[ELH] Psions defense vs. tjasamcarl

[tjasamcarl]

not exactly

I'm saying that wotc rules supps are the most consistent in terms of balance, not because it was produced by wotc.

When i say a good supp does not neccesarily appeal to the person reading, i mean in terms of immediate gratification. It improves the quality of the game, but that doesn't make it a recreational read. While not appealing to any one individual, it still holds value to the GROUP. This is because gaming is GROUP activity. Thus any component of the game falls flat for the individual.

I rate OA the highest, because it has the most rules material. I don't care about the proportion of rules to fluff, but i do gauge the value on the absolute quanity of solid rules versus the price, not the relative pages versus fluff. Fluff doesn't bother me, i just don't value it. You seem to be projecting an irrational extreme sentiment onto my posts. Why?

 

[rounser]

To a point I agree with tjasamcarl that fluff can be for naught but facilitation of intellectual masturbation and ego strokery. I'd add that not all fluff is equal, though - some is directly applicable to your game - others not. Wishy washy macro level setting material could be considered such "bad fluff", on one level, but as Wizardru points out in the case of the LGG, it can be inspirational - which can be worth more than you pay it credit for. Perhaps what makes Keep on the Borderlands and Tomb of Horrors classics in gamer's minds isn't just ubiquity, but the atmosphere they present. In the case of the Keep, limitless possibilities and unexplored horizons - anything could be out there because there's no setting defined beyond the Keep; in the case of the Tomb, eldritch deadliness, and an uncompromising style of play which fired more than one person's imagination.

Although the argument that the fantasy genre is so overbaked that any fool can come up with their own fluffiness has substance, I would add that to a certain extent that is a mirage - else why are there so many adventures which are widely considered substandard around? Look at the "classic adventures" thread for evidence. They must be hard to write in a way that transcends hackery. Designers, like most gamers, think they've got it in the bag when it comes to writing adventures, but the results seem to suggest otherwise - else why would so many DMs be convinced that they can do better? It may be because of the home ground advantage (no-one knows your tastes and your material like you) and a loyalty to your own creative output.

I don't begrudge the stance of keeping fluff out of the ELH, but as Psion implies, crunch can be inspirational as well - even in the form of hard rules - and in the case of D&D, arguably is obliged to be so. Feats, spells and the existence or abscence of certain rules impact on the flavour of the game, and people's willingness to play it. Surely the difference between a cool feat, spell, rule or monster and a boring one affects the tone of the game, and whether people want to play it. That's that wishy-washy "soul" thing in action. Without soul, D&D is no better than Fudge - and because it's not a blank slate like that is why many people bought a ticket to ride. All IMO...

 

[tjasamcarl]

And on the FRCS

The FRCS, like the MotP, probably attained an inordinate amount of the fluff market, but that doesn't change the fact that, with a few exceptions, rules triumph over fluff in the market. Note how subsequent FR supps apparently did comparitivly poorly to rules heavy core books. The FRCS' success probably had less to do with the value of the fluff in and of itself, and more to do with the network effects resulting from its long held status as a 'default' world. It provided a vague background for modules while allowing varied groups to speak the same language. How much detail or 'ideas' come into play in most FR games is debatable, especially given poor sales of Lords of Darkness, etc. Its probably a good resource of place names though. That and it does monopolizes those who do care about fluff in the first place.

 

[Ds Da Man]

When I want fluff for my settings, I buy a setting specific "fluff" book, when I want a book to cross over into all aspects, cut the crap, gimme da' rules!