Talk:Paludia (3.5e Campaign Setting)

Patriarchy

The patriarchy thing was thrown in order to avoid any PC groups from doing anything, keeping in mind that I am a straight, white, Christian male myself. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noname (talk • contribs) 23:19, 2 June 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

The ultimate d&d origins of that came from an entry on Quanaks, stating that they, like their brethren, are patriarchal. It came from this site: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psb/20021227b Noname 16:17, 2 January 2008 (MST)

Semuanya and Copyrights

Am I allowed to mention Semuanya? (legally) I will delete anything and everything that violates copyright protection. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.108.210.255 (talk • contribs) 08:04, 3 June 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Yes you can mention it, seeing that Wikipedia does (here). --Green Dragon 15:42, 5 June 2007 (MDT)

I also need to mention that, after I had explicitly received permission, I used some ideas from the game Dominions 3. A very good game, by the way. The website mentioning this can be found here: [1] -Noname 15:32, 30 August 2007.

I think mentioning that you received permission should cover all bases. Good work about asking. --Green Dragon 23:16, 30 August 2007 (MDT)

Ideas

I will be modeling this campaign setting after the template of Semuanya, whose main themes are survival and propagation. All rated topics will be dealt with in a censored manner (nothing R rated or worse.) -Noname 16:17, 6 June 2007 (MDT)

That's always good :). --Green Dragon 10:38, 7 June 2007 (MDT)

So, what do you think so far? Keep in mind that this is still very early in development. I have yet to add some NPCs, more locations, special rules, creatures, weapons, etc... -Noname

I like this setting, as a person who owns reptiles, I've always had a love for Lizardfolk. If there is anything you need help with let me know and I'll be glad to toss in my 2 cents. Otherwise please keep this up, I can't wait to see (and use) the finished setting. --Sepsis 08:10, 20 July 2007 (MDT)

It will take quite some time for me to finish this setting, and even when it is finished, I will continue to add on extra material and improvements. Keep in mind that I can only make improvements during my spare time, which may or may not be available in the weeks and months to come. --Noname 20:00, 20 July 2007

I was thinking you should focus first on finishing the various "Races" of Lizardfolk, then move on to detailing the various tribes. Although the Tribes may benefit from a fully detailed history of the "Ages". --Sepsis 23:35, 21 July 2007 (MDT)

I think that I ought to mention that one of the purposes of this campaign is to juxtapose (contrast) Christianity with previous religious systems of polytheism. If one reads my sections on religion and culture, you will note a mostly dim view of pagan systems of thinking, worshiping, and living (with a few positive notes here and there.) My goal is NOT to evangelize, but rather, to place various modes of thought into perspective. The goal is to make the primitive, pagan, desire-filled lizardfolk look bad, and explain WHY they are bad (wrath, lust, greed, sloth, gluttony). I had earlier ideas, covering other sets of sins, including prideful Elves and wrathful Dwarves, but these were harder to work with, given the diversity of ideas people have on these fantasy races. One fantasy race which is usually depicted in the same way are the reptilian humanoids. They are usually shown as pagans living in primitive conditions who never wear enough clothing to appear civilized. Of course, this theme has been exploited by media as diverse as Spider-man's nemesis the Lizard, to countless deviant-art pictures (which range from appropriate and proper to disgusting and immoral), to the D&D game itself. In other words, I picked this race because it was simple and therefore easy to use for my first campaign setting (In which I would learn how to make these settings.) The setting I really wanted to do (the next one, and the one I had planned for a long time) is on hold until I can complete more of this one.

My next campaign will be an allegory for Christianity (and the world in which Christianity grew up in) itself, set in an evil empire in which good is punished and evil rules. Worshipers of God will be often forced to hide in catacombs (where the dead are buried, as they were in history), and every sort of unthinkable sin will be unleashed upon the world. Regardless of the evils surrounding them (and some evils which tempt them), the Christians (who will probably not be called that in the campaign) stay good and learn that goodness and happiness come from within, and that no one, not even the emperor, can take these things away or destroy them. Boethius, Augustine, Plato, and to some extent St. Paul will all be major influences. --Noname 16:18, 2 December 2007

This episode of the spider-man animated series was an influence on the setting as well: http://www.veoh.com/videos/v760038yXYJjpjJ. Note that it featured an arena and gladiator-type games in it. And the speech about choosing to live as savages. Noname 20:53, 27 December 2007 (MST)

Rating: 5/5

5/5 - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.254.200.225 (talk • contribs) 11:14, 30 July 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

Who posted this excellent rating? --Noname 17:29, 30 July 2007

I think all that matters is - do you agree with it? Do you think your CS is worthy of a 5? If so, please change it on the actual CS. --Green Dragon 14:05, 4 August 2007 (MDT)

It isn't complete enough yet, so I don't think it's worth that much. Still, what I judge my own work isn't as important as what the veteran players deem it. -- Noname 4 August 2007

