How to create a good dark fantasy setting?
>>46699895
Don't
>>46699895
Have a good reason for the darkness of it.
>>46699895
By keeping magic from becoming commonplace and by keeping large civilizations on their back foot.
>>46699895
Watch Solomon Kane. Do that.
Copy Berserk, file the serial numbers off.
Pay homage to prevent criticism.
>>46699961
I'd say this. I'd also suggest making the magic a sinister force in the universe.
>>46699985
If you are feeling lazy this works too.
Researching old horror/weird fantasy tales like Zothique or the Night Land is a good way to get a dark fantasy feel too.
Read suicide notes and the last words of death row prisoners. Then, make them into allegories.
>>46699895
>Make a fantasy setting
>Dim the lights
>>46699926
Came here to post this and feel clever...
I've said it before, I'll say it again, you've gotta be a scary person, at some level
Is the First Law dark fantasy? I've seen it described as Grimdark (hell that's the authors ironic Twitter handle) but it only ever came across to me as being incredibly realist and Machiavellian rather than Grimdark.
>>46699895
Write a book.
Don't try to play it at the tabletop.
>>46700247
This. If you aren't presently an edgy kid, or didn't go through an edgy phase at some point, you'll have a harder go of it. I'm a bit of a scary edgelord myself and dark dim low fantasy can be so much fun to write.
>>46700328
>realist
>Machiavellian
Yeah, that would qualify id say
>>46700247
I've always trended toward the melancholy dark fantasy.
>>46700430
Blend both for maximum gloom
Theres a difference between edgy and dark.
Edgy kids put gore and rape for shock factor, a truly dark writer gets the feeling of despair through theme.
>>46699895
>How to create a good dark fantasy setting?
First, use something more descriptive than "dark". Do you mean horror? Gothic? GRIMDARK? Tragic? Evil? Dangerous? Vigilante? Trying to go for just a "generic dark" concept will just give you a generic dark setting, which almost everyone has seen before and which will quickly become dull and boring.
Second, be specific. Kind of like the first point, you want to focus on something precise and do it well. Generic dark has been done before. Supernatural monster investigation horror has been done before as well, but it's far less common and stands out quite a bit. And, for anyone who might get interested in that idea, a well-designed system is worth a look.
Third, set the tone. Be descriptive. If you want an evil setting, then describe the world and the people in it as vile as you can. Give weapons which are naturally destructive and cause collateral damage. Provide spells which just seem morally wrong.
Fourth, tailor the system to the theme. You don't just need to list a bunch of common longswords, longbows, and longspears in the equipment section. If it is a horror game, then provide only the basic weapons a common person would encounter (perhaps a good sword is the best available) and good luck fighting off werewolves with that. In a vigilante game, have more weapons available along with an extensive "black market" of good and sneaky equipment. You probably don't need moral rules in an evil setting (although an infamy tracker could make sense) but in a vigilante system, the difference between what needs to be done and being needlessly vicious is probably worth noting.
And fifth, set the tone. In the best "dark" settings I've seen, the tone provided by the books is nearly worth their price independent of system. Check out something like the World of Darkness or the Shadows of Esteren. Most of the splatbooks are worth reading just for the theme and the ideas they could provide.
>>46700506
There is, but it's almost negligible. If done right it won't even seem edgy at all.
It should be dark because we tried to hold back a natural force, something inevitable. But it failed. A brief respite at best. The sun still dies. The hope fades. The warmth departs.
Have it done for a horribly expensive cost, such a deep price that it becomes Pyrrhic, that to gain you must lose. Avoid details too, as players will think of reasons internally which will mean more to them than anything you tell them. Tell them what, but hint at why.
Atmosphere is everything. Everything.
Contrary to some belief; the world does not have to be in a doomed, dying state to be considered dark fantasy. Have bad things happen to good people. The state of the world is not black and white. Good guys don't always succeed.
>>46702063
That's just real life.
Make a tidally locked planet, set the game on the far side.
Has anyone made the opposite of Dark Souls?
Bright Bodies?
>>46699895
Steppeniggers in great abundance coming to rape and pillage everything. Migration of barbaric peoples shatters prosperity and induces feelings of the apocalypse.
Civilized armies are powerful, but divided due to petty squabbling, and unable to adapt quickly enough to the tactics of those horsebound freaks.
As in real history, expect there to be an overabundance of actual ruined cities and castles.
>>46700128
>allegories
Ugh, you are truly vile.
>>46704282
>Ugh, you are truly vile.
1. Explain.
2. >>>/lit/
>>46704294
Between the picture you posted and what you suggested it's more than obvious that you're a pretentious fucking twit whose idea of "creativity" is as hollow as the empty frames you and your ilk adorn themselves with.
>>46704177
Luminescent Mind.
>>46704282
So, the fall of Roman, Persian and Chinese empires?
Where can I read about them to get some idea where to dig?
>>46704334
>>46704294
Holy shit what kind of autism have these two conjured
>>46699895
Decide what you want out of it first and foremost.
>>46704382
Is it any good?
>>46704849
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvrtX9ZWAOE
I'd recommend listening to this rather than reading about it directly, since Dan emphasizes the human element in these events, which is the more appropriate basis for a campaign.
