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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="med stud" data-source="post: 4179126" data-attributes="member: 1211">I consider myself a world builder in the sense that I like to build game worlds. Here, it seems like the term is used to describe people who wants to build worlds using the rules as a foundation; if a monster can spawn like a 3e wraith, then the world is filled by wraiths if you don't find some anti-wraith that explains why wraiths aren't everywhere. That kind of world builder also seems to be after consistency to a large degree. If monster A does something one time, then it should do A at all times, if there is not a reason for A not to be valid.I'm on the opposite side of what is described above. Rules exist in contact with the PCs and the general sense of the rules exist when it comes to NPCs. That is, the greatest swordsman in the world won't be killed by a gopher. OTOH, I don't stat out the greatest swordsman unless he comes into contact with the PCs.I also defenitly don't provide consistency. I think the #1 way of killing the sense of magic and mystery of a setting is to detail everything, especially for the players. If the players see that Vampire Lord Arkhan is a brute that lives like an animal and eats his victims, they can't expect that from all vampire lords. The next one may be like Dracula instead. Why is it like that in the game world? Of course there are theories. There exist vampire scholars who try to come up with an explanation, but the general knowledge is that vampires are something to be afraid of.My players like it this way, and for our suspension of disbelief it's imperative to keep the amount of meta-game knowledge to a minimum.</blockquote>

Verification