Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rel" data-source="post: 5464753" data-attributes="member: 99">I view a lot of this from the standpoint of how people (players or potential players) "chunk" information.  "Chunking" is a word that I picked up from a book a while ago (don't remember the title) that describes how we wrap a set of information into a specific "chunk" so that it is easier to mentally hold onto rather than a lot of loose details.So when I say the word "castle" then a person immediately gets a mental image that embodies a chunk of information such that I don't have to describe every detail of the castle for them to interact with it as an object in the game (at least not until they need further detail like where entrances are if they are trying to sneak into the castle or something like that).  So let's say I decide that, because there are dragons and flying wizards in my games, that the traditional concept of a castle makes no sense.  I have replaced them with some other type of fortress that seems defensible from such threats as dragons and flying wizards.  But that also means that I've now got to describe such fortresses in detail to the players so that they get the concept and layout of such a place.  And I'll probably have to do so several times before my new fortress concept becomes a useful chunk to them.  I can no longer fall back on the simple chunk of visualization that comes from saying "castle".If fantasy games have too many exceptions to the chunks of information that people are used to then they have to spend all their time describing stuff rather than letting people take it for granted.  At a typical RPG session this kind of description might be very worthwhile.  For example if the PC's are going to spend the next three sessions exploring one of these Not-A-Castle fortresses then it's probably worth describing the concept in detail to them.  But, if they are just passing by on the way to someplace else and see it in the distance, then is it really worth taking the time to describe it when you could use that time instead to move on to the next thing they are actually going to interact with?  Maybe it is.  Such details are part of the oft vaunted "verisimilitude".  But the question remains as to how much is too much.Personally I sometimes think that the best way to tackle such ideas is to take advantage of chunking but also throw a twist or exception in there that puts your own stamp on the world and gets you the verisimilitude in the bargain (hopefully).  So back to my castle example, what if I said, "It's a castle.  But you can see that it has one particularly tall tower in the middle.  Rumor has it that this tower contains a magical device that can launch a big web-like spell that can bring down a flying monster so that nothing can simply fly over the walls of the castle and attack those within."  Suddenly my players can chunk that again by thinking, "Ok a regular castle but with a giant web gun in the center.  Got it."</blockquote>

Verification