Campaign World Presentification [Archive] - Wizards Community

Campaign World Presentification [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
thetoastman
01-25-07, 07:06 PM One of the key elements of most fictional worlds is the fact that they don't accurately match the world they are intended to represent perfectly, instead, some aspects are 'translated' into more present-era terms for the benefit of the players.

I call this presentification.

Presentification takes a few basic forms. A common example is language. It is almost impossibly unlikely that in any alternate universe English would develop as it has in this one. Many words we use, like quixotic, derive from names of real-world people or places, and many more are influenced by foreign languages which do not actually exist in the fictional world. Furthermore, even in games like D&D, which are modeled loosely after medieval times, during which English was spoken, the English used was far different than the modern English today.

Effectively all fictional works written from the perspective of another era rely on presentification, whether consciously or not. World of Warcraft has a decidedly un-medieval feel, and includes not only elements that are out-of-place for its setting but many tongue-in-cheek references to the real world, like a location called 'Area 52'. The new Battlestar Galactica series does the inverse, putting modern speech, dress, thinking, and, to some extent, technology into a far-future world in which, realistically, these will change dramatically, all for the purpose of familiarizing the viewer. If anyone doubts the extent of presentification, they need only take a look at how ridiculous the hairstyles of nearly every character in any 70s or 80s television show about a different era look to the modern viewer.

My question is this- what do you consider the line where presentification should be drawn? To omit it completely would be nearly impossible, and even to attempt to rid a campaign of it as much as possible would cause players to face an insanely high, and frankly boring, learning curve. Too much presentification, however, would remove the fantasy from the D&D experience, and aggravate the expectations of the average player.

How much is too much?
allenchan
01-25-07, 07:28 PM The Short Answer: It Depends.

The Long Answer: It depends on the subject matter and the feel you want to get across. Using your examples, WoW is sprinkled with pop culture references to appeal to a large audience, and geeky references help build a social schema attached to the game itself. BSG purposefully uses real-life similes such as phones and cars, to help the viewer to relate to the characters and the concept that they are a "sister world" to earth, encouraging them to focus on the characters (In dnd, RPing) and not on the fact its sci-fi (In dnd, "zomgz magic missile!").

Other examples intentionally move away from the acceptable norm of the modern world, with the expressed intent of creating something alien and off-putting, to make the viewer/player uneasy and/or fascinated by the unknown and exoticism.

There's no black and white line between too much and not enough, but finding the right level to evoke the appropriate response is the most important thing, and the varies from campaign setting to campaign setting (and even locales in them).
Ramses III
01-25-07, 08:11 PM The answer is clear. All D&D games should be conducted completely in Elvish (both in-character and out-of-character exchanges, but not when you call to order pizza, that would be silly), the books should be written in Elvish rune-script, and you should dress up as your character at the gaming table.

Oh, right. Sorry, I'll answer seriously. Even in Medieval Europe, there was really no "common language" as most people spoke only German or English or Italian depending on where they were from. French was the closest thing to a common language, as it was the language of diplomacy -- royals and ambassadors had to be able to talk to each other to be able to make treaties, demands, arrange marriages and the like. However, in a roleplaying game you want the characters to be able to have a conversation without resorting to hiring interpreters, so a common language is a necessary tool.

There are other conventions we use as necessary "filters" to make the game actually work, such as idioms unique to contemporary language. We use a lot of expressions that would make no sense in a medieval (or fantasy) context, but it's a lot easier than demanding that everyone study Shakespeare or whatever to be able to use more period-appropriate language. Unless a player is speaking in-character in a way that's really disruptive to the game (like having their bard talk like Lil' John, or their fighter like John Wayne) one has to let modern use of language slide.
Necrosis
01-25-07, 09:18 PM keep it fun,

the game exsists in your players heads, so give them descriptions in 5 senses, keep it simple, add details without overloading them with infomation (bringing medievil snacks to the table is a good way of going about tihs :) ).

Probelm is these pieces fo advice are mutally exculsive so it take s practice and a feel for what oyur players actually want :).
Iddig Ap Nil
01-25-07, 10:24 PM I'm not too worried at all about how inaccurate my setting may be due to language, I know that if I tried to get my group to speak in "ye olde english" they'd slap me around a bit, then steal my cheetos and mountain dew...Heck, right now I'm designing a 1930s era pulp game and I'm not at all worried about getting the lingo right, it's more about high adventure then if you're using the correct accent or what have ya.
Leaves
01-25-07, 11:17 PM I think bringing up language is distracting us from your main point. When I read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" I didn't let it bother me that all the dialogue was in English, not Farsi. Even if you are fluent in another language, everything you hear and read is still mentally processed through your native tongue.

