How do you feel about Fluff in your Crunch?

[KingCrab]

People complained endlessly that 3e's core books were bland and boring. Absolutely no flavour. Well, be careful what you wish for. You wanted flavor in your core books, now you got it in spades.

Um, that was never a complaint of mine. I liked 3.x. I don't think the books are bland or boring. I like that they are meant to be used in a variety of settings. I didn't get what I would have wished for (had I wanted a new edition) which was something like 3.x with maybe some more balance changes and some new interesting rules and abilities.

Added: So my point is, don't try to blame me for this. I did not want flavor in my core books (specially glowing wyvern acolyte flavor.)

 

[KingCrab]

Keep Fluff for the Settings books. Seems pretty simple to me.

Exactly. It is much easier to keep the core books (what some people consider) "bland". This way when settings are released you can start with core and add X,Y,Z instead of start with core, take out A,B,C, and D and add X, Y and Z.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I voted for sidebars. I know the Core books have an implied setting, but it shouldn't unnecessarily interfere with the other published settings.

For instance, when the FRCS comes out, is Forgotten Realms going to suddenly spawn Golden Wyvern Adepts, or will there have to be a sidebar saying "GWA's are now known as 'Silver Moon Sages.'" Because that's both dumb and annoying.

I would like it to stay in the sidebars though, and not removed entirely. I'm running a mini-campaign with some Iron Heroes and Tome of Battle elements, and I'm using the ToB maneuver names in the book. It lends itself to easy and quick world creation that sounds flavorful; but I think it would be time consuming and annoying to adjust all of the names to Eberronian or Realmsian alternatives (not to mention my players would object to having to learn the names all over again).

An example of a book with almost zero flavor was Grim Tales. Awesome mechanics, but I almost fell asleep every time I tried to read them ...

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

D&D 3e is an excellent game for running fantasy adventures in a world that looks a startling amount like Greyhawk. And yes Virginia, when you consider some of what we see in fantasy worlds (Tekumel or Glorantha on the one end of the spectrum, Nehwon and errr....Thieves' World? Do the ever name the -world-? on the other), Faerun looks a whole hell of a lot like Greyhawk.

This time, they're going in a different direction.

If there is no default setting, then there should be no default fluffy names.

But there is this time. Not in the lame-duck "here's some gods and we don't have to rename the spells" sense of 3e, but an honest to god assumed setting that yes, you'll have to work around if you want to homebrew something remarkably different.

I have a feeling somehow we'll all get by.

And cue the chorus of "By playing 3.5 in Greyhawk, As Gygax Intended!" in 3...2...1...

 

[Woas]

People complained endlessly that 3e's core books were bland and boring. Absolutely no flavour. Well, be careful what you wish for. You wanted flavor in your core books, now you got it in spades.

Well I sure didn't wish for it. That's what campaign setting books or my own imagination is for.

 

[Odhanan]

I don't like most of the fluff changes.

 

[Stormtower]

I actually like the fluffy names of Bo9S but I prefer such things in an sidebar or as part of an optional supplement. However, I realize that 4e is going with a strongly implied default setting and that the 4e naming conventions are designed around this... too bad for me. Maybe they will put more generic titles for Golden Wyvern and Emerald Ice and such in the sidebars instead?

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm a bit puzzled... there IS or there ISN'T a default setting?

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

I'd say, based on everything we've seen, there is one. It doesn't have a name or nations or NPCs or anything, but it seems one will be referred to in the core books.

 

[PeterWeller]

I'm a bit puzzled... there IS or there ISN'T a default setting?

There's not, but that hasn't stopped people confusing the "Points of Light" with a setting.