RPG Writing and Design Needs a Paradigm Shift

[MichaelSomething]

I think that the flavor text and mechanics both have a place, but I really like them separated. The flavor ignites (see what I did there!) my imagination and helps me visualize the fiction. The mechanics tell me what I need to do to resolve it. Parsing those together is just some ick stuff to me.

But what about mechanics that are the flavor??? They are not always opposing factors. Sometimes one reinforces the other.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I said some posts back that I am ok with adding a mechanical line like 'Range: 150 ft, Radius: 20 ft, Effect: 8d6 fire, Save: Dex, halves' and removing that from the description, so it is not redundant. I am not ok with that being the entirety of the description, the flavor text should remain.

"A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.

The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren't being worn or carried."

is more flavorful to me, 4e seems to go for the bare minimum possible

4e's actual rules are just VERY PRECISE. None of that verbiage is required because the rules clearly describe how an AOE interacts with a corner, etc. The sweet part is, you learn that rule once and it is totally consistent! No need to wade through the text of every power and hope they covered your case.

Note however that exceptions are possible. Stinking Cloud supplies a variation where it flows around corners and such. Exception based design, a whole other concept that is very powerful and should be part of modern RPG design when it makes sense.

 

[Reynard]

Flavor text can be evocative but brief. I'll once again point folks to Shadowdark, specifically the monster entries.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In contrast I find that nothing valuable is lost this way. Play is simply streamlined etc. I just can't see anything interesting to me that would ride on specifically having an AOE be a cone with an angle of exactly 20 degrees, for example. Chances are extremely high that the granularity of positioning is insufficient to make the difference matter, it's going to just fall to GM fiat at that point, so what was gained?

I suppose this is why there are different games for different people. Streamlining play comes at too high a cost for me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Flavor text can be evocative but brief. I'll once again point folks to Shadowdark, specifically the monster entries.

On the other hand, if lore is organized properly you can make use of huge amounts of it. Witness the Monster Overhaul and its many awesome tables.

 

[mamba]

4e's actual rules are just VERY PRECISE. None of that verbiage is required because the rules clearly describe how an AOE interacts with a corner, etc.

you can leave out the second paragraph if you want to, and 5e still is a lot more flavorful than 4e’s description.

As I said, 4e is the bare minimum flavorless description. It is functional, I give it that, but no more.

Out of “A globe of orange flame coalesces in your hand. You hurl it at your enemies, and it explodes on impact." and "A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame.“ I much prefer the latter.

 

[Umbran]

I think one takeaway from this thread is that rulebooks are not tasked with doing what just one person thinks is best.

The books have to serve multiple purposes and audiences, with different needs and desires. Each rulebook will be a compromise of design, and you may like some of them more than others.

There is no One True Way.

 

[Umbran]

Folks, this thread should not be a war between 4e and 5e, or any other two editions. Please don't make it one.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

you can leave out the second paragraph if you want to, and 5e still is a lot more flavorful than 4e’s description.

As I said, 4e is the bare minimum flavorless description. It is functional, I give it that, but no more.

Out of “A globe of orange flame coalesces in your hand. You hurl it at your enemies, and it explodes on impact." and "A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame.“ I much prefer the latter.

And I find them to be virtually identical. The same imagery is going to be evoked in each case. That's literally what evocative means, right?

 

[mamba]

And I find them to be virtually identical. The same imagery is going to be evoked in each case.

not for me

That's literally what evocative means, right?

yes, hence why I do not like 4e's