Charles Ryan on Flavour and Rules

[MerricB]

From the Wizards boards:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=307074

Q. I have the impression that, since the early days of the 3rd edition until now, (I'm referring to WOTC products) most of the flavor of the game has been taken out in favor of a very rule-intensive approach.

Yes, this is somewhat true. Several posters have already commented on the reason: We've chosen to provide a game system that is most easily adaptable to any DM's campaign. Adding a lot of flavor text makes assumptions about the style and nature of the audience's campaigns; those assumptions can make the material less useful, rather than more useful.

For what it's worth, we didn't make this decision from the top of an ivory tower. Feedback we've received from players over the years led us to this approach in Third Edition. It's not the best approach for everyone (what is?), but it seems to be what works best for the majority of players.

That said, we're looking to leak a little more color into our products--someone commented on Races of Stone as an example. You'll see more material like that in the future--material that adds depth to the rules content, but generally doesn't step on the toes of DMs running their own campaigns in their own styles.
__________________
Charles Ryan
Brand Manager, Roleplaying Games
Wizards of the Coast

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Part of me thinks the "mechanics vs. flavor" debate is incredibly important to RPGs. Another part of me wishes it would go away.

There are some outsanding mechanics writers in RPGs who really shouln't be writing flavor text because they stink at it. Conversely, there are some terrific writers who absolutely need to have all their mechanics work vetted before an editor and playtesting staff before one word sees print. Some people can do both and the people who can do both are perfectly capeable of dropping the ball on one or both parts (usually when a deadline looms).

The problem creeps up more times than I like to think about. There's one d20 writer who I think is great at mechanics, but I really want to grab him by the shoulders and invoke the line from Stargate: Atlantis: "You don't get to name anything. Ever." One the other side of the coin, there's the module at the end of the epic level handbook that

Spoiler

has an obsidian castle at the edge of a cliff that has a lava "waterfall". When the players approach a red dragon launches into the sky shaking molten rock from its skin. Great imagry! Too bad there's no way for a party within the suggested level limits to defeat the thing.

Wonderful scene. Lousy mechanics.

I don't care about the ratio of mechanics to flavor text. I just want what there is to be well-written.

 

[EricNoah]

When they make a toolkit, though, I do want some examples of what you can make with the tools provided. And to me some of that implies explaining or demonstrating how the rules can fit into the story or what impact they might have on a story. To me that's an important blending of fluff and crunch.

 

[BryonD]

When they make a toolkit, though, I do want some examples of what you can make with the tools provided. And to me some of that implies explaining or demonstrating how the rules can fit into the story or what impact they might have on a story. To me that's an important blending of fluff and crunch.

Do you feel that WotC is not providing this to you?

 

[Psion]

Adding a lot of flavor text makes assumptions about the style and nature of the audience's campaigns; those assumptions can make the material less useful, rather than more useful.

This is true. If you are sure to include A LOT in the above statement.

That said, I think a little goes a long way, can gives you good ideas, and can be generally non-intrusive. That's the main reason I differ vociferously with notions that CCII is campaign specific, and I find R&RI to still be one of the better rules supplements: it gives me ideas of how to use those rules.

 

[diaglo]

Charles Ryan on Fluff

i had to do a double take on the title...

looked too much like huff... i thot this was gonna be a designers gone bad thread...

film at 11

edit: and of course reading it as huff... finally made it click in my mind what is wrong with d02.

 

[Henry]

The word "Fluff" isn't exactly without its connotations. I'll shut up now.

I hope they do go back to a little more story-based content, if nothing else, like Eric says, giving some light examples in their works. Now, if Forgotten Realms is the goal, or Eberron, or another specific setting, then I WANT that story driven info! Without it, the flavor of a game world is nonexistant. When I want Serpent Kingdoms for instance (didn't pick it up, by the way, I'll get to that later), I want info on the politics, the who's and why of power in the region. I don't need the "Rainbow guardian of Yss'l'ss" or some other prestige class, and I don't need extra feats or equipment, unless it really brings home a point about the way they do things west of the Vilhon. I was looking forward to Serpent Kingdoms, but found its flavor still too lacking, even with a renewed emphasis on it. What I skimmed, just didn't tell me enough about that area. WotC still got my dollar, because I bought Eberron instead, and there was so much new material there that it was quite able to whet my appetite.

So yes, I want more flavor! And what is being done is coming closer to what I want.

 

[EricNoah]

Well let me give an example of what I'm talking about: Frostburn is chock full of crunch. But then at the end they do kind of "mix it together" and provide a couple of adventure settings with NPCs, keyed encounter areas, etc. That's a nice way to put all of the material together and demonstrate how different parts can fit.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

Actually, in some ways I think D&D has gotten more and more into flavor in recent years as well as keeping with lots of rules creation.

This is off topic but the only complaint I really have with anything now is that there are so many optional rules and such to add flavor to characters that I know I am missing out on all kinds of things, but that likely has more to do with the OGL and so many publishers putting out so many different things and so many different options.

 

[KB9JMQ]

I like a crunchy book with some flavor text. Not only do I want the rules to be clear and concise but I like the book to be a good read.
I agree with Eric about examples. I love when someone takes the time to show you how or why rules and items work.