>>46705040
>go write about the upside of the third reich
>like that's a revolutionary idea
>as if the leaps and bounds in propulsion technology the war encouraged don't speak for themselves
>like we don't already have scores of books about how nice it is to know so much more about hypothermia
>>46705040
thank you
>>46705103
Yeah Dan's kind of a cuckservative, especially when it comes to the Nazis, but he's also a good storyteller and tends to reject the deconstructivist notions of history. Generally speaking, as long as it doesn't involve the Nazis or the USSR, he calls a spade a spade.
>>46702186
>tfw
>>46704282
Y'know, you could just as easily replace the Mongols with any struggle not over some land or title and you'd get the same effect.
People predict the apocalypse at the drop of a hat; you don't need the Mongols trouncing everyone in China and Eastern Europe to get people to do that.
Consider, perhaps, the Year Without A Summer or the build-up to the French Revolution, where you get persistent crop failures and mass starvation, or the bubonic plague, where the world simply died.
>>46705299
>any struggle not over some land or title
Prove to me that those exist.
>>46705307
Point. But I meant in the sense of some feudal lord claiming that since the land belonged to his grandfather, it was rightfully his, etc. etc.
>>46705299
>Y'know, you could just as easily replace the Mongols with any struggle not over some land or title and you'd get the same effect.
You really can't. The Huns and the Mongols and the Sea Peoples (and a few others like the Scythians) stand out as destroyers of entire empires and ages. Planet Earth was irrevocably changed in the wake of the incursions of these barbarian peoples, and those on the receiving end of that destruction were utterly shocked and dismayed by it. As much as it's fashionable to act like barbarians were not so different from the civilized people, at the end of the day there were understandings, if not rules, for war in the civilized world. You didn't go and butcher and raze whole cities full of people, treating them like animals.
When Rome went and sacked Carthage even Roman contemporaries recognized it as barbaric, as the darkest moment in Roman Republican history, and those who commanded it were in severe emotional distress. But what the Romans did to Carthage was small potatoes compared to what barbarians like the Mongols did to hundreds of cities, and they didn't bat an eye at the ordeal.
>>46699895
> How to create a good dark fantasy setting?
One feature that appears almost universally in dark fantasy, and the thing that makes it dark in my opinion, is that there is no truely good options.
this startsa at the concepts of divinity. You can have deity's, and they don't always need to be baby eating evil, but there needs to be a distict disconnect between their plans and goals and those of humanity. Some good non-edgy examples are the various polyhtheistic pantheons of the ancient world, with gods that did their own thing and did noot care that much about humanity, as long as they got their worship.
This attitude also extendends to magic, which tends to be evil,or at least draws on sinister forces. Even in cases where good people are able to use it, it is dangerous, and certainly not a solution for all problems.
But mostly, this attitude is reflected on people, and the societies they live in. Dark fantasy tends not to have clear-cut lines between good and evil, and no karmic bonuses for people that do good. people can suffer for doing the right thing, or chooosse to do the wrong thing for the benefits and still be sympathetic. Moving through society will most likely require a decent amount of realpolitik, making immoral choices to achieve something better.
Of course, despite what some people think, the existence of nuances and shades of gray does not mean that morallity doesn't exist enymore and everyone turns crazy evil. People may differ on what defines good and evil, but ultimately, almost everyone has their own moral compass, and will try to get as close as to can to being "good', even if they will have to compromise with what is, possible, what is practical, and for some, what is easiest for them.
I'm personally of the opinion that any fantasy setting is a dark fantasy/horror setting for someone. For every quest about a dragon or orc tribe or werewolf or something that has been terrorizing a region, for all of the people in that region for however long the problem was there for, that was basically a nightmare scenario. Take your typical fantasy setting and think about what it's like from the perspective of the people who aren't able to fight monsters. If you really want a setting entirely devoted to being dark fantasy then remove the heroes entirely, dragons with no knights to slay them, undead rise from the forest and there is no holy light to drive them back.
Although I will add one more thing, I suggest this to anyone running a darker game, don't forget to have some hope. Players will only feel the darkness if they're invested, they can only get invested if they believe that they have a chance of achieving their goals, let them save their village, make them pay dearly but let it happen. You need to give them things they don't want to lose if you hope to show them the cruelty of the world by taking it away, this means giving them things they like, that they can enjoy, a spot of happiness, and because of the hope bit you have to give them a chance, however slim, of protecting them. Then they'll feel every loss.
Also remember, dark fantasy doesn't mean that good is absent, simply outnumbered and outgunned.
>>46705537
You do not recognize the contradiction between "They did not do these things" and then citing a specific example of what you consider a settled people doing exactly that?
Whole cities got put to the sort really rather often, from the ancient world through near to today. It's just that settled peoples often saw the city as a part of their prize; razing it was largely a waste of future resources. The Mongols didn't really have such a view.
Alexander destroyed Tyre basically because he was unhappy; slaughtered those who had fought against him, crucified many civilians on a whim, and sold everyone else into slavery; burning the city, and he's just the first example who comes to mind.
The Mongols weren't an aberration, and ideas like the Rules of War only really applied to the nobility in Europe. You honoured the surrender of knights, but not of peasants; you honoured the property of lords, but not of serfs. There was plenty of burning but rarely mass slaughter because peasants were property, after all; why kill what you intend to capture?
I could go on.
The Black Death is better anyway, because it's omnipresent; a persistent paranoia that a small cough might be the first sign that your entire village is going to die within days. It is an omnipresent, unknowable threat that makes the world worse and more vulnerable in its wake.
