No more "fluff"!!! [A rant and a request]

[EricNoah]

I think it goes somewhat back to the "toolkit" approach of 3E though, too -- if I'm importing some feats or spells from product X to use in my homebrew world, most likely I'm importing the "crunch" and making up my own "fluff" or "flavor". I think some people feel that creating "crunch" is hard while creating "flavor" is easy, and thus they don't ascribe much value to it. Which is kind of ironic, if you think about it -- the open gaming license protects "flavor" better than it protects "crunch" and yet there may be a perception that the later is more "valuable" in some way...

 

[Wippit Guud]

"I like fluffy!"

- Stitch

 

[jgbrowning]

I know, my book is only fluff and I like it...
like it..
like it..
yes, I do....


I said I like it......




I said I like it....



joe b.

 

[VirgilCaine]

I don't know anyone willing to eat flavorless food, nutritious or not.

Ditto that. Even MREs have SOME taste...or at least they're supposed to.

Hey, you back me on my little quest to eradicate the annoying term "Munchkin", and I'll back your little coup d'etat.

Swedes call them "kobolds"--better?


I think flavor is just as important as "crunch."

 

[Dreeble]

Heya:

My beef is with the existing term[.]

I'm offended by the use of the word "beef" as a replacement for "problem" or something similar. Beef is not a problem! It's good and delicious.

Take care,
Dreeble

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'm offended by the use of the word "beef" as a replacement for "problem" or something similar. Beef is not a problem! It's good and delicious.

Take care,
Dreeble

You may assume that the "beef" to which I referred was tainted by Mad Cow, and had no bearing on, or relation to, good and delicious beef.

 

[Particle_Man]

How about "story"/"story elements", "rules"/"rules additions", and "really really annoying people who try to have the best possible character with the best possible items, even if they have to cheat against the rules and/or contradict story logic to do so"?

 

[Altalazar]

I'm all for eliminating "fluff," "crunch," "munchkin," and all terms associated with the magic level of a setting when there is more than a copper piece with "light" cast on it and a rusty +1 dagger in existence in the entire game world.

 

[Numion]

"Flavor" seems to imply "pleasant but unnecessary to good nutrition" or something along those lines.

How about double-plus-descriptive ?

 

[blargney the second]

I'm all for the premeditated murder of fluff as it pertains to important and relevant descriptive text. However, I think it still has a use in the more common use of the term: useless or frivolous words, written simply to take up space.

Case in point: speaking of fluffers, WotC's latest Realmslore: Alustriel's Consort. According to the descriptive text (True Fluff!), he's a "superb actor", which would lead one to believe that he has some ranks in Bluff, or Profession(Acting), or something.

Nope.

The descriptive text doesn't mean anything in this case. It's simply there to take up space. Fluff!

-the blargil's advocate