Races of Destiny: First Look

[JoeGKushner]

If people keep saying they want fluff and then don't support those products that contain fluff... well, it doesn't take Dr. Spok to tell us what companies are going to keep making. It's already been established by WoTC what sells and that's where a lot of this whole crunch vs fluff talk started with. Now what sells for a book doesn't necessarily sell for a magazine and I'm looking forward to Dragon magazine having a 'return' to good solid articles with more than just game stats to them.

I like fluff. Heck, I'm the guy who started the "Favorite Dragon Articles" thread talking about old fluff. Stuff like "Be Aware, Take Care", and "Saintly Standards".

It's just people say one thing and do another, especially on the net where the consequences for not following through on your actions is 0.

 

[Zweischneid]

Well, for myself, I'd like to question the notion that Races of Destiny is a particularly fluffy book.

I think the major appeal of RoD is the crunchy parts. The whole Illuman Sigils and the Chameleon PrC, etc.. really tickly the stat-tinkerer in me.

Sadly though.. crunch is not enough to sell a product to me.

I agree that this is a highly subjective point, but lets compare two cases to highlight my point.

If you take the amount of adventure/story potential the Illumans (with Feats & PrC, background stories and all, like 40 pages of coverage.. maybe more) would potentially introduce into a campaign as to, say the Eberron Warforged (Feats & PrC and all, about 5 to 7 pages of coverage) have opened up in my (and it seems many other peoples) campaigns, then the RoD fluff is not only exceedingly bad (IMO), but also spread very, very thin.

So 1: Not any dumb filler between the numbers is fluff, and not any kind of fluff (infact not even a majority of fluff) is worth buying it... note: it has to be good.

That in mind, I will always and most defenitly follow through on my standards and purchase any and every book that I consider to be good or excellent fluff. Despite my running Dawnforge Campaign (uhh.. more bad crunch but such nice fluff) I've picked up the Eberron Campaign setting on this sites recommendation two months or so ago and certainly found it very, very pleasing (though again.. the crunch might be average at best)

So 2: I tend to by books based more on fluff than on crunch

As always though, good fluff is far harder to come by than good numbers.. given a few years experience with D&D I find myself writing up Prestige Classes and Feats without any greater hassle (thats why I see no need to buy books with them).
I still don't claim to be able to write a good and inspiring story though.. for that, I would (and do) lay money down without a second thought.

So 3: I tend, as a customer, to spend my money on books with fluff

Since RoD doesn't fill that need, my christmas money goes into the new Neal Stephenson Novel.. to bad WoTC.


So 1,2, & 3: RoD does not satisfy the need for fluff. -- > I will not buy it because it lacks the right amount of fluff.

 

[JoeGKushner]

That's why crunch is more prominent. It's easier to do and get away with. Even when companies come out with specific race or monster books, some people cry that the fluff there doesn't match their own. Better then to offer a little fluff and game mechanics that the GM can alter to suit his own world then no?

 

[Zweischneid]

That's why crunch is more prominent. It's easier to do and get away with. Even when companies come out with specific race or monster books, some people cry that the fluff there doesn't match their own. Better then to offer a little fluff and game mechanics that the GM can alter to suit his own world then no?

I agree that its alot easier and seemingly a working concept. Can't change that.

I think the major problem with WoTC Fluff is that its so unspecific as to not safe you any time at all since you must adapt it anyways.

The crunch example: Feat X says you get a Bonus of +2 to your damage
under Y circumstances.

Now if I wanna save time, I can just use that feat and be done with it. If I wanna add more time and customize it,change it or build something myself from the inspiration I can do that too.

Now the fluff example in books like RoD doesn't nail it down in something I could paste & copy into my campaign like: In 997 after the plaque of night, the great Illuman Scholar Havraastarr, Son of Itralklar discovered a new arcane formula named Xi by distiling the famous celestial Emerald the much heralded Aasimar Bard Svania had found and it allowed him to master Y and Z and it has since been lost in the fourth succession war of the viciously mad half-orc King Grobal... etc...

