Source
r/rpg•
GabeFS

How to create a good "dead world"?

Game Master

I'm a GM that's geared toward more epic campaigns, but got interested in some Dark Fantasy world building. I like the Dark Souls-style of world building were you arrive in an world that has died and the people in it lingered on, it has some interesting NPCs with interesting stories, all with that dread and palpable sense of "this guy could fail at any moment", but I fear that too much gloom and dread might be uninteresting for my players. Any tips for making a world with so little hope in it more likeable?

Posted Feb 2, 2022, 12:12 PM UTC

3222
Macduffle•

A way to make a good dead world imo, is to make it a living world.

No world starts of being dead. Make a triving living world first, and when that is done... KILL IT! That way you have the history, the npcs and plothooks that make a dead world so interesting. D&D has the famous Dark Sun setting that does this very well. Maybe take a look at it for some inspiration!

40
GabeFSOP•

I like it. Same steps as a normal campaign, but with the added finale of "kill this". And how "dead" is Dark Sun? It may be the kind of thing I'm after, and if not it could serve as well. Thanks a lot.

2
Macduffle•

It could be deader imo, its an old setting afteral before the rise of popular "dark"media like dark souls. Because of this it looks more like post-apocalyptic. Dark Sun really shows the decline of multiple great civilisations who time and time again destroy the world (and the sun) just a bit more until almost nothing remains but memories.

1
JavierLoustaunau•

Mork Borg does a decent job of this in that you are more likely to find corpses than NPC and the whole world is undergoing an apocalypse (roll to get closer to the end). It kinda makes sense that you only find ruins, cultists, undead and madmen.

No such thing as too much gloom in the OSR adjacent scene, although... when I created a horror game I did this metaphor of scuba diving. You dive, you come up for air. That is the circle. In my game that meant going into a haunted house (and gaining dread) and going outside to have your dread drain away.

You can be planar explorers, sent to plunder / rescue / explore / whatever a dead world... but you can return to your vibrant plane. Go in, gain corruption, horror, haunting, sadness, tragedy... come out and drink, party, meditate, seek psychological help with an alienist.

The more you level up, the longer you can spend gathering great wealth in the dead world, but the more the dead world changers you.

15
vtipoman•

Hm.. maybe state that an offshoot of humanity left the world a long time ago, perhaps before/during the "collapse"? That way, the PCs can be stuck on a dead world, but at least there's the hope of knowing that humanity is living on properly SOMEWHERE.

4
WayParty8666•

Give the npc’s stated goals they are making progress towards. Something that understates their hope for change and an enduring mindset.

3
Lwmons•

My world hass three types off Wish spells. Limited, normal, and Unlimited. Unlimited Wishes are powered by stars. If you use one, there is a minor chance that the star our world orbits will extinguish. It doesn't go completely dark, it gives off enough light and heat to sustain life, but the world is plunged into an eternal twilight, which means all the nasties like vampires and such can come out to play permanently.

2
DwizKhalifa•

I can't believe no one mentioned "Aesthetics of Ruin" yet! This is one of the foundational blog posts of the modern old school/grimdark gaming movement. The intro sets it into a bit of a specific time and place but when Joseph digs into the details it's an incredibly evocative analysis that you should definitely plunder.

2
volkovoy•

I big point would be to not agonize too much over the lore. You want to leave big gaps in history and meaning. Dark Souls works so well in big part due to evocative suggestion of facts, the fun is in the interpretation.

1
ergotofwhy•

Look into Athas/Dark Sun. Their world is mostly dead at this point and the people yet linger. It's massively popular

1
tracertong3229•

I always reccomend reading up on history for ideas. In this case I'd read up on things like the bronze age collapse, the dust bowl, and the little ice age and how societies affected and were affected by the environment. These kinds of events tend to start feedback loops in both natural systems as well as social ones that culminate in little apocalypses that would be great to understand for your purposes.

1
Zaorish9•

Include a few immortal or survivor npcs with clear goals among the ruins. A computer who was programmed to rebuild and restore, a mutant survivor who wants to keep her children safe and healthy, a ghost who still believes he can win a long lost war.

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
Glasnerven•

Maybe it was a "prison area" (like historical Australia, but with less weird stuff going on)

I like how our advice on how to create a hellscape of a world suitable for gaming includes "like Australia, but not that bad."

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
Carrollastrophe•

"but I fear that too much gloom and dread might be uninteresting for my players"

Ask them what they want. Ask them what they like. Decide together what you want to play. Hell, create the world together that you want to play in. You don't have to try and guess this stuff. Yeah, surprises can be fun, but being thrown into something with little to no knowledge can be a major turn-off. If you're ever not sure about how your players will react just ask them.