I am not sure I would call this IP a "veteran player"... Anyway, as soon as you think it is ready for a rating feel free to put one on it. Also, if you do not want to rate it yourself, EldritchNumen (who, currently, has limited internet access) should be able to rate it. He has rated most all the other CS's on D&D Wiki and should give a fairly fair rating. Hope this helps. --Green Dragon 00:57, 5 August 2007 (MDT)

Hey. Sorry I've been so slow to respond. I've looked over the setting, and--I must say-- there is some really good material here. Further, you have at least some material in most important categories. I especially thought a few areas were well done; for example, the culture section was quite comprehensive, while the city of Lixus was nicely detailed. On the other hand, I think many sections would benefit for more detailed information. Many of the tribes, locations, etc. have a good creative spark, but a single sentence (or two) is usually inadequate to fully explain your vision to the rest of us. So, I think the most important thing is (in no particular order) to add depth and detail to the wonderful and expansive outline you have provided us with. For example, the history section is pretty good, but lacks just a bit of information under the more modern headings that would be nice to have (Rise of Lixus?). In Geography, you mention many places, but only a few have been expanded upon, and it is at least useful to add a bit of description (physical size? plot hooks? importance to the lizardfolk?). I also think a crude map might help; you mention mountain ranges coming out of the swamp, and the place where those are seems pretty important, since a primitive, swamp-dwelling people is more likely to circumnavigate the mountains rather than climbing over them, so they will be a pretty important geographical barrier as well as resource. Next, I personally think the religion section could be expanded (if not with deities, then at least with other information: religious celebrations? discussions of religious war and how common it is? etc.). Finally, it would be nice if someone (not necessarily you; the admins can help with this) would put your information into d20 tables and into the NPC stat block when it is appropriate, since a fair amount is currently unformatted. So, that's the important thing: my suggestions. I'm not going to rate this now, since I know that you are still working on it, but if I did it would currently fall somewhere between a 3 and 4 (towards the 3 side, probably); it has lots of material, but not all of it is extremely deep, and often is just a heading or couple of sentences. With some more fleshing out, though, this is going to be an excellent setting. –EldritchNumen 12:15, 27 August 2007 (MDT)

This is coming along beautifully, noname! I love it; there is lots of really good information here. Obviously there is still much more you can continue to add to make the setting better, but you should be really proud of your accomplishments here. I've given you a 5 for the setting, for the amount of material here is quite expansive, but I encourage you to continue adding to the setting. It is gorgeous, truly! –EldritchNumen 16:09, 14 November 2007 (MST)

1,000 views

This is a milestone! - Noname 19:39, 18 November 2007

I agree. Good work, this really is becoming one of the more used and viewed campaign settings on D&D Wiki! --Green Dragon 10:28, 19 November 2007 (MST)

Congratulations! As I said above, the setting is really coming together very nicely. You should be very proud! –EldritchNumen 20:50, 3 December 2007 (MST)

Feats

Does anyone know how to implement these? Noname 12:45, 23 December 2007 (MST)

What exactly do you mean? Do you want them linked to from this page as well as linked to from DnD Feats, or do you just want them formatted correctly onto this page? --Green Dragon 13:41, 23 December 2007 (MST)

I mean, how does one create feats in general? Noname 16:34, 23 December 2007 (MST)

So the mechanics behind them, or how does one create them on a wiki? If it's for creating them on this wiki just go to DnD Feats and press "Add a new feat" then follow the instructions. --Green Dragon 16:47, 23 December 2007 (MST)

Homebrew Content and Popularity

Am I allowed to use other homebrew content, such as bringing in "foreign" deities (that other posters put up)? Also, this site [2] mentions this setting. Noname 21:24, 23 December 2007 (MST)

First off, yes, you are allowed to use other peoples creations in your campaign. The Wikiworld setting does this all the time, so... Also, good work with the link :), this really is becoming a popular CS. --Green Dragon 12:34, 24 December 2007 (MST)

Next Step

I'm going to stop adding new sections and concentrate on the ones I already have (including the unfilled quests and classes). Does anyone have any suggestions? Noname 16:42, 1 January 2008 (MST)

Okay, I added one more class, the shaman, but until I fill in what I have, I ought not to add more sections. Noname 17:05, 1 January 2008 (MST)

And another, the priest. I guess the classes and templates section needs a bit more. I suppose I will add a couple of sections, but no more than three new templates and seven new classes. Noname 20:48, 3 January 2008 (MST)

As a side comment remember that all classes should be treated like a normal "DnD Class" and just linked to here. They do not have the "Paludia Supplement" identifier. Thanks! --Green Dragon 21:50, 3 January 2008 (MST)

Feedback

Does anyone have any ideas? Questions? Comments? Criticisms? Ways that things could be improved? Noname 10:51, 4 January 2008 (MST)

In a cosmetic way all of the ALL CAPS titles are a little annoying. I would recommend that you change the titles to normal titles that start with a semicolon to make them bold :). --Green Dragon 17:34, 5 January 2008 (MST)

Why the "happy face" symbol? Noname 21:24, 5 January 2008 (MST)

Because I wanted to try to lessen the aggressive "do this" tone... I guess it just made it more confusing though... --Green Dragon 23:24, 5 January 2008 (MST)

Are there any comments about the content? And yes, I will remember to sign these posts in the future. Noname 14:11, 6 January 2008 (MST)

Has anyone used this setting in an actual D&D game? Noname 21:19, 6 January 2008 (MST)

This setting is exceptional and shows more depth than any WotC product I have seen. You apparently have more than cursory knowledge of biology and philosophy, or at least a willingness to research. Your sections on biology and culture are by far my favorite.

