Edit sorry I was way to vague and bad explained question. But great explanation everyone.
If you start playing as a player in a homebrew world that I built. How little information would you feel needed to be able read before you can build a character in it?
I have been planing to start looking for players soon but I struggling as I don’t want to give them a whole novel of mostly boring lore dump but sending them like two sentients feels just silly.
Not to mention would you as a player like reference to other mediums so you could quickly know what to expect or would you rather have a in game view of it?
I mean, nothing. I’ll just assume standard fantasy tropes exist somewhere, keep my pitch brief and anywhere I need proper names you’ll get or whatever.
It’s not ideal but I’ve done it plenty of times.
Comparisons with other media can be a powerful shorthand, but reference the wrong things and it can be extremely off-putting. Over the years I’ve learned that DMs referencing some media, even things I like, can be a massive red flag. Nothing triggers my flight instinct from a game quicker than seeing the advert reference anime.
Good it sounds like I ahould work on a little crash course but I don’t need to to worry to much what I miss
I felt the same regard reference but wanted to check as it saved some time this like Stormfell but with undead servants. Instead of a three sentences but it felt so cheep.
Being able to say something like “It’s like ___ but with ___” isn’t cheap, it’s crucial. Being able to play out scenes at the table relies on everyone having a similar (-enough) idea in their head about what this world is like, and the amount they’re going to be able to get from you in advance is very limited. That’s why standard settings like the Sword Coast can feel so cliched - D&D runs on cliche. Short blurbs are better than detailed infodumps, and art is even better if you can find any.
I ran a game of Blades in the Dark for some friends a while back, which has a really cool setting, but because it was so out there it kept getting in the way - we’d be getting into a scene, and then someone would remember “Oh yeah, it’s always night here” or “chickens don’t exist here” or “Don’t we all know that corpses turn into ghosts after a while? Maybe we shouldn’t have left that guy there” and it would derail the whole session.
Also that’s another reason letting your players fill in the gaps in your worldbuilding is so powerful - not only does it make them more invested in the world and story by giving them a feeling of ownership, which changes the way they behave towards NPCs and reduces the risk of them going full murderhobo on your beautiful creations, but also having information about the world be tied to cool moments at the table makes that information way stickier in everyone’s minds. I’d go even further and say make sure you leave plenty of gaps for them to fill in - every detail you ‘miss’ is an opportunity.
But would you not feel the scene was even more derailed if the player said remember this is like Halloweentown when they trying to figure if it worth buying the fancy torches?
Also don’t it give “demand” that all player know the reference? Because for me I know it ever darkness but you didn’t? Instead had a 5 sentence description that you can quickly look it up and said it was ever lasting night.
Absolutely with you on giving the players the freedom to shape the world from mine to ours. That is the very reason I try to figure out how much lore I can get away not giving players so they feel part of world but also shape it.
Not at all, although admittedly my table is definitely more on the slapstick than the dramatic side.
Absolutely, e.g. BitD referencing the game Dishonored, which some of my players hadn’t played.
I guess I should walk that recommendation back and say that if everyone is familiar with the media, and it fits the tone of the game you’re running, then references can be a powerful tool.