The only relevant question when you ask "how much" is what you are trying to accomplish. The only situation where you would completely eliminate modern references is if you wanted to create a world to stand on its own as a work of art, a la Tolkein. And if you are doing that, really, DnD isn't the right medium. Art is a solo activity. Dnd is social. Mix them at your own peril.

Other than that, I think the best rule in fantasy or science fiction is to change only the things that are necessary for the story. That includes a certain amount of "atmosphere" regarding foods, clothing, etc. But if you go into too many details, all you are doing is distracting the players from the story.

For an example, suppose your party goes to an inn and orders roast chicken. Now chickens are origianally from India, and most campaign settings don't have an India, so they shouldn't have chickens. But does it matter? Will the game be improved by introducing some different domestic bird with a different natural history and a different name? Probably not. So don't do it. Call it a chicken and get on with the game.
Tiberia
01-26-07, 06:34 PM Language Tolkien solved it by letting the Hobbits talk in modern idiom, the Elves and Numenoreans had an exalted Shakesperean style and the Rohirrim spoke Archaic.

Cultural references, I have solved by applying Renaissance tch rather than mediaeval tech. Printing has been invented, so the NPC know any story I want them to know. Mary Poppins is cutting edge Sci-Fi and LotR is an everyday soap opera about people like us.

I agree with Leaves
Other than that, I think the best rule in fantasy or science fiction is to change only the things that are necessary for the story. That includes a certain amount of "atmosphere" regarding foods, clothing, etc. But if you go into too many details, all you are doing is distracting the players from the story.
Undrhil
01-27-07, 01:23 AM It's really easy: just make it so there is no spoken language in your campaign. Everyone talks through Telepathy, which is a Universal language, with no need for translations. Yes, even monsters would speak telepathically. This could even provide some unique insight into the current situation:

Your group approaches a door and you can hear the thoughts of the occupants of the room on the other side.

Gnoll #1: Man, this new shampoo doesn't help with the fleas at all!
Gnoll #2: Well, at least you *get* shampoo.
Gnoll #1: Uh ... go get some shampoo!
Gnoll #2: Nah ... I like the greasy feeling of unwashed fur... plus, it's harder for adventurers to get a grip on me!

Bob: Ahh! So, that's their secret....

Gnoll #1: Hey! Someone's outside!
Gnoll #2: You think they heard about my greasy hair?

