Good Fluff, Bad Fluff [re: Flying off the shelves]

Psion · Jun 19, 2003

I am going to take this out of the context of the "We aren't representative" discussion, because it strikes a different chord in me that I have been thinking about:

Originally posted by Henry
If that were true, WotC would be concentrating on "fluff" and "crunch" more evenly.

Originally posted by Mark
Yup. And that's where I think the d20 community is largely missing the boat, thus far. WotC is crunch-heavy, which leaves the door open on the other side of that scale.

If only they could live up to that calling.

For a while, I picked up a few fluff heavy books and didn't like what I saw. I felt like I was slogging through minutia (Rokugan Secrets series, I am looking at you...) or was being provided with details that were all to apparent to me (Slayer's Guides, I am looking at you.) This led me (and many gamers, I think) to beleive that fluff is just bad.

Then I picked up Book of Taverns and was bowled over. This writing was good. Intriguing. I gobbled it up. And it was mostly what we would call "fluff", but it actually had risen to the level that I might call it "flavor" instead of fluff as Mark suggests.

This made me realize that when it comes to fluff/flavor, most of the current stable of d20 writers quite simply aren't up to the task. Many of them came from the background of beign good DMs. Good DMs may be good designers, but they aren't necessarily good writers.

I have no recommended solution to this, but will say I wish there were more good "flavor" writers out there, and it is refreshing to realize that the problem is not just a personal disdain for non-mechanical writing.

TiQuinn · Jun 19, 2003

I think that game designers also have to walk a fine line between flavorful, creative ideas and being generic that is tough to accomplish.

Umbran · Jun 19, 2003

Psion said:
This made me realize that when it comes to fluff/flavor, most of the current stable of d20 writers quite simply aren't up to the task. Many of them came from the background of beign good DMs. Good DMs may be good designers, but they aren't necessarily good writers.

There's another issue as well. When it comes to flavor, it may not be an issue of being a technically good writer. Perhaps flavor-heavy game products should be viewed a bit more like novels. The issue may be less about it being "good", and more about individual personal tastes.

I mean, lots of people find Tolkien boring. Does that mean he's not a good writer? Hardly, because lots of people also love his work. We are now in the realm of personal taste...

With "crunch" books, there are some more absolute measures of good and bad. You can look at how consistent the rules are, how well they mesh with the core, how balanced they may be, and such. With flavor, the only real mesure of value is entirely subjective.

BlackWych · Jun 19, 2003

There were good flavor writers at Wizards of the Coast, they just lost or fired them all.

Technik4 · Jun 19, 2003

There were good flavor writers at Wizards of the Coast, they just lost or fired them all.

What a rotten thing to say.

Technik

Psion · Jun 19, 2003

Re: Re: Good Fluff, Bad Fluff [re: Flying off the shelves]

Umbran said:
There's another issue as well. When it comes to flavor, it may not be an issue of being a technically good writer. Perhaps flavor-heavy game products should be viewed a bit more like novels. The issue may be less about it being "good", and more about individual personal tastes.

True, but even though you like some authors better than others, I think it is pretty hard to dispute that there are certain competancies and techniques in writing that generally make it more engaging.

With "crunch" books, there are some more absolute measures of good and bad. You can look at how consistent the rules are, how well they mesh with the core, how balanced they may be, and such.

You would think so, but somehow people still argue with me about the lack of validity of the "raw XP for powers" approach...

Desdichado · Jun 19, 2003

I agree 100% with Psion here -- I actually prefer good flavor supplements, as I find mechanics reading to be dry and tedious beyond a certain point.

However, there's precious little flavor text in the gaming industry that I think is really good. Green Ronin has some (Book of the Righteous and the volumes of the Book of Fiends comes to mind) and although they've taken some flack thusfar in the thread, I actually think WotC has some pretty good stuff (a lof of the FRCS is fairly good reading, and Manual of the Planes is one of the few RPG books that I actually pick up just to read when I've got a few minutes here and there.)

Games Workshop also has some decent stuff -- I've kept several issues of White Dwarf that have really good "history" articles in them that are fascinating to read, and if anything, there seems to be more of them lately. And I don't even play Warhammer or 40k...

Mark · Jun 19, 2003

Joshua Dyal said:
Book of the Righteous

That's probably the single best example of a d20/non-WotC product with which I'm familiar that illustrates the point I was trying to make...in that other thread where I posted in whole. I'm not familiar with the Book of Taverns but I'll certainly take Psion's word for it because he seems to understand very well what I meant.

*edit* And I further agree with Psion, if I may dare to paraphrase, that there are many d20 mechanical writers on the scene, some flavor writers and even fewer who can combine both effectively and consistently. I hope to someday number among the last group.

BiggusGeekus@Work · Jun 19, 2003

Joshua Dyal said:
Games Workshop also has some decent stuff -- I've kept several issues of White Dwarf that have really good "history" articles in them that are fascinating to read, and if anything, there seems to be more of them lately. And I don't even play Warhammer or 40k...

I agree. But then there's just a certian something about a pistol-weilding skaven getting mauled by Brettonian knight.

Getting back on topic....

Gaming fiction/fluff/flavor is hard to write, IMHO.

I wrote columns for a local entertainment magazine called On Tap. It was a fun gig. I got to interview bands and basically got paid to hang out at bars. Those articles wrote themselves. Very easy. I've written satire. Again, not too hard for me. But writing gaming fiction? Hard.

The problem, to my mind, is that the setting gets in the way of the character development. With the entertainment magazine it was a piece of cake because most people know what a bar is like so you don't have to have to delve into expanatory sentences like "the person behind the bar -- known as the bartender -- pulled a 'tap' to cause the beer to flow into the glass." But in fantasy fiction, basic lifestyle assumptions sometimes just have to be spelled out. This problem is more predominant in gaming fiction where you have to keep an eye on the rulebook and make those rules come alive into a plausible story.

I mean, think about the kind of stuff we joke about. "You all meet in a tavern", "Since you destroyed the town, the mayor demands you go on a quest in repayment", "Even though you've never met him before, you quickly arrange a meeting with the baron". These kinds of things happen in games because its expedient and people have to be home by a certain hour. In literature you don't have that luxury. So the setting considerations you can ignore for a game suddenly get thrust into the light.

IMHO, of course.

Shard O'Glase · Jun 19, 2003

Its not D20 but the old shadowrun books had a really good flavor to crunch raito in many of their products. They somehow made some really boring topics interesting.

It was easier for them though because they had a interesting seting in which to backdrop the crunch. Core D&D has grehawk sort of, but they don't really go into it. With the FR I think they could do a good job, if they'd divesify their characters. They seem to concentrate too much on the big E and volo.(or at least did I'm lite on the 3e products) I think volo is a realy cool character but if they developed 20-30 characters with which to transmit the fluff to us I think it would of come across much better.