Agree with (2). Option to use it if I feel so inclined, but not an obligation if I have a better alternative.
Flavor in Rules Text
- Thread starter Stormborn
- Start date
Agree with (2). Option to use it if I feel so inclined, but not an obligation if I have a better alternative.
I like to have the fluff tied into the crunch.
Let's face it ... each RPG has a flavor and style that its rules are intrinsically tied to. This is not to say that the flavor can't be changed, only that there is a sweet spot for each system ... a type of game that it is best suited to support. At least from the designers point of view.
IMHO ...having fluff that helps to define & enhance that flavor, tied in with the rules, is the best choice for the text of a system. Sadly there are not many systems (and designers) that are able to merge these together.
Let's face it ... each RPG has a flavor and style that its rules are intrinsically tied to. This is not to say that the flavor can't be changed, only that there is a sweet spot for each system ... a type of game that it is best suited to support. At least from the designers point of view.
IMHO ...having fluff that helps to define & enhance that flavor, tied in with the rules, is the best choice for the text of a system. Sadly there are not many systems (and designers) that are able to merge these together.
Fallen Seraph
First Post
Number 2 here.
4e hit it right on its hammer with stuff like the Powers. There is a brief minor fluff description but it is so separate and small that it is easily to disengage and is simply a demonstration.
For me, for non-setting specific games that is what fluff should be a brief demonstration of what one could do with the rules. So the fluff for a race is a brief demonstration of where one could take that race, thats it.
4e hit it right on its hammer with stuff like the Powers. There is a brief minor fluff description but it is so separate and small that it is easily to disengage and is simply a demonstration.
For me, for non-setting specific games that is what fluff should be a brief demonstration of what one could do with the rules. So the fluff for a race is a brief demonstration of where one could take that race, thats it.
Stormborn
Explorer
Thanks for voting everyone. This has really helped me get a direction on a project I am working on for a soon (December) to be released product. Looks like my instincts were correct, at least as far as abotu 70% of you go. More input welcome.
PS Let me add for those with questions: This is flavor for a ruleset specifically intended to describe a particular time period and setting, so its not like its a generic rule set.
PS Let me add for those with questions: This is flavor for a ruleset specifically intended to describe a particular time period and setting, so its not like its a generic rule set.
Of course, thinking like this leads to a D&D setting where it's impossible to break a limb, lose a limb, (even twist an ankle or suffer any debilitating injury at all, save actual death), where senility is unhead of (because aging can only make you smarter and wiser) but the economy is absolutely bonkers and the towns and cities are overrun with millions of chickens (cf. Hongian economics).
The fluff/crunch disconnect isn't just unavoidable in D&D, it's vital in the creation of a semi-believable setting. The rules (at least in D&D) describe an absurd world, when taken at face value.
Leatherhead
Possibly a Idiot.
I voted number 4.
I like number 3, but the mechanics need to be highlighted somehow when written that way.
I like number 3, but the mechanics need to be highlighted somehow when written that way.
Rafael Ceurdepyr
First Post
I think for a non-generic set of rules, I favor #3. It helps me get more of a feel for how the rules operate within the setting. I could go for #2 as well.
howandwhy99
Adventurer
Description and rules are the same thing, so I voted #3.
Similar Threads
