Forked from "An Epiphany" thread: Is World Building "Necessary"?

[rounser]

Hey rounser this is a great opinion about why worldbuilding doesn't work for you but really, you should stop stating it in a manner that suggests it's objective truth... when it's not.

Imaro, we've got 30 years of evidence, the failure of TSR as a company, and edition-sized "anti-fluff" backlashes that suggest you're wrong. You can continue to stick your head in the sand on this issue, but no amount of worldbuilding you do will create a campaign players can actually play, until you drop the stuffing around and actually put some effort into making adventures. If you improvise those, then perhaps they'd be much better if you cut back on the worldbuilding and invested time in something that actually has more to do with where the rubber meets the road. I'm surprised and vaguely amused that you continue to split hairs on this issue, because it's patently obvious.

But I'm not going to get sucked much further into this sinkhole again. Until you answer the questions I asked a page or two back about Keep on the Borderlands to define terms, there's no point in talking to you about this. Detailing the Caves of Chaos may constitute worldbuilding to you, which would make this conversation pointless. If you've run KotB (as you said you have, didn't you?) and weren't asleep when you did it you probably know what the Keep and the Caves are, if not the hermit.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Imaro, we've got 30 years of evidence, the failure of TSR as a company, and edition-sized "anti-fluff" backlashes that suggest you're wrong.

I personally have 30 years of experience that more than suggests that you are wrong.

I am not at all certain how the failure of TSR as a company suggests Imaro is wrong. Perhaps you can explain what this has to do with worldbuilding. Certainly, 2e focused on adventures that were less sandbox-y than 1e (AFAICT, focused on adventures similar to those non-worldbuilders in this thread are advocating), had lots of crunch in various splats, and managed to stave off the end with fluff for a considerable time, even in light of poorly written railroads for adventures, a general decline in the hobby, and the advent of collectable games that TSR's offering simply didn't compete well with despite TSR throwing a heck of a lot of money into them.

I have never heard it suggested by anyone with any knowledge about the collapse of TSR that it had to do with worldbuilding. Of course, you can continue to stick your head in the sand on this issue if you like, but your "evidence" simply isn't evidenciary.


RC

 

[Imaro]

Imaro, we've got 30 years of evidence, the failure of TSR as a company, and edition-sized "anti-fluff" backlashes that suggest you're wrong. You can continue to stick your head in the sand on this issue, but no amount of worldbuilding you do will create a campaign players can actually play, until you drop the stuffing around and actually put some effort into making adventures. If you improvise those, then perhaps they'd be much better if you cut back on the worldbuilding and invested time in something that actually has more to do with where the rubber meets the road. I'm surprised and vaguely amused that you continue to split hairs on this issue, because it's patently obvious.

What 30 years of evidence... so many factors contributed to TSR failing as a company, how does it in anyway constitute evidence to support anything you're claiming. Also what edition-sized anti-fluff backlashes? I mean honestly, does the continual low sales of modules support anti-adventure design backlash? You're reaching for straws here. Or is this another case of rounser's opinion being stated as fact...when it's not

As far as sticking my head in the sand, what am I hiding from? The belief that worldbuilding is a waste of time...subjective. The belief that worldbuilding doesn't add anything significant to a game...again subjective. Perhaps that time spent on worldbuilding could be better directed at "scripted"-adventure building... again subjective.

I never claimed that adventure design was a waste of time or unnecessary, what I disagree with is that worldbuilding is an objectively lesser or unimportant part of campaign design. You see in my worldbuilding I think up and give form to the hooks, sites, machinations and plots in an organic as opposed to "scripted" way. They develop naturally, and IMO more easily, from how I choose to structure the world. I don't like going in and preparing with the thought process of...ok what do I want the PC's to do this weekend, but to each their own, just don't tell me what is or isn't a "better" way for everyone when it is clearly a "better" way for you.

Finally on the subject of other people's games and what they should do to improve them... I would suggest before offering advice on what could make someone's game better you actually sit down and play in one of their campaigns. I mean I could say that I think if you spent more time on worldbuilding instead of "scripted"-adventure design that you might improve your game and your players might actually get a chance to choose the type of adventure they want in your world without you spoon feeding them the one you created the week before. But before I made a statement like that I would definitely play in your game so I would be speaking in an informed manner as opposed to just speaking.... But that's just me.

 

[Imaro]

But I'm not going to get sucked much further into this sinkhole again. Until you answer the questions I asked a page or two back about Keep on the Borderlands to define terms, there's no point in talking to you about this. Detailing the Caves of Chaos may constitute worldbuilding to you, which would make this conversation pointless. If you've run KotB (as you said you have, didn't you?) and weren't asleep when you did it you probably know what the Keep and the Caves are, if not the hermit.

Dude, I was like 9 when I ran KotB for my brother and cousin, I honestly don't remember it that well. If I had a copy of it here cool, I would answer but do you honestly expect people to discuss specifics of design about something they barely remember and can't reference? If so my answer is... I got nothing to say on it because I can't answer in an informed way.

