Why Worldbuilding is Bad

hawkeyefan

Legend
But, as [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] just posted, he didn't say "no fluff!" he just wants some actual stat blocks and mechanics and stuff. That is something that I also appreciated about 4e, it always had a pretty decent mix. Maybe a given book might slant a bit one way or the other, but on the whole there was a lot of 'crunch' and a very solid and not too overly harped upon bunch of 'flavor' that was created with a real genuine eye to being maximally usable in play.

I bought easily $2k worth of 4e stuff, I have bought pretty much zilch since then. It is what it is, and I was never that wedded to needing a huge amount of extra stuff anyway, so I don't care all that much, but I might buy a crunchier line of products that was suitable to the kind of play I enjoy.

Sure and that’s fair. I can understand the preference. I don’t think that what WOTC has published for 5E is as unbalanced toward the fluff as he is implying. The big books seem pretty evenly split, don’t they?

And then there’s the AL modules that are available through the DMsGuild. Those are short adventures that seem to be very much what he has in mind.

But it still may not be enough of a shift for him. Which is fine, that’s his preference and I don’t blame him for it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
World building was already defined in the original posts quotation as “the attempt to exhaustively survey a place that isn’t there.”

World building is defining the 20 gods in your pantheon, their complex personal relationships, followers and traditions.
World build is mapping out continents and cities and population sizes, demographics, locations etc.
World building is specifying the ten most dangerous dungeons, the key enemies within and the treasures.
It is effectively writing your own equivalent of the Forgotten Realms campaign setting and a Volos guide.

It isn’t writing flavor text.

You don't get that stuff without flavor text, though. The flavor is part and parcel of everything you listed, so it's a part of worldbuilding, too.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Sure and that’s fair. I can understand the preference. I don’t think that what WOTC has published for 5E is as unbalanced toward the fluff as he is implying. The big books seem pretty evenly split, don’t they?

Only if you count adventure paths as crunch. If you're just looking at the stuff that you can put into any setting(classes, feats, etc.), the fluff vastly outweighs the crunch, and most of the crunch is monsters.
 

eayres33

Explorer
Yet, funnily enough everyone else in this thread could follow my criticisms perfectly well. To the point where others started pointing out that I never actually said what [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] claimed I did.

Pen hits it pretty square on the head.

I'm sorry I did not know that popular opinion trumped what was right. So should Maxperson and I give you tribute, or do you need a lamb or goat for slaughter?
 

hawkeyefan

Legend
Only if you count adventure paths as crunch. If you're just looking at the stuff that you can put into any setting(classes, feats, etc.), the fluff vastly outweighs the crunch, and most of the crunch is monsters.

I’m going off the kinds of things Hussar mentioned: maps, NPCs, monsters, encounters, etc. I think you have to consider the adventure books as presenting a good amount of crunch. The locations and encounters are very easy to port to a home game.
 

Tony Vargas

Legend
Sure and that’s fair. I can understand the preference. I don’t think that what WOTC has published for 5E is as unbalanced toward the fluff as he is implying. The big books seem pretty evenly split, don’t they?
It's hard to say, as there's not always a clear line between fluff and rules text, and both are mutable at the whim of the DM. One DM may interpret a sentence as fluff and not consider it when ruling, another may base a ruling almost entirely upon the same sentence.

You don't get that stuff without flavor text, though. The flavor is part and parcel of everything you listed, so it's a part of worldbuilding, too.
Squares & rectangles. Fluff about a PC, for instance, is not worldbuilding. Worldbuilding requires a lot of fluff, and part of the objection to it is that it's useless fluff the players may never experience, but not all fluff is worldbuilding. FWIW (nothing I can see).
 

Hussar

Legend
A lot of OSR material follows the philosophy you lay out. If you haven't you might want to check out some of it. Because the focus is usually very much about utility over reading.

Yeah. I agree here. And, I'd point out, it follows my point rather well. OSR material draws very heavily on how the game was presented (largely pre-2e) before the world builders took things over. Material to be used, rather than read.

Yes, it’s a conpromise. A specific issue may lean one way more than another, but I’m reasonably sure they’ve been giving an entire adventure for free with any issie, right? Maybe not with this last one...I haven’t checked it out.

At this point, all I can say is that it’s pretty much impossible not to include at least some fluff material with any bit of crunch because without it, the mechanics lack context. So even in a best case scenario from your point of view, you’re going to be looking at a 50/50 split. I think that’s just a given.

Even in the releases where there is a free module, you still have about 90% of the material related to world building. There has not been a 50/50 split in material between stuff to read and stuff to use in decades.

So, no, it's not a given.

Are there a metric ton of modules out there for 5e? Yuppers, it's great. Fantastic stuff. Mostly DM's Guild stuff true, but, there's a buttload of stuff.

Trick is, so much of it is there to be read. As in, the DM will read it, most likely forget about 90% of it and then get on with building his or her own adventures, largely without any help from the publishers.

I said this earlier. To me, a perfect Monster Manual would have about 1/4 the monsters, but, every monster would come with 1-4 very short adventures/encounters, complete with maps, treasure, all the stuff you need to run that adventure. String together a bunch of those and you've got a complete adventure.

My absolute favorite 3e supplement was the Foul Locales series from Mystic Eye Games. Fantastic stuff. Each one focused on a certain type of location (urban, wilderness, whatever) and gave about 20 adventure locations you can plug and play. Great stuff. Used the heck out of those books. Heck, I STILL use them. Or, as another example, I used to callect the Dragonlance modules. The ones I got the most use out of were the last two (DL 15 and 16? is that the right number?). They were collections of 10 or 15 short adventures in Krynn that you could plug and play. FANTASTIC. I used the crap out of those.

THAT'S what I want. All this "10000 years ago, the ____ were a proud ___" stuff can go jump in the lake.
 

Sure and that’s fair. I can understand the preference. I don’t think that what WOTC has published for 5E is as unbalanced toward the fluff as he is implying. The big books seem pretty evenly split, don’t they?

And then there’s the AL modules that are available through the DMsGuild. Those are short adventures that seem to be very much what he has in mind.

But it still may not be enough of a shift for him. Which is fine, that’s his preference and I don’t blame him for it.

Yeah, I don't know. I have my own particular drum, so I tend not to try to project my own tastes too far. I don't really use adventures much, but I do like crunchy monster books, and rule books that add new fun material. Now, 5e obviously has core books and such which meet the criteria, in fact there's not really a LOT of fluff in the 5e core books. No more than you'd expect, certainly.

I think there have been some publishers however in the last few years, and maybe sometimes WotC is one of them, which go 'fluff crazy'. So, my eschewing of 5e material may be partly that, and just partly that I LIKE 4e fine and have a HUGE pile of 'stuff' to go with it that I will never exhaust.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I said this earlier. To me, a perfect Monster Manual would have about 1/4 the monsters, but, every monster would come with 1-4 very short adventures/encounters, complete with maps, treasure, all the stuff you need to run that adventure. String together a bunch of those and you've got a complete adventure.

Ugh! They tried this with the higher numbered monster manuals in 3e and I refused to waste my money on them. I'm not going to pay money for something I can do myself very easily, AND that everyone and their mother can just go out and read.
 

Ugh! They tried this with the higher numbered monster manuals in 3e and I refused to waste my money on them. I'm not going to pay money for something I can do myself very easily, AND that everyone and their mother can just go out and read.

Those Monster Manuals are awesome. Especially Fiend Folio.
 

Remove ads

Top