Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 458743" data-attributes="member: 2067">I think someone's being a bit oversensitive about the term. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Flavor is actually a good thing, and I think it works as a term too. Without flavor the game is like a rice cake -- good, but bland. Not fun.What has been prevalent to the 3e designers was that in 2e, people whined about there being too much story, too many &quot;it has to be this and then this,&quot; and it was difficult to accomadate those who fit the mold.So, as a base line with 3e, they lightened up the fluff to be almost nonexistant. Then there was the recent SKR discussion, which gave rise to the term &quot;crunch.&quot; (I could be wrong, but that seemed to be when it started). The opposite of something crunchy is fluffy...fluff.I don't see any of these as real value statements that are deragatory or praising. Flavor adds dimension...fluff adds the flavor...they both probably need a good crunchy baseline to work from.So &quot;ambience&quot; add the &quot;enjoyable sensation&quot; once one already has the &quot;core rules base.&quot;What's the dilly,&nbsp; yo? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 458743, member: 2067"] I think someone's being a bit oversensitive about the term. ;) Flavor is actually a good thing, and I think it works as a term too. Without flavor the game is like a rice cake -- good, but bland. Not fun. What has been prevalent to the 3e designers was that in 2e, people whined about there being too much story, too many "it has to be this and then this," and it was difficult to accomadate those who fit the mold. So, as a base line with 3e, they lightened up the fluff to be almost nonexistant. Then there was the recent SKR discussion, which gave rise to the term "crunch." (I could be wrong, but that seemed to be when it started). The opposite of something crunchy is fluffy...fluff. I don't see any of these as real value statements that are deragatory or praising. Flavor adds dimension...fluff adds the flavor...they both probably need a good crunchy baseline to work from. So "ambience" add the "enjoyable sensation" once one already has the "core rules base." What's the dilly, yo? :p [/QUOTE]

Verification