The False Dichotomy of "Fluff" and "Crunch"

[WizarDru]

I'm not sure that it's a false dichotomy, quite honestly. Perhaps an oversimplification, but not false, per se.

"Crunch", which to me is game and rules-related material, is necessary. Without it, we're not playing a codified ruleset, but just pretend. The system reinforces a particular kind of play that the designers hopefully intended, and provides a common ground for all players and referees to work from. "How do I know how hard he is to hit?" "After an attack or two, we'll have a ballpark for his AC." "Ah, I see." Creating new rules is a simple enough task, but creating new, consistent and balanced rules material is not. A lot of crunch is developed in a vacuum, without thought to how it might interact with other material, even within the core.

Fluff, however, is harder to peg down...at least for me. Some people seem to define crunch as anything that isn't a mechanic, such as city demographics, political structures, financial systems and so forth. To me, fluff is flavor material and setting information that may or may not be disassociated with mechanics. I see something like city demographics as crunch, not fluff. A discussion of the effects of those demographics, however, is fluff.

For example:

• the city of Glump has 10,000 inhabitants (Crunch)
• 75% of the populus are human, 20% half-elven, 4% halfling and 1% other. (Crunch)
• The People of Glump dislike Dwarves. (Fluff)
• Glump remembers the border war of 10 years past, and Dwarves are unwelcome there. (Fluff)
• When in Glump, Dwarves suffer a -2 circumstance penalty to any Charisma or Charisma-based skill checks. (Crunch)
• Dwarven equipment and handicrafts are extremely difficult to locate in Glump (fluff).
• Dwarven war-axes and equipment tailored for dwarves (such as armor, clothes and so forth) are only available at 150% book value in the city of Glump (Crunch).
• In the market bazaar, merchants will rarely sell anything other than food to a Dwarf. (Fluff)

Now, note how some of these are borderline. If anything points to the dichotomy being false, it would probably be this. Some fluff clearly tips it's hand towards mechanics, but doesn't provide them directly. The idea that Dwarves are not popular in Glump is actionable, mechanically, but the specific indication of a rule (the circumstance penalty) is a specific instance. The two don't have to be mutually exclusive, and in fact should feed each other. That is, the fluff should suggest and explain the crunch when possible, and the reverse may be true, that crunch should suggest fluff. In our example, a border war (presumably with a dwarven nation) adversely affect Glump, and the populace still remembers. This suggests the mechanics listed above. By the same token, the mechanic of expensive dwarven merchandise suggests all sorts of story ideas and consequences of that specific mechanic, such as a black market in dwarven goods or loss of reputation among other merchants for carrying such stock.

The best supplements combine these two elements, with each drawing inspiration from the other. Just because I can create either by myself doesn't mean that I don't want to see other folks work, too. Yes, I can create a campaign, but most supplements provide much more detail and data than I would ever bother to do on my own...and that's why I buy them.

 

[Henry]

Wisdom Penalty, I have to disagree here: BAD crunch is easy - just as easy as BAD fluff, in fact.

Let me explain myself. The majority of d20 books on the marketplace are written by guys with Engineering degrees and one semester of required English Literature under their belts. In short – these folks can’t write. Pick up one the campaign settings mentioned in this very thread. Look for the italicized “flavor” text. Read.

Oh, there's bad (boring) story elements to be sure: In the story hour forum, for example, they're revealed by how formulaic they are in relation to other story hours. Imitation is flattery, but it doesn't necessarily make for an enjoyable story.

...It’s easy, folks, to make up a feat or a spell or a prestige class. Don’t believe me? Go check out the House Rules forum. Pick up a recent Dragon magazine. Go flip through any one of the d20 books at your hobby shop. It’s easy, and it’s been done to death.

But read through those house rules discussions, and see how many people disagree with one another on whether a certain created rule is balanced or not. And notice that of the good rules created, most have been hammered out with blood, sweat, tears, and 3 or 4 score of posts prior to the finished rule.

You show me an adventure with a visceral punch-in-the-gut plot hook, and I’ll take it any day over a module with 32 new monsters and 17 templates.

Here, I agree. I don't like lots of extra rules, but I don't discount the necessity of them.

You show me a campaign setting that makes me want to dive in and live it, I’ll take it any day over one that offers 14 prestige classes, 32 races, and 11 heroic paths/truebloods/half-feats yada yada yada. [/QUOTE]

On the other hand, a beautiful prose for a setting without rules that reinforce what is said about it is nothing more than a story. Same reason that laws without a punishment system only get lip service. RPG's need more than stories; they need rules that reinforce the players' participation. Even LARPing has rules and referees.