Bob: Yes.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
thetoastman 01-25-07, 07:06 PM	One of the key elements of most fictional worlds is the fact that they don't accurately match the world they are intended to represent perfectly, instead, some aspects are 'translated' into more present-era terms for the benefit of the players. I call this presentification. Presentification takes a few basic forms. A common example is language. It is almost impossibly unlikely that in any alternate universe English would develop as it has in this one. Many words we use, like quixotic, derive from names of real-world people or places, and many more are influenced by foreign languages which do not actually exist in the fictional world. Furthermore, even in games like D&D, which are modeled loosely after medieval times, during which English was spoken, the English used was far different than the modern English today. Effectively all fictional works written from the perspective of another era rely on presentification, whether consciously or not. World of Warcraft has a decidedly un-medieval feel, and includes not only elements that are out-of-place for its setting but many tongue-in-cheek references to the real world, like a location called 'Area 52'. The new Battlestar Galactica series does the inverse, putting modern speech, dress, thinking, and, to some extent, technology into a far-future world in which, realistically, these will change dramatically, all for the purpose of familiarizing the viewer. If anyone doubts the extent of presentification, they need only take a look at how ridiculous the hairstyles of nearly every character in any 70s or 80s television show about a different era look to the modern viewer. My question is this- what do you consider the line where presentification should be drawn? To omit it completely would be nearly impossible, and even to attempt to rid a campaign of it as much as possible would cause players to face an insanely high, and frankly boring, learning curve. Too much presentification, however, would remove the fantasy from the D&D experience, and aggravate the expectations of the average player. How much is too much?
allenchan 01-25-07, 07:28 PM	The Short Answer: It Depends. The Long Answer: It depends on the subject matter and the feel you want to get across. Using your examples, WoW is sprinkled with pop culture references to appeal to a large audience, and geeky references help build a social schema attached to the game itself. BSG purposefully uses real-life similes such as phones and cars, to help the viewer to relate to the characters and the concept that they are a "sister world" to earth, encouraging them to focus on the characters (In dnd, RPing) and not on the fact its sci-fi (In dnd, "zomgz magic missile!"). Other examples intentionally move away from the acceptable norm of the modern world, with the expressed intent of creating something alien and off-putting, to make the viewer/player uneasy and/or fascinated by the unknown and exoticism. There's no black and white line between too much and not enough, but finding the right level to evoke the appropriate response is the most important thing, and the varies from campaign setting to campaign setting (and even locales in them).
Ramses III 01-25-07, 08:11 PM	The answer is clear. All D&D games should be conducted completely in Elvish (both in-character and out-of-character exchanges, but not when you call to order pizza, that would be silly), the books should be written in Elvish rune-script, and you should dress up as your character at the gaming table. Oh, right. Sorry, I'll answer seriously. Even in Medieval Europe, there was really no "common language" as most people spoke only German or English or Italian depending on where they were from. French was the closest thing to a common language, as it was the language of diplomacy -- royals and ambassadors had to be able to talk to each other to be able to make treaties, demands, arrange marriages and the like. However, in a roleplaying game you want the characters to be able to have a conversation without resorting to hiring interpreters, so a common language is a necessary tool. There are other conventions we use as necessary "filters" to make the game actually work, such as idioms unique to contemporary language. We use a lot of expressions that would make no sense in a medieval (or fantasy) context, but it's a lot easier than demanding that everyone study Shakespeare or whatever to be able to use more period-appropriate language. Unless a player is speaking in-character in a way that's really disruptive to the game (like having their bard talk like Lil' John, or their fighter like John Wayne) one has to let modern use of language slide.
Necrosis 01-25-07, 09:18 PM	keep it fun, the game exsists in your players heads, so give them descriptions in 5 senses, keep it simple, add details without overloading them with infomation (bringing medievil snacks to the table is a good way of going about tihs :) ). Probelm is these pieces fo advice are mutally exculsive so it take s practice and a feel for what oyur players actually want :).
Iddig Ap Nil 01-25-07, 10:24 PM	I'm not too worried at all about how inaccurate my setting may be due to language, I know that if I tried to get my group to speak in "ye olde english" they'd slap me around a bit, then steal my cheetos and mountain dew...Heck, right now I'm designing a 1930s era pulp game and I'm not at all worried about getting the lingo right, it's more about high adventure then if you're using the correct accent or what have ya.
Leaves 01-25-07, 11:17 PM	I think bringing up language is distracting us from your main point. When I read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" I didn't let it bother me that all the dialogue was in English, not Farsi. Even if you are fluent in another language, everything you hear and read is still mentally processed through your native tongue. The only relevant question when you ask "how much" is what you are trying to accomplish. The only situation where you would completely eliminate modern references is if you wanted to create a world to stand on its own as a work of art, a la Tolkein. And if you are doing that, really, DnD isn't the right medium. Art is a solo activity. Dnd is social. Mix them at your own peril. Other than that, I think the best rule in fantasy or science fiction is to change only the things that are necessary for the story. That includes a certain amount of "atmosphere" regarding foods, clothing, etc. But if you go into too many details, all you are doing is distracting the players from the story. For an example, suppose your party goes to an inn and orders roast chicken. Now chickens are origianally from India, and most campaign settings don't have an India, so they shouldn't have chickens. But does it matter? Will the game be improved by introducing some different domestic bird with a different natural history and a different name? Probably not. So don't do it. Call it a chicken and get on with the game.
Tiberia 01-26-07, 06:34 PM	Language Tolkien solved it by letting the Hobbits talk in modern idiom, the Elves and Numenoreans had an exalted Shakesperean style and the Rohirrim spoke Archaic. Cultural references, I have solved by applying Renaissance tch rather than mediaeval tech. Printing has been invented, so the NPC know any story I want them to know. Mary Poppins is cutting edge Sci-Fi and LotR is an everyday soap opera about people like us. I agree with Leaves Other than that, I think the best rule in fantasy or science fiction is to change only the things that are necessary for the story. That includes a certain amount of "atmosphere" regarding foods, clothing, etc. But if you go into too many details, all you are doing is distracting the players from the story.
Undrhil 01-27-07, 01:23 AM	It's really easy: just make it so there is no spoken language in your campaign. Everyone talks through Telepathy, which is a Universal language, with no need for translations. Yes, even monsters would speak telepathically. This could even provide some unique insight into the current situation: Your group approaches a door and you can hear the thoughts of the occupants of the room on the other side. Gnoll #1: Man, this new shampoo doesn't help with the fleas at all! Gnoll #2: Well, at least you get shampoo. Gnoll #1: Uh ... go get some shampoo! Gnoll #2: Nah ... I like the greasy feeling of unwashed fur... plus, it's harder for adventurers to get a grip on me! Bob: Ahh! So, that's their secret.... Gnoll #1: Hey! Someone's outside! Gnoll #2: You think they heard about my greasy hair? Bob: Yes.