 

[Scribble]

Seems like everyone wants to make things binary all the time. Either it is something or it isn't. Either you're a worldbuilder or you're not. Either it's a good way to do something or it's not. Blah.

Too little world building and I feel like I'm flying blind, or just bobbing around in a void.

Too much detail and I feel like a lot of effort goes to waste (because it never comes up) or it makes things too hard to ever use.

I enjoy being somewhere in between. I have a rough outline of my "world" with some parts a little more rough then others, and some parts slightly more detailed then others. Some stuff gets filled in as we go, some stuff never comes up. Some stuff even gets revised as we go along.

This is how I even aproach premade campaign settings. I usually use them as a rough starting point for a campaign, and modify as needed during the campaign.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Sounds like a fine way to do things to me, Scribble.

 

[Bacons]

I'd say it's a pervasive idea among the people who write fantasy and science fiction precisely because it's what the readership has demonstrated that it wants. Like I said, it's a (popular) genre convention. It's not something being foisted on the readers by misguided authors (which is kinda what I get from your statement... forgive me if that's inaccurate).

Oh, that wasn't what I was trying to say, sorry! I love a story set against an intricately built backdrop. It doesn't, however, help aspiring authors who probably need to be trying their hand at actually completing a short story or improving their general writing craft to be told by their writing community that you can't write anything fantasy or SF unless you've built a massive world/universe and know everything about it. World-building is an asset if you do it well, but it can easily bog down an inexperienced author (or GM).

 

[Raven Crowking]

Having sold a few fantasy and sf short stories, and having read many books on the subject of writing them, I have no experience with being told "that you can't write anything fantasy or SF unless you've built a massive world/universe and know everything about it". I rather wonder where this idea comes from.

What these books generally tell you is that you should have some idea of what the background is, and that you should choose a few details that both supply the necessary background and resonate with the theme. Hard sf is, of course, a bit different. Even so, I've never seen a book that suggest approaching world-building more carefully than plot-building or character-building.

Nor have I ever seen that sort of advice given to GMs in any rpg sourcebook anywhere.

YMMV.


RC

 

[Bacons]

Having sold a few fantasy and sf short stories, and having read many books on the subject of writing them, I have no experience with being told "that you can't write anything fantasy or SF unless you've built a massive world/universe and know everything about it". I rather wonder where this idea comes from.

It comes from the dark underbelly of the internets!


edit to say: I had assumed this whole thing was arguing largely about the dedication to massive world-building in online communities, as that's the only place I've really seen it (in terms of both fiction and RPGs). Internet communities are all I was referencing in my previous post.

 

[Hussar]

/snip

However you've made a distinction that others such as Hussar have been unable to make for some reason and that is the fact that it can add to the game and isn't necessarily a waste of time.

And when have I ever attributed the statement that "world building is absolutely a bad thing and no one should ever do it." to you, Hussar? What I have argued against are your generalizations of it being a waste of time, or that campaigns should be plot-based and that worldbuilding is necessarily divorced from the act of actually playing the game.

Right here:

/snip

However you've made a distinction that others such as Hussar have been unable to make for some reason and that is the fact that it can add to the game and isn't necessarily a waste of time.

I mean it's pretty easy to make it seem like you said whatever you want when you're selectively cutting and pasting your comments... Yeah, I noticed all the snips and parts that were left out. I mean really are you honestly trying to play the victim role now? Your posts are mostly like the person who apologizes by stating... "I'm so sorry you feel that way.".

One minute you claim that worldbuilding isn't the worst thing you could do (which with the multitude of bad DM'ing moves one could make isn't saying much) but then in the same paragraph have no problem claiming it's a disservice to one's campaign, a time waste, or only something to look at (and here I thought it was something for my players to interact with). But you're right none of these statements give the impression or insinuation that worldbuilding is a bad thing.

There is no contradiction here. Just because I think something is better, does not mean that something else is bad. Yes, I think that world building tends to lead to a huge time sink that could be better put to use. I do think that. But, better put to use does not mean that world building is useless.

The negative bits are on you, not me. I'm saying that there may be a better way. Several people are jumping up and down saying that I'm claiming that world building is badwrongfun and completely useless. It's not. I've stated that repeatedly. Some people are now trying to claim that I'm too inexperienced to have an informed opinion. At least, it looks like they are passive/aggressive pointing that at me. If they aren't perhaps I'm being too sensitive.

If nothing else Kask, look at the join date. Do you really think I joined and then never gamed for several years after that?

What I'm trying to suggest is that there is a better way to campaign creation. That by emphasizing world building, we've done a disservice to DM's who could better employ their efforts. Not that you should NEVER do world building. Or that world building is a complete waste of time.

It's not. Heck, there are multiple campaigns that attest to the value of world building.