Some time ago, I became incompatible with the real world. Some of my readers may nod here, while others now have a big question mark hovering above their heads. So, let me explain.
I'm game mastering a DSA story. Aventurien, the continent where DSA takes place, has developed a rich potpourri of cultures, traditions, people, monarchies and cities over the years, thanks to its creators. Over the course of the last months I've read a lot of source books to spice a story of my own creating. I often stumbled over a phenomenon that seems specific for the DSA world: An interweaving of rules, background information and official adventures. Most, if not all printed adventures taking place in Aventurien come from the same publisher that is also responsible for the rest. What comes out of it are not only hints given in the source or even rule books regarding a storyline persued in a set of adventures, but also frequent hints along the lines: "This NPC will be part of the next official campaign regarding this region," or: "This city will play a major role in the next official adventures. If you change its shape, you will become incompatible with the official world." It goes even as far as marking the mysteries of a certain region with an asterisk that means: This mystery is freely available for your next private story.
I guess I always misunderstood the reason for source books.
I have to admit that I rarely see a reason for buying an adventure. Sure there's maps, lots of nice stuff that adds flair to a well-designed story, but I always felt that this is something that I could do myself. Not the good layout and the nicely done prints, of course: But developing and designing a good story. Though crude, I always thought that actually buying a RPG story created by someone else meant declaring the defeat of my own fantasy. Well, I know that this isn't true, and I proudly use and reveal my sources of inspiration now. However, I have yet to buy my first adventure book, be it official of third-party.
Anyways, I have some expectations to a good source book. No, I don't mean nice graphics, maps, fantastic descriptions of people, traditions and places; that I take for granted. It's more meta what I want to get with such a book: Getting inspirations for my own stories, a stage where my carefully designed play can take place. Because regardeless of how well-done such a book is, it can and may never be more than a foundation.
With DSA, it's only partly true. Because -- although DSA's authors carefully avoid to write it -- there's a label on many paragraphs saying "you are disallowed to change this!" It perfectly makes sense to use the world you've created to write and sell your own official adventures that take place in it. It doesn't make sense to indirectly forbid people to change this world for their own creations. I can guess where this comes from: More than with any other system and world I know, DSA and Aventurien have a community of eagerly consuming players, who not only buy source books, but also the latest adventures. Certainly, following a greatly designed campaign and watching vallaineous plots unveil has a lot of appeal. But I'd never trade my own story-writer freedom with these experiences.
I like source books and rules not only nice, but also humble. That means they should instead have another label, saying: "This is how we currently see our world. Be free to change it!" It should not only allow, but encourage people to change the setting. I like epic adventures that change the shape of a world, and I am not content with exchaning the local Hetman of a small viking village. Sorry, dudes.
And that's why I became incompatible with the real world. And you know what? It feels great.
Just coming home from a DSA-heavy convention, I can only say that the authors probably have a lot of fun designing things very meticulously, and there are most likely many GMs and players who want a high level of pre-fabricated detail, and a high amount of consistency even between different playing groups. I think, however, that nobody is trying to discourage GMs from changing the official canon.
There is a whole spectrum of GM styles and needs, ranging from completely homebrew systems and worlds on one end to completely pre-fab ones on the other. Some GMs do both extremes and everything in between.
I'm usually doing my own stuff, taking the source material (if there is any) as a suggestion at best. That also means I'm very grateful that Sven, our resident D&D expert, didn't flip out and kill me when I completely raped and tortured Faerun last time.
Whenever I'm a player, the "official world" is exactly what the GM says it is.
There actually *is* discouragement in the books. The sentences that encourage the players to change the world are few, but one frequently stumbles over things like "This character will take part in a planned adventure. If you use him, your group will become incompatible with the official version of Aventurien." The adventure hooks with asterisk marking are no joke, either. I mean, why does one put mysteries and other sources of inspiration in source books and tells people that only half of it is freely usable? If something is part of an official adventure, well, why not put it there? (I can guess the answer.)