Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I have been working on-and-off on my own wargame heartbreaker.

The original concept was around 2017, when I was curious about the implications of implementing an MtG-like stack for a 40k-like tabletop wargame. I did some tests, the idea seemed viable, and I implemented those ideas. However, one disadvantage I found with the system was that the resource-based activation meant keeping a LOT of secondary tokens, and that felt potentially clunky.

Real life happened and I left the ideas on the backburner for some time, until coming back to it this year. I ended up reworking the dice system and creating a luck-manipulation mechanic, and tying activations/reactions into that paradigm, and things seem to play more smoothly as a result. There is a lot of open design space for me to model whatever type of world I want to with this...

...and that is where I feel like I am stuck. This project started off as a gameplay thought experiment, and I built a 'framework' for the game. However, the actual worldbuilding at large is what has me driving myself nuts. I roughly have 'four' factions down, each with their own tactical niche and variations of the core gameplay.
-"NotRomans" with primitive steampunk based off Hero of Alexandria's Aeolipile. The 'jack-of-trades' civilization.
-NotGermanic Barbarians with berserkers, shieldwalls, valkyries and more.
-Nomadic Dwarf caravans, with crossbows and mobile gunnery platforms. Very much a 'Fantasy Tau' army/"mobile dwarfs" army.
-Atlantean Orcs with a Minoan minotaur aesthetic. The 'big monsters' civilization.

I do want at least one 'cavalry' civilization, though whether they are a NotBritannia or a NotParthia is the real question.

Perhaps what I could do is run a few demo games, see how they play out, and work the results into the lore. However, that means scenario design as well, or testing in different terrain setups.
The question is, what other strategies have people here used if they attempt worldbuilding for their own game/setting?

My wargame has undergone several iterations, and the themes grew from simply writing short stories about the history and adding bits as I saw fit. It started as a racing game, then I tried to add crew, the crew became more important than the cars, and it transformed into a skirmish game instead.

It sounds like the era is an accellerated technological advancement world where you have entirely close-combat armies (NotGermanics) co-existing with gunpowder age armies (dwarves).

The backstory, to make sense, has to offer a reason for the conflict. In my case, I started by wanting the basic concept of "a racing game where each faction is a "punk" type, EG steampunk, cyberpunk, scrappunk etc."

I then had to ask myself: why would one faction run everything on steam whilst another uses batteries? There are a few options here - scarcity of resources, jealously guarded natural deposits - but I picked "the world ended" because heck, let's go all-out on cliche!

Then, I needed to work out how the world would need to have ended to make it interesting. Obviously there are still resources, so we didn't just run out & kill each other. Nuclear weapons is kinda meh for it, and I wanted an atompunk faction, so that was out. So I went for an "it came from space" approach to make the setting - an asteroid has come down and done what asteroids do.

Then I decided that this asteroid had some interesting properties, which fueled some other factions. Other things adapted to the new lore - the Scrap-punk race went from humans to apes, I changed my stories of what the meteors origins were to allow psychic powers to manifest in the world, and to give different factions different motivations within it.


What I was left with worked well for me. The factions are not directly hostile because they can't afford the losses, but they are also inclined to compete over resources. So it's not all-out war, but more that they have their missions and don't care who has to die to make it happen. It's an unwritten rule of the wastes that if you are not willing to back down, you had better be ready to fight. The factions had grown somewhat organically from the lore, and the lore had grown around what I wanted it to accomplish.


So yeah, I recommend using the "Why" strategy.

The unromans have steam power. Why? because they found a type of rock which doesn't cool down as it heats things, which they use their slaves to install in their machines as it also causes them to wither and die (in other words, plutonium). The minotaurs are fighting the unromans - Why? Because their civilisation knows this rock is bad news and they must not use it. Why? Because it caused the collapse of their atlantis and prevented their world domination plans. The dwarves have guns but no-one else does - Why? Because the dwarves guard their secrets jealously. Why? because their homeland was destroyedb y their own weapons, which is why they are nomadic, etc. etc.

So the story grows and the factions are adjusted to maintain the theme but to fit the world. It wouldn't make sense, for example, for steam powered dwarves to appear in 40k, because the technology to surpass steam power is so prevalent that no-one will use steam (except orks).



In short - keep asking yourself "Why" about every dil. Once every "why" is answered, you'll have your lore!

Well, I make it a lot easier on my self and just write "Historical" games or "generic scale and mini agnostic" games.

If you read Frostgrave V1 closely, you will see that there is virtually NO world building. I think the trick is to avoid detail and instead use broad brush strokes and bits of imagery text to let the players fill in what they want.

Honestly I think the way to go for indy devs at the moment is to follow the Turnip/Sludge route and focus less on worldbuilding and more on "identity". Unless you have a significant base of pre-existing resources to design, produce, and expand a range of bespoke miniatures of high quality and good value proposition, you aren't going to break into the market in any meaningful manner producing a game built around a specific world, setting, miniatures range, and aesthetic.

Going for a generic miniatures agnostic ruleset that can leverage existing kits on the market kitbashed into a unique theme and aesthetic will capture a lot more attention a lot faster, including people who might otherwise shy away from getting involved into a game with its own unique miniatures range. If you really want to produce some form of physical product, you can release conversion kits (alternative heads, torsos, weapons, etc.) to expedite peoples conversions towards meeting your own aesthetic stylings, etc. That has a much lower barrier for entry as a solo designer.

Just one world building in general I agree totally with Some Bloke, start with the cool ideas then start asking how and why this can work. It might lead you in new directions.

Reading some relevant history can also lead to cool stories or interesting problems that can help flesh out the world.

Japan had guns and artillery in the 1600s during the tail end of the Age of the Country at War. But it was once again using swords and bows in the 1850s, due to a deliberate policy of isolation that only an island nation with a powerful single government could pull off. Yet by the 1900s they'd mastered technology to the point they could win wars against China and Russia. The story of how they did that can lead to interesting places in a fictional setting.

Getting out of your comfort zone can also help. I was never interested in the mid-East till I came to Egypt but obviously there is a long a fascinating history of empires crossing Egypt and leaving traces behind.