1
SharkSymphony•

Consider Eox as a potential model. Dead world, sure, but with a pretty hoppin' undead civilization!

1
EvilKam•

Make sure your players find the concept interesting. For me a critical question would be "how dead, exactly?"

If I feel like it's gonna be "10 Candles", I'm out.

1
druid_of_oberon•

Dead Names is a great resource. https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/130967/Dead-Names-Lost-Races-and-Forgotten-Ruins

1
WrestlingCheese•

The trick I have found is to make sure that whilst the world isn't going to be saved, isn't going to improve, it is still changeable. There are still people working to affect changes in the world, they just aren't trying to bring it back to life.

The Fallout games have plenty of factions, all of which are trying to dominate one another, but none are trying to stop the bombs from dropping. Dark Souls has the Covenants, which have their own goals, but again are not trying to link the fire.

If the world is dead, and there's nobody trying to change it, then it becomes a static image, and that dissuades players from engaging with it on a level that is more than simply looking. At that point they're only going to be invested if they're interested in the world, which means writing lots of lore and interesting NPCs, but you're probably better off just writing a book.

As long as change is possible, though, then players will be able to engage with it, even if all they're doing is foiling the plans of some other faction that clearly wants to change things for the worse.

1
MASerra•

I fear that too much gloom and dread might be uninteresting for my players.

Dead worlds are uninteresting because they are empty and devoid of much story. Interesting NPCs will solve that issue, so you likely will not have much problem with it being uninteresting, if you players buy into interacting with NPCs.

It has been my experience that players tend to dismiss NPCs as not useful or interesting and something that gets in the way of them having fun. You need to teach them/inform them that the NPCs are important and then carry though so that the PCs can not successes or make progress without interaction with the NPCs. Make the NPCs part of the story, or they will be disregarded after they present their 'bit of info' for the players.

You do need player buy-in on this though. Once players accept that NPCs aren't there to be murdered when they are done with them, then things go better in the dead world.

0†
vontariel•

Dead worlds are uninteresting because they are empty and devoid of much story.

Yet post-apo is one of most popular type of setting, and not without a reasons :) There can be plenty of storytelling, but its requires different approach than having handy npc that explain every bit of lore and plot for players. Environmental storytelling or Show/don't tell approach can work wonders if used correctly. Leaving enough dots for players to see picture for what it is (or showing them how to connect them themselves), instead of showing them everything can make them interact with the world MUCH more. And what GM doesnt want from players to be invested?

It has been my experience that players tend to dismiss NPCs as not useful or interesting and something that gets in the way of them having fun. You need to teach them/inform them that the NPCs are important and then carry though so that the PCs can not successes or make progress without interaction with the NPCs.

Generally +1. And it's often caused by how their were presented. Also relaying too much on npcs converts them to plot devices, sort of living mcGuffins, and by result it can lead to railroading and stealing players agenda. As every tool it has it's use obviously, but overrelying on hammer makes every issue look like a nail.

Make the NPCs part of the story, or they will be disregarded after they present their 'bit of info' for the players.

And there's nothing wrong with that in general. Even players ignogance and lack of attention can be used in story. Dark souls was mentioned; there is section in sewers when you see victims of basilisks's petrification, before you see them. When you finally see them It's not specially difficult to connect those 2 together and know immediately what they can do to player. And even better example comes from plot itself - npcs have their own agenda and hide info or even lie to player to achieve their own goals. I'd suggest different thing - show them that very little can be achieved by killing npcs, and that their trinkets usually dont help much if at all. Or delay consequences of their actions - npc could be somewhat helpful in different quest and without him neutral outcome is possibile at very best.

9
MASerra•

Generally +1. And it's often caused by how their were presented.

I agree. The NPCs in my game are often very important, yet two new players to my game have said independently, "NPCs are useless, we don't need them." Which I found odd. The existing players both said at the same time to the second guy, "Well, she is our armorer, so she is really important."

I've played in a couple of games lately where the NPCs were so bland that I couldn't ever remember who they were. There were really no identifying qualities for any of the NPCs and they were, in fact, useless. I put that directly on the GM making them so.

1
Glasnerven•

Yet post-apo is one of most popular type of setting, and not without a reasons :)

A post-apocalyptic world isn't dead, though. At worst, it's terminally wounded and dying rapidly (like "The Road"). Even in a setting like Mad Max, you've got people and communities who are going on with the business of living.

In an actually dead world, there are no more ongoing stories, and you're kind of stuck with the "walking simulator" kind of game; you can recover stories from environmental clues and records left behind, but the only thing that's still happening is weathering.

Or maybe I'm taking the term "dead world" more literally than most people mean it.

1