Containers vs Relationships

[weogarth]

With RL being a major PITA, I'm just now getting going on some data entry and I wanted to know how you guys have been using Containers vs Relationships. I started off with my continents being an off-spring relationship to the planet but then I started wondering if the planet should be a container. After that, sub-continents, regions, cities etc are in play so wanted to what other people are finding works best before adding in those links.

Thanks!

 

[Silveras]

One important difference is that a Topic can have only one Containing Topic, but it can have many Relationships.

The early example given for Containers is geography.. if one Topic is completely within another, then that makes sense ... islands are "within" a body of water, for example.

Beyond that, sometimes things may vary.

A Group that represents the population of a Community makes sense to be Contained by that Community. A Group that represents Individuals who are spread out all around the world, not so much.

So in my usage. one Individual might be:
Contained by a Group representing the People of Community X
AND have a Member relationship to a Group representing the Community Leaders
AND have a Member relationship to a Group representing some interest group
AND have an Owner relationship to a Merchant in that Community
AND have a Supervisor relationship to an employee at that Merchant
AND have a Master relationship to some follower or servant creature
AND have a Parent relationship to another Individual

Typically, in my usage,
Communities are Contained by the Geographic Region they are located in
Locations may be Contained in Communities, if the Location happens to be there.
Merchants may be Contained in Communities, likewise.

Encounters are Contained in an Adventure topic (my own creation)
Chambers/Rooms (again, a custom Topic) are Contained in Locations (typically)

Depending on the genre and scale of your games, you may or may not need to worry about Planet or Dimension Topics.

 

[zarlor]

I tend to contain geographical locations in the larger locations as well. However I'm not quite as consisted as Silveras is on things like merchants, for example, maybe in part because the biggest thing I've been working on isn't an entire continent, for example, but the main setting for a single city. So in some cases I might contain individuals in a group they belong to, but I'm just as likely to put a merchant contained in the shop they run, instead. Otherwise, though, as Silveras mentioned you can only contain one thing, but relationships can be all over the place so you can link them up to anything and everything you like.

 

[Silveras]

Interesting.. because Merchant is a "subtype" of Location, I use Merchant entries *instead of* Locations in the communities.

Also, I should note that the "Urban Region" is new, and that is fast becoming my go-to for depicting neighborhoods in a Community.. so the Community may Contain 0 or more Urban Regions (not much point if there's only 1), which in turn Contain Locations, Merchants, Individuals, Groups, etc., as seems appropriate.

 

[AEIOU]

I'm still experimenting and I keep changing my mind. But for now, here's my plan.

I use Merchant for all businesses. Which sounds like how you are using it, Silveras? Every street address is a merchant location whether they sell anything or not.

Merchants are in Urban Regions are in Communities are in Geo Regions (which are nations for me).

Notice that Locations aren't in there. They also belong to Geo Regions but are usually landmarks (forests, mountains, rivers) or unique places I want to identify (mage's tower, witches hut, ruins).

 

[zarlor]

Actually I suppose I should clarify that I used Merchant above in two senses, one for a Merchant location but mainly I meant it in terms of an individual whose occupation is as a merchant. And Individuals are probably the least directly consistent thing for what I put into containers.

Because I'm mainly working on a campaign with plot points some individuals will not be nested (most often that will be generic types, so a generic policeman, citizen or even base monsters like a ghoul or whatnot). Those can be found wherever you need them and I use them in the sense of just copying that generic entry out and then defining it/naming it on the fly as I need any of them.

Some named individuals are associated with a location, such as the NPCs I would be using that can pretty much just always be found in their shop or place of business. The base personalities that the PCs might meet pretty much always in that location.

Other named individuals will be nested in a group. Those are for when they are important for the overall story but are not associated with a specific location or are important throughout a campaign as a member of that group, so the mob boss and some of his Capos might be under the Mob group.

Finally some individuals (and in a very few instances some locations that the PCs would not normally visit otherwise, or items or unique monsters, etc.) will be nested into quest/plot/encounter entries as it appropriate for the plot points I want to hit. In that way when I do a nested view I can see the hierarchy of items that connect to the plot points showing more of a flow of when PCs may run into specific things.

I think that latter part is the more important thing for me, really. I want to be able to put things into containers in order to have them make sense at a glance when viewing everything in the hierarchy view and for that purpose on overall plot will take precedence over most of the other containing views for any individual thing. This is especially true for me if working from a published source because I'll want things to be as close to what the author did as I can and trying to follow how and when they introduce things can be an important factor in how I try to nest things in Realm Works. Once those plots are done I can either leave them as is for historical reference (oh yeah, they met that guy when they did that thing!) or I can change the containing object to fit one of the above methods as would be most appropriate.

Now if I were just making a world/setting in general without a campaign plot point kind of set-up then that last part wouldn't be too important, but I think the most important thing is to nest things in ways that will make the most sense for you and in a way that will help you to quickly find those things at the table when you are glancing at things in that nested hierarchy view since that is the view you have some flexibility on deciding what works for you whereas the default view will break things down into their simply categories when it's easier to work with things that way. (And of course you can always use the filter box to narrow down finding something or a subset of somethings as well.)

 

[weogarth]

Thanks everyone. Some good ideas and discussion. I have a feeling that I'll also be changing my mind and being somewhat inconsistent in some things but some thoughts of mine were confirmed and got some new ideas too.

 

[Silveras]

The key is, as zarlor mentioned, to do what makes sense to you based on the game and style you're running.

For my use, in one realm I made "Arcane Shop" and "Temple" as variants of Merchants. I also added "Ruin/Adventure Site" as a subtype of Location.

 

[weogarth]

The key is, as zarlor mentioned, to do what makes sense to you based on the game and style you're running.

For my use, in one realm I made "Arcane Shop" and "Temple" as variants of Merchants. I also added "Ruin/Adventure Site" as a subtype of Location.

Of course. That's why we're all going to have different structures based on styles, genres and world design.