Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Doug McCrae" data-source="post: 2115214" data-attributes="member: 21169">If we apply the same methods that have been used to hold the terms 'fluff/crunch' to be inappropriate then 'meat/bones' is equally problematic, if not more so.'Fluff/crunch' is held to incorrectly describe the relationship between rules and flavour text as it does not describe the connection between them. But 'meat/bones' incorrectly describes the connection. It makes it seem as if the relationship is a lot tighter than it is.After all only one particular set of bones could fit with one 'lump' of meat. But many, many different worlds could use the same rules. One could have a civilisation of orcs, or a land of islands floating in the air, or a desert world and so on, all using the same DnD rules.'Meat/bones' also suggests that the former will be more plentiful than the latter. Of course in most recent WotC books, the opposite has been the case.</blockquote>