Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JustinA" data-source="post: 3530861" data-attributes="member: 51618">And now we switch to a definition of world-building from which one can only conclude that no one has ever done world-building.Why?Because you are insisting that it's only world-building if some creates an entire world. This is impossible. No meaningful world can ever be described to its last detail. So, clearly, a line must be drawn at some point.You are, in fact, choosing to draw that line at an arbitrary point of &quot;more detail than is needed for the present adventure&quot;, and then tautologically assuming your conclusion from that.But, of course, I have already destroyed this line of your argument. And it is notable that you failed to respond to that.This line of argument is more compelling, but you're assuming that &quot;what type of adventures do I want to run&quot; isn't taken into consideration when you're world-building. You're the only one drawing an artificial boundary between the two activities, after all.And, ultimately, this still just comes back to the after-the-fact nature of the distinction you're trying to draw: The color of a rooftop is &quot;good setting&quot; if it comes up during the course of an adventure; it's &quot;bad setting&quot; if it doesn't.Barring a precognizant DM, I'm not sure what the usefulness of this distinction is supposed to be.Justin Alexander<a href="http://www.thealexandrian.net" target="_blank">http://www.thealexandrian.net</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="JustinA, post: 3530861, member: 51618"] And now we switch to a definition of world-building from which one can only conclude that no one has ever done world-building. Why? Because you are insisting that it's only world-building if some creates an entire world. This is impossible. No meaningful world can ever be described to its last detail. So, clearly, a line must be drawn at some point. You are, in fact, choosing to draw that line at an arbitrary point of "more detail than is needed for the present adventure", and then tautologically assuming your conclusion from that. But, of course, I have already destroyed this line of your argument. And it is notable that you failed to respond to that. This line of argument is more compelling, but you're assuming that "what type of adventures do I want to run" isn't taken into consideration when you're world-building. You're the only one drawing an artificial boundary between the two activities, after all. And, ultimately, this still just comes back to the after-the-fact nature of the distinction you're trying to draw: The color of a rooftop is "good setting" if it comes up during the course of an adventure; it's "bad setting" if it doesn't. Barring a precognizant DM, I'm not sure what the usefulness of this distinction is supposed to be. Justin Alexander [url]http://www.thealexandrian.net[/url] [/QUOTE]

Verification