I wonder – is there a campaign setting on the market that offers a blend of great prose with sensible crunch? I’ve read the “popular” settings, and I’ve yet to find it.

Try Aetherco's Continuum game (a game of time travel). Never seen more coherent rules mixed with engaging prose in my life. However, the game still sunk like a stone in the general market.

 

[Psion]

I'd have to say bad fluff is pretty pervasive. I didn't realize how pervasive it was until I read Book of Taverns last year and saw an example of good "fluff".

But again, I find the definition is slippery. Some would call manual of planes "fluff." I wouldn't, but it's not quite crunch either. It's somewhere between, or sort of off to one side.

 

[WizarDru]

I wonder – is there a campaign setting on the market that offers a blend of great prose with sensible crunch? I’ve read the “popular” settings, and I’ve yet to find it.

*cough* The Valus *cough*

 

[EricNoah]

I don't like crunch by itself, and I usually don't like fluff by itself. I like them mixed together, especially with the different crunchy bits mixed together.

Or to use a different metaphor ... the crunch heavy books give you a lot of tools. But do they show you how to use them? I appreciate seeing not just a PRC, but then a statted NPC using that new material. I like new monsters, but then I want to see those monsters in action.

The ultimate showcase for doing this is in adventures -- short, long, doesn't matter to me. That's one reason I love Dungeon magazine -- it takes the various crunchy bits and makes them "come alive". One of the best things about the Adventure Path in Dungeon, for example, was how it started off by using a bunch of new critters from the Fiend Folio, showcasing them in action. That, I thought, was great.

Adventure material may be a "hard sell" but it's also essential to the growth of a new brand or a new game or a new campaign setting. Adventures demonstrate how the various pieces can go together.

 

[DragonLancer]

For me its difficult to say whether its bad or not. I don't want loads of new feats, PrC's, spells, magic items...etc in each new book, but then a book that was just information is not going to sell and will probably be quite boring.

If I buy a book and don't use those options, I've wasted my money. Take Savage Species. I bought that for the monsters and templates, but I would never use the monster race rules because I prefer a standard races D&D game.

 

[Arnwyn]

But read through those house rules discussions, and see how many people disagree with one another on whether a certain created rule is balanced or not.

I think that might have less to do with difficulty, and more to do with never being able to be perfect - magnified because it's on an internet messageboard.

And notice that of the good rules created, most have been hammered out with blood, sweat, tears, and 3 or 4 score of posts prior to the finished rule.

True - but there is a difference between "good for mass consumption" and "good for a home campaign". Good for mass consumption has to try to satisfy a large number of people, while good for a home campaign only needs to satisfy your group. (Thus, if all you care about is running a good home campaign, then I agree with S'mon and Wisdom Penalty - coming up with good rules-material is easier than coming up with good descriptions and inspirational material.) [Results may vary, blah blah blah]

I don't like crunch by itself, and I usually don't like fluff by itself.

Quite different for me. I, too, don't like rules material by itself - but I can easily enjoy non-rules material by itself, no problem. I'm more than happy getting an entire book filled with city, government, and regional descriptions and maps with only the barest number of statistics (like the demographics and populations that WizarDru considers "crunch", above, and basic NPC stats - alignment, race, sex, class, and level only, please).

This is why, nowadays, I prefer geographical campaign accessories (and adventures) than rulebooks - and why I refuse to buy any book in which feats, PrCs, spells, and/or magic items are the main focus of the book.

 

[fanboy2000]

"And I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for thouse dang kids!"

I think some of you new-to-the-hobby folks love your hundreds of new feats and prestige classes. I think older gamers enjoy writing that’s evocative and imaginative. I think the majority, the intellectual middle, like both. There are exceptions, certainly, but those seem to be the norms. D&D is not a video game.

You know, you had me noding my head (mostly) untill you got here. I would like to point out that what's evocative and imaginative differs from peoson to person. Thuse, game fluff that is evocotive and imaginative to a gamer because it reminds him of Tolkin, has no hope of lighting my imagination on fire. (I hate Tolken's writting, thus anything that trys to emulated him just sucks to me.)

 

[WizarDru]

That's meddling kids.


Whippersnapper.

 

[fanboy2000]

That's meddling kids.


Whippersnapper.

Dang.