Crunch and Fluff in the Diamond Throne

Ruins of Intrigue Design Diary, Part 2

By Mike Mearls
In part one of the Ruins of Intrigue design diary, I talked about how I came up with the book's basic format. Rather than reveal a canonical truth about the city of Serathis, Ruins of Intrigue gives you several plausible motivations, goals, or attitudes for each important NPC. These options allow you to tailor the city to fit the needs of your campaign. This installment covers the basic process of building Serathis.

One of the most persistent bits of conventional wisdom regarding roleplaying games is the dichotomy between "fluff" -- descriptions of settings, characters, places and events -- and "crunch" -- rules material such as feats, prestige classes, and spells. It seems like a logical divide. For reasons that spread far beyond the scope of this article, we have a cultural tendency to place science (crunch) and the humanities (fluff) as far apart as possible. In roleplaying games, this manifests in the idea that gaming material neatly falls into one of those two silos.

Lies I say! Lies!

A truly interesting design synthesizes the game mechanics and the story material into a coherent whole. Let's say you design a world where elves have blue skin. If that change has no effect on how the game plays, it's likely to escape the players' notice unless the DM beats them over the head with it. I call these "By the way..." designs. Like this:

DM: "You arrive in town after a few days of hard travel."

Guy Playing an Elf: "OK, I need more spell components so I look for a shop that sells them."

DM: "Sounds good. By the way, you're still blue."

Guy Playing an Elf: "Right!"

This aspect of the setting has no real effect on the game. Though the elves are a weird color, it has no impact on how the players act, the choices they make, and the abilities or situations their characters face. Obviously, this is an extreme example, but the nugget of truth there applies to a lot of roleplaying game design. If something is important to the setting, it should have some effect on how the game works. If a change doesn't actually change anything, why bother with it?

The experience of a roleplaying game results from the combination of the story elements and the game mechanics. Neither can produce an enjoyable game experience on its own. The space where they meet creates the game. Breaking down game design into two components is a false dichotomy spawned by a factor outside of gaming: our cultural tendency to separate science and engineering from the humanities. Mechanics play an important role in defining the story elements of a game, just as the story elements shape the game choices, decisions, and mechanical priorities of the system.

So far, this might sound obvious. Most roleplaying game designers know that a system should support a setting. If your game is about heroic warriors who fight their way through entire battalions of enemy soldiers, the rules should allow the PCs to absorb a lot of attacks. If the average hero has 5 hit points, and the typical sword blows deals 6 points of damage, the rules don't support that sort of action.

Yet, roleplaying game design also works in the opposite direction. The setting elements should reflect the rules, support the mode of play suggested by the mechanics, and provide a logical, believable milieu for play. If the rules make it easy to produce magic items, I would expect to see merchants and shops that deal in potions, scrolls, wands, and so forth. More importantly, if the rules assume that the PCs have access to magic items, the presence of such shops makes it easier for the party members to equip themselves.

The relationship isn't always so direct. Imagine a game of heroic action where the PCs are mighty warriors capable of defeating an entire army. Now, set that game in a world where good has triumphed over evil. Without anyone to fight, what's the point of having all those combat skills? If the game is about fighting, then the setting should give me plenty of foes to smite.

Bringing it All Together

So what does all of this have to do with Ruins of Intrigue? A lot.

Arcana Evolved presents a setting where the basic conflict lies between the giants and the dragons. It also drops alignments in favor of ambiguity in NPC attitudes and presents character options for both sides of the conflict (giant and dracha as PC races). I decided early on that Ruins of Intrigue had to focus on the basic conflict in the game, liberally spiced with shades of grey to allow the DM and players to run a game from the point of view of the dragons, the giants, or one of the many groups caught in the middle. Chances are that if you like Arcana Evolved, you like the basic concept behind the setting and the conflict within it. You can run a lot of adventures in Arcana Evolved that have nothing to do with the elements that make it unique, but only Arcana Evolved can support that bits and pieces that make it unique.

With all that in mind, the ruined city of Serathis took shape. I built up a short list of components that the city needed, then created story elements to support each component.

The Giants and the Dragons: These two factions, and the conflict between them, helps make Arcana Evolved a unique game. They had to be at the center of the action, but if they engaged in open fighting, the conflict could quickly consume all possibilities. I didn't want Ruins of Intrigue to offer only one type of adventure. Thus, the conflict needed to be low-key, something short of open fighting. The concept of the ruins fit this desire perfectly. Both sides want the treasures, artifacts, and wealth hidden there, but the dangerous lurking monsters make direct competition risky. If the two sides fall to fighting, the ruins could consume them both. Thus, both sides have an uneasy truce. They don't really trust each other, but for now they have to.

The Conflict Must Be Ambiguous: Since the PCs could side with the dragons or the giants, I couldn't paint one side as evil and the other side as angelic. Yet, in a campaign a DM might decide to cast either side as pure villains. My decision to present options rather than one truth really shined here, since I was able to design multiple variants depicting each faction as helpful, neutral, or hostile. DMs can easily configure the giants and the dragon in Serathis to fit their vision for the campaign.

The PCs Must Be Important: A recently discovered ruin appealed to me, since it gives a DM a good excuse to place the characters at center stage. There hasn't been a chance for a clear, stratified social order to emerge in Serathis. The PCs could start at 1st level as neophyte explorers and work their way up to become some of the most powerful people in town while remaining at the center of the most important events in the ruins. At low levels, the PCs can uncover artifacts and sites within the ruins that are important to the campaign without stretching the game's credibility. After all, the ruins are mostly unexplored. As the characters gain levels, their personal might and their actions allow them to climb the ruins' social and political ladder.

The Ruins Must Support the Game's Structure: In other words, there had to be a place for low-level PCs to adventure, and regions they could progress into as they gain levels. In Serathis, the ruins become more dangerous as you wander farther from the settled areas. The giants and the dragons take care to drive away powerful monsters that could threaten the settlement in Serathis. Low-level PCs can adventure in the civilized area or just outside its walls. As they gain levels, they can embark on expeditions that venture deeper into the ruins. There's a clear connection between the party's level and the areas of the ruins that are appropriate to them. In addition, the distant ruins hold greater treasures and deeper secrets. Not only do they provide an appropriate challenge, but there's a logical reason for the PCs to go there.

All four of those points rolled together to give Serathis its final shape. The different regions within the ruins support different levels of play, and game background explains why they're arranged that way. The different options for the NPCs and locations allow you to tailor the ruins to fit your group's characters and the campaign.

Hopefully, this article gave you some insight into how roleplaying game design is the synthesis of setting and rules creation. Neither can exist without the other, and in the case of Ruins of Intrigue I tried to do a good job of both. Even when you work on material with no direct bearing on the setting or the mechanics, you need to think about where your work lies in relation to the game as a whole.

Related Articles