Why Worldbuilding is Bad

[Bedrockgames]

Not entirely sure myself.

But I think the gist of it is that those who prefer to have encounters, stat blocks, and game mechanics provided for them by WOTC are not having their particular indulgences catered to like those who prefer stories, world building, and setting lore are having their particular indulgences catered too. Or something.

Whatever it is, it's bad, and if you don't agree then you are on the other side and your opinion doesn't count because you are already being 100% catered too.

And Dragon+ (which I've never even looked at) is somehow catering to me specifically.

If all we are talking about is WOTC, I feel like they are in a bit of an impossible position. I mean, they are trying to get the widest possible segment of D&D fans they can (and in honesty it seems like they've done a pretty good job of achieving that with 5E, even if I don't play it myself). Whatever they put out is going to be a compromise that maximizes their customer base. I imagine the people on the extreme ends of any playstyle will feel snubbed. But on the whole, I hear people from a wide range of styles saying they like 5E. If people want another approach, the market is literally flooded with options.

 

[Sunseeker]

People have so much material that it’s not really usable.

If your line is "If it's not a stat block its useless to me." Well okay then YOU are the one stating the unreasonable position and YOU are the one making the impossible demand.

This goes back to my comment on the upcoming Pathfinder edition: this reads a lot like "How dare WOTC not design everything without taking my specific feelings and emotions about D&D into consideration!" Like, dude, take a little ego off the top.

Lots of things in official books are useless to me, to any given person. I doubt I've met anyone who found 100% of any book useful. That's just kinda the way the cookie crumbles.

 

[Hussar]

If your line is "If it's not a stat block its useless to me." Well okay then YOU are the one stating the unreasonable position and YOU are the one making the impossible demand.

This goes back to my comment on the upcoming Pathfinder edition: this reads a lot like "How dare WOTC not design everything without taking my specific feelings and emotions about D&D into consideration!" Like, dude, take a little ego off the top.

Lots of things in official books are useless to me, to any given person. I doubt I've met anyone who found 100% of any book useful. That's just kinda the way the cookie crumbles.

Why would you even think that that's my position? Since when have I even suggested that? Oh, right, if everything setting related is world building, then, obviously, all I want is flavorless stat blocks and number charts. Sorry, that's the straw man position that people have attributed to me, not the position I take.

I have no problems with flavor text. That's fine. No problem. Like I said many times, if you have a Throat Warbler Mangrove in the game, you actually have to tell folks what a Throat Warbler Mangrove is. Fair enough. No problems.

What I don' need is pages upon pages of background material on a Throat Warbler Mangrove with absolutely nothing I can actually plug into my game.

So, basically, the "compromise" is, suck it up or find a new game to play. After all, there are lots of other games out there. The world builders have taken over D&D, and everyone else can just get off the train.

I fail to understand how a more pragmatic, useful approach to game material, as things to be USED rather than things to be READ is such a horrible idea.

 

[Lanefan]

Again, I’ll point to Dragon+ for a good example of what you are calling compromise.

We have: an article specifically about world building, a part three of short fiction, an article detailing the history of githyanki and githzerai, including links to PDFs of more articles detailing them.

On the non world building side, we have an article of maps for the latest AP, and an adverticle, linking to modules for sale.

Umm, again, you think that’s a compromise?

There's only one thing missing from that list in comparison to most old-time Dragon magazines: rules tweaks.

Early Dragons always had at least one or two or three articles that were, in effect, either homebrew rules ideas or trial balloons from the TSR design team; these might include new classes, new magic items, a rebuild of a rules system e.g. initiative, or whatever. Once 3e hit this sort of content almost disappeared, as where TSR saw rules as guidelines to be tweaked WotC saw them as inviolate.

But most Dragons didn't have adventure modules in them; and none at all once they started putting Dungeon mag. out.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Why would you even think that that's my position? Since when have I even suggested that? Oh, right, if everything setting related is world building, then, obviously, all I want is flavorless stat blocks and number charts. Sorry, that's the straw man position that people have attributed to me, not the position I take.

I have no problems with flavor text. That's fine. No problem. Like I said many times, if you have a Throat Warbler Mangrove in the game, you actually have to tell folks what a Throat Warbler Mangrove is. Fair enough. No problems.

What I don' need is pages upon pages of background material on a Throat Warbler Mangrove with absolutely nothing I can actually plug into my game.

So, basically, the "compromise" is, suck it up or find a new game to play. After all, there are lots of other games out there. The world builders have taken over D&D, and everyone else can just get off the train.

I fail to understand how a more pragmatic, useful approach to game material, as things to be USED rather than things to be READ is such a horrible idea.

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.

 

[Maxperson]

Why would you even think that that's my position? Since when have I even suggested that? Oh, right, if everything setting related is world building, then, obviously, all I want is flavorless stat blocks and number charts. Sorry, that's the straw man position that people have attributed to me, not the position I take.

Everything setting related is not worldbuilding. Worldbuilding is the act, and setting is the result. Everything in a setting is related TO worldbuilding, but it is not the same as worldbuilding.

What I don' need is pages upon pages of background material on a Throat Warbler Mangrove with absolutely nothing I can actually plug into my game.

So, basically, the "compromise" is, suck it up or find a new game to play. After all, there are lots of other games out there. The world builders have taken over D&D, and everyone else can just get off the train.

I fail to understand how a more pragmatic, useful approach to game material, as things to be USED rather than things to be READ is such a horrible idea.

What I don't need are plant monsters and oozes. I almost never use them, so I have to suck it up when they are given to me in monster books or find another game to play. You aren't alone in this, so you might as well stop pretending that you are the wounded one here and the rest of us are skipping merrily along, happy with everything we are getting.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Again, I’ll point to Dragon+ for a good example of what you are calling compromise.

We have: an article specifically about world building, a part three of short fiction, an article detailing the history of githyanki and githzerai, including links to PDFs of more articles detailing them.

On the non world building side, we have an article of maps for the latest AP, and an adverticle, linking to modules for sale.

Umm, again, you think that’s a compromise?
[MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION], I’m not twisting anything. You have so much material that you cannot even find what you are looking for. You stated that. A lack of indexing means that you can’t really use the material you have. Right? So, it’s perfectly fair to say you have more than you can use.

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.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

In the late 90s TSR released a 5 CD-set with #1 to #250, plus the 7 prior issues of The Strategic Review, as PDFs. All OCRed and Indexed.

I believe that a licensing/rights issue with regard to some Kenzer content was what led to the settlement that allowed the release of Kingdoms of Kalamar using D&D trade dress, and then the use of TSR-era IP in early-00s Hackmaster.

EDIT: I should add, I have this collection.

I knew they released a set of CDs. I never knew all of those Dragons were on it. Just never paid that much attention I guess. Late 90's TSR was kinda off my radar.

 

[TheSword]

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.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

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.

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.