Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3526248" data-attributes="member: 22779">I can think of an excellent example where world building has become indulgent and that's Forgotten Realms.&nbsp; FR's been in print for what, about 20 years?&nbsp; There's been thousands of pages of material (not adventures, just setting material) banged out for that setting.&nbsp; And they're not finished yet.Darth Shoju, I think that we actually agree more than disagree really.&nbsp; If the world buildilng that you do comes out during the game, then, likely, it isn't terribly indulgent.&nbsp; It might be, but, likely not.&nbsp; But, no one is going to tell me that ten or twenty thousand pages of setting material is not indulgent.&nbsp; There's depth and then there's a festering quagmire that no one could possibly sort through.&nbsp; Again, it's building the world's largest library.Earlier someone mentioned Niven's work on his FTL drives in Mote in God's Eye.&nbsp; There's a perfect example of indulgent world building.&nbsp; What do we remember from the novel?&nbsp; We remember fantastic battle scenes, cool aliens, funky xenobiology and possibly the opening scene of the light sail ship committing suicide.&nbsp; What we don't remember is how the FTL drives work.&nbsp; Thankfully, that information was never brought into the book, because, frankly, it's completely unimportant.&nbsp; Niven did it as a thought experiment and that's fine.&nbsp; But, it's not like it is required in the slightest for the text.Is all world building indulgence?&nbsp; Probably not.&nbsp; Certainly not if you define world building as all setting construction.&nbsp; Since placing trees in a MMORPG is apparently world building, then, of course you need to do some.&nbsp; Me, I define world building as going beyond what is required for the setting.&nbsp; World building, by nature, is indulgent.&nbsp; If it's required by the text, then it's setting.&nbsp; That's where I draw the line.&nbsp; Obviously, that annoys the heck out of some people who figure that any time you do the slightest bit of setting building, you are world building.&nbsp; To me, that makes world building a meaningless term relative to setting.&nbsp; Why not just dispense with it entirely?The net is littered with indulgent world building.&nbsp; The front page of Enworld right now advertises a new bit on Fargoth.&nbsp; And, look, it's not an adventure.&nbsp; It's a new race.&nbsp; Color me surprised.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3526248, member: 22779"] I can think of an excellent example where world building has become indulgent and that's Forgotten Realms. FR's been in print for what, about 20 years? There's been thousands of pages of material (not adventures, just setting material) banged out for that setting. And they're not finished yet. Darth Shoju, I think that we actually agree more than disagree really. If the world buildilng that you do comes out during the game, then, likely, it isn't terribly indulgent. It might be, but, likely not. But, no one is going to tell me that ten or twenty thousand pages of setting material is not indulgent. There's depth and then there's a festering quagmire that no one could possibly sort through. Again, it's building the world's largest library. Earlier someone mentioned Niven's work on his FTL drives in Mote in God's Eye. There's a perfect example of indulgent world building. What do we remember from the novel? We remember fantastic battle scenes, cool aliens, funky xenobiology and possibly the opening scene of the light sail ship committing suicide. What we don't remember is how the FTL drives work. Thankfully, that information was never brought into the book, because, frankly, it's completely unimportant. Niven did it as a thought experiment and that's fine. But, it's not like it is required in the slightest for the text. Is all world building indulgence? Probably not. Certainly not if you define world building as all setting construction. Since placing trees in a MMORPG is apparently world building, then, of course you need to do some. Me, I define world building as going beyond what is required for the setting. World building, by nature, is indulgent. If it's required by the text, then it's setting. That's where I draw the line. Obviously, that annoys the heck out of some people who figure that any time you do the slightest bit of setting building, you are world building. To me, that makes world building a meaningless term relative to setting. Why not just dispense with it entirely? The net is littered with indulgent world building. The front page of Enworld right now advertises a new bit on Fargoth. And, look, it's not an adventure. It's a new race. Color me surprised. [/QUOTE]

Verification