Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mouseferatu" data-source="post: 1404236" data-attributes="member: 1288">Okay, I've kept my mouth shut for far too long about this. Even if I'm the only person to feel this way, I'm going to speak up.I'm sick and tired of the word &quot;fluff&quot; used to describe the setting/thematic/non-mechanical aspects of an RPG rulebook. I don't know who first decided that &quot;fluff&quot; was a good counterpart to &quot;crunch,&quot; but it's actually vaguely offensive to those of us who happen to like some mood with our rules. When used in a literary sense outside the RPG world, &quot;fluff&quot; refers to padding, or words/writing that have no real value but to fill space. Or, to quote the dictionary:&quot;3. any light or trivial matter or talk.&quot;The non-mechanical aspects of a rulebook are not trivial. I'm not in any way claiming the rules aren't important; crunch makes the game. But I'll challenge anyone who tells me that the other stuff isn't equally as important; a book with just crunch is a textbook, and a bad textbook at that.So, I don't know where &quot;fluff&quot; got started, but if someone else can create a term, I don't see why we of EN World can't do the same. I'd like to propose &quot;flavor&quot; as the new term for any part of an RPG book that's not crunch. &quot;Flavor&quot; is not offensive, lacking the negative connotation of &quot;fluff.&quot; It's actually a better word for the writing, because it's more descriptive. People only know what &quot;fluff&quot; is if they see it in context with the word &quot;crunch,&quot; but it's pretty obvious what &quot;flavor&quot; refers to.So... no more &quot;fluff.&quot; The two differing aspects of RPG books are now &quot;crunch&quot; and &quot;flavor.&quot; Who's with me?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mouseferatu, post: 1404236, member: 1288"] Okay, I've kept my mouth shut for [i]far[/i] too long about this. Even if I'm the only person to feel this way, I'm going to speak up. I'm sick and tired of the word "fluff" used to describe the setting/thematic/non-mechanical aspects of an RPG rulebook. I don't know who first decided that "fluff" was a good counterpart to "crunch," but it's actually vaguely offensive to those of us who happen to like some mood with our rules. When used in a literary sense outside the RPG world, "fluff" refers to padding, or words/writing that have no real value but to fill space. Or, to quote the dictionary: "3. any light or trivial matter or talk." The non-mechanical aspects of a rulebook are not trivial. I'm not in any way claiming the rules aren't important; crunch makes the game. But I'll challenge anyone who tells me that the other stuff isn't equally as important; a book with [i]just[/i] crunch is a textbook, and a bad textbook at that. So, I don't know where "fluff" got started, but if someone else can create a term, I don't see why we of EN World can't do the same. I'd like to propose "flavor" as the new term for any part of an RPG book that's not crunch. "Flavor" is not offensive, lacking the negative connotation of "fluff." It's actually a better word for the writing, because it's more descriptive. People only know what "fluff" is if they see it in context with the word "crunch," but it's pretty obvious what "flavor" refers to. So... no more "fluff." The two differing aspects of RPG books are now "crunch" and "flavor." Who's with me? [/QUOTE]

Verification