While I am generally not a fan of creating a slew of new classes for a new world, but from what you have written about yours, they fit. Your Heirodule, from what I can gather from your incomplete description, seems to me like a cleric without offensive spells and martial ability, much like an NPC class, which fits the way you portray the female lizardfolk; I would like to see the write up of this class, complete with description. I have always liked the idea of the shaman, but I have not seen a well done class since the old first-edition shaman from Dragon Magazine, which only worked due to the experience system of the old rules. I would like to see your take on the shaman.

The geography section is probably your weakest section and the more efficient remedy to this would be to provide a map. Also the specific races of lizardfolk and their major tribes are not all well described, with some races having only a single line devoted to them, and no statistics provided. To be fair, these same races are D&D races, but does that prevent you from writing a description about them, in your own words?

And, to answer your question, I plan on using your setting, on a smaller geographic scale, as a location in my world - I love games with a survivalist aspect to them, especially before such spells as teleport and create food and water come into play. Ihala 18:10, 28 March 2008 (MDT)

Announcement

Due to the upcoming fourth edition, I have decided NOT to work on the Christian allegory Campaign setting until 4e is released and I can frame such a campaign in that setting. I will, therefore, fall back on an alternative plan and work on a second CS. Paludia will be finished sometime, and I will work on both settings. Paludia is too limited for many players I am sure, and a more original setting is probably better than one with so many outside influences and focus on one specific race. The new CS will be a multi-racial one with a wide variety of races and terrains, and will be under the influence of powerful arch-mages. Noname 20:09, 15 January 2008 (MST)

2000 Views!

Apparently, this setting is attracting attention. Please tell me, what exactly has made this scenario worthy of its rating and views? Noname 20:25, 14 February 2008 (MST)

The third most viewed campaign setting on D&D Wiki, not bad. Congratulations. --Green Dragon 23:43, 14 February 2008 (MST)

That's good to hear, but it doesn't answer my question: why do so many people like it? My CS is only behind the mega-project wikiworld and an adaptation of the lord of the rings! How'd It end up there? Noname 19:47, 15 February 2008 (MST)

I will ask again, why is this so popular? What things am I doing right? I will be able to do more of these things if I know what they are. Noname 21:07, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Honestly it is probably viewed so much just because it is rated 5/5. Very few CS's hold that honor. --Green Dragon 22:02, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

Yes, I know it is 5/5, but why is it 5/5 to begin with? Not that I'm complaining about that. Noname 22:18, 17 March 2008 (MDT)

It is rated 5 for the amount of content and how comprehensive the content is. CS ratings do not worry about formatting, which this could improve greatly in. --Green Dragon 00:07, 18 March 2008 (MDT)

Okay, thanks for telling me. Noname 11:16, 18 March 2008 (MDT)

I added a new section. Noname 15:08, 11 April 2008 (MDT)

Media

Does it cause strain on the website or its servers if a large number of images are placed on a single page? Noname 20:25, 29 April 2008 (MDT)

Does anyone know if images such as these: [3] are permissible on the wiki? I just put the "i" in between the letter of "jpg" to prevent the picture from being posted. Noname 16:11, 2 May 2008 (MDT)

Is this wiki allowed to have WOTC visual media on it? Noname 19:09, 2 May 2008 (MDT)

I think you can, not sure, you might ask green dragon.--Lord Dhazriel 20:24, 2 May 2008 (MDT)

Images from WotC are actually copyrighted and not allowed to be posted on D&D Wiki. Also, large amount of images on a certain page is fine. --Green Dragon 23:43, 4 May 2008 (MDT)

Thanks, that's why I added so many links leading to their pictures lately, since I can't actually post them on this site. Noname 23:46, 4 May 2008 (MDT)

I know, I already answered this question on my talk page, but oh well. I just didn't want to leave this unanswered. --Green Dragon 00:31, 5 May 2008 (MDT)

Useful?

Is the material for this setting useful to the DM? If there are any DMs out there, do you think that this has enough information that is relevant to the game? Is there too much clutter? Noname 15:53, 4 May 2008 (MDT)

Wikipedia feels that titles should never be links. --Green Dragon 23:53, 5 May 2008 (MDT)

3000 Views

That is quite a lot. I should get back to and start to finish this setting soon... Thanks for all of the views! Noname 08:52, 18 June 2008 (MDT)

Paludia and 4e

While this setting was designed under the 3.5 rules originally, it seems as if Paludia's wilderness fits in perfectly with the whole 4e setting. Civilization in 4e is described like "points of light" in a world of darkness (http://dnd.soulbro.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=377&sid=3ed518ae4962a002a92cf63a82562bd7), which Paludia really fits into... Noname 18:21, 23 June 2008 (MDT)