Something like that, I could use if I'm in a pinch or change, vary or adapt if I got time. But the stuff is just sooo vague that I must put in the effort to put fixed names, dates, and causalities of events on it, that it doesn't safe me anytime what so ever. I'd likely be faster by writing it myself and making my PrC to suit.
(again assuming that it's easier and alot faster for me to write up a few PrC, Spells or Feats, than it is to write a good story that spawns intelligent and intriquing adventures.)

Why should I pay money for that?

 

[BryonD]

Its funny how point of view can vary so widely.
I'm a very much pro-crunch anti-fluff guy.
To me, buying fluff is paying someone else to play the game on my behalf.

However, I see RoD as a very much crunch book.
The illumians are crunch. WotC tossed in some default fluff. But so what? Why can't they have tattoos? Or make then a kind a fey that can be surrounded by music at will, with the melodies and instruments involved replacing sigils. Or make then bipedal lizard-type people with varying scale colors. I'm certain that I could think of others.

But I'm not buying RoD. I don't want more races. I'm not interested in more races. And when they tell me there is a new book about humans and part humans, I'm looking for a book about the humans and part humans I use.
Races of Stone was a decent book. But I felt ripped off by the amount of pages dedicated to Goliaths. Goliaths are not on equal footing with dwarves. Please don't pretend they are. That is not meant to be a slam against goliaths themselves. I just want my dwarf book to be about dwarves.

Ditto for my human book. And looking into my crystal ball, ditto again for my elf book.

Put dwarf stuff in the dwarf book and human stuff in the human book and new race stuff in the new race book.

 

[Zweischneid]

However, I see RoD as a very much crunch book.
The illumians are crunch.

Eh.. my point exactly.
Just that I don't need anyone to tell me some cool glowing sigils, tattoos, whatever might expand class abilities. I can come up with that myself.

I'd need a very inspiring and compelling story to introduce them into my campaign to make the book worth buying. The one given is just too ...well, bland.

Strange as it is.. I think WoTC managed to not please (most of) either faction with that book it seems.


The competitive nature of Goliaths was.. decent I guess.
But than again, the Last Hero in Scandinavia from Atlas Games did that schtick alot better (also rules wise I would argue)

 

[Psion]

I'm sorry, but this is just beautiful. After so many crunch vs. fluff debates, we finally get fluff. Its usless in people's games because it isn't the fluff they wanted. Ahh, beautiful.

I'm sure if I dug hard enough, I could find old statements by me about how the more detailed the fluff, the less portable it is to different campaigns.

So at least some of us weren't saying that.

 

[Davelozzi]

I like fluff a lot, but I don't feel like I should be expected to buy Races of Destiny because of it. After all, Races of Stone was a huge disappointment. The book just wasn't interesting, and the new races getting all the glory doesn't help. Much of the book made no sense. The fluff doesn't have to match my game exactly, but if it's a generic book it should match the generic D&D take on the races in question. I mean dwarves who don't bury their dead, come on? And a new dwarven pantheon, yet still headed by Moradin...what was wrong with the old one?

A book can be fluffy without being tailored for my game. Forgotten Realms products like Serpent Kingdoms and Silver Marches prove that. And going back to 2e, the fluff is what made Faiths & Avatars and its sequels so well received, especially compared to the 3e diety books like Dieties & Demingods and Faiths & Pantheons.

I'm sorry, but Races of Stone was terrible and Races of Destiny doesn't look good either, and I don't plan on spending my money on it, no matter the fluff/crunch ratio.

 

[JoeGKushner]

You note the Silver Marches was a great book for fluff. Ironically, it was the low sales of that, compared to Magic of Faerun, that prompted the more crunch less fluff if the old posts from the source are true.

 

[Zweischneid]

You note the Silver Marches was a great book for fluff. Ironically, it was the low sales of that, compared to Magic of Faerun, that prompted the more crunch less fluff if the old posts from the source are true.

What old posts from the source? Could you link them possibly?

Silver Marches definitly holds a special place of honor in my collection while Magic of Faerun certainly does not (though I owe both)