What makes a good setting?

Memes

forgot to mention this also applies to sci-fi, star wars had the Jedi order where Lord of the Rings had the ancient elven and dwarven city's

I'd also like to add a degree of ambiguity to the workings of the setting to give the DM and players some wiggle room for roleplaying.

For example, is Gthnr the Undying really undying? Is he simply a title handed down from archmage to archmage? Did he ever exist in the first place? That sort of ambiguity and mystery allows the GM and players to decide who or what Gthnr is (or was), rather than having to deal with a set-in-stone Gthnr that behaves according to whatever the writers have in mind. Granted, you should have some definitive institutions and features to give a framework for the game, but beyond that the players and GM should be able to fill in the blanks according to their preferences.

How many shades of grey? I've heard 50 is a good number.

Top comment material.

There's gotta be stuff to do.

violence, sex and covfefe

Opportunity for adventure hooks. There needs to be monsters to be fought, undiscovered lands to explore, political intrigue to be had, and treasure to line one's pockets with. The world needs to be filled with people, factions, and nations all trying to achieve something. There are dungeons and ruins and forests replete with great danger and even greater rewards. Dark forces must loom somewhere, biding their time to wreak havoc upon innocent people. The world does not stand still when the players rest, old adventure hooks are resolved without the PCs and new ones become available as circumstances change.

The best settings are the ones where there's always something interesting or important to do.

>pic
"MAGIC SUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS"

honestly from what I have seen and played, lore is where it's at.

make your own, and try to integrate the player's ideas and background stories as seamlessly as possible.

New DM here. I really like this advice, thanks.

WHAT THE HELL MAGINA.

SERIOUSLY?

I bet you fags don't even know Kael and if you do it's from WoW.

And that's terrible.

>implying I didn't play WC3 in its entirety
>implying the joke isn't that Kael's model is used for Invoker in the original DotA
I laugh in the face of danger! HAHAHAHA!

Hwat hwat hwat?

Woopheehee hahaha.

Don't run, we are your friends.

What if my universe is consistently inconsistent?

1) Consistent internal logic. The history of the setting should be an unbroken line of cause and effect, or action and reaction. If it's a human empire but there's dwarven ruins, explain where the dwarves went. Of course, you don't have to explain this all up-front—perhaps the sudden discovery of the dwarven ruins are a mystery to the players and NPCs alike—but have some kind of answer prepared.

2) Personal potential. What can a player do in your world? If they want to be X, what avenues are available for them to do so? If it's a class-based game, sit down and think about the possible backgrounds and place in society for every single class. The more variety, the better. This will prevent players from feeling pigeonholed and being "just another outlander barbarian" in your world. Give them inherent options.

3) Open possibility space. This is why big worlds are better—more to do, more to imagine, more to invent and present to your players. If it's possible for your players to really "see it all" and "do it all," it's not a good world. Make sure your world has baked-in elements of volatility that can manifest when this risk rears its head. Maybe a revolution is brewing? Maybe the plot of a cult is finally coming to fruition? Plan for a future in this world where everything could change.

All other things are subjective, but these three tenets are big, I think.

INDUBITABILY.

That in itself is a form of consistency