We don't all get magic, because it's a PITA to balance and account for in stories!

[Rucket]

The 1890s version makes me think of Arcanum. And I really, REALLY love that game. So I'd have to pick that option, even though I'm not totally against the first option. They both sound good, but giving me flashbacks to Arcanum make me like #2 more.