Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 3531311" data-attributes="member: 3192">So world building is a specific practice of creating a simulated environment.&nbsp; I gotta say, all 6 of the Wiki listed elements routinely enter into my designs.&nbsp; I don't see this as separate from what you are terming &quot;setting&quot; however.&nbsp; Why?In a word: Relevancy.&nbsp; All 6 of those aspects will be in my game.&nbsp; Will every specific detail be designed?&nbsp; Of course not.&nbsp; I've mentioned I build by proximity.&nbsp; Will every detail I create be encountered?&nbsp; No too.&nbsp; But the players aren't expected to suss out every last tunnel in every dungeon either.&nbsp; This isn't Zelda.What about the &quot;23 grasses of the Shaar plains&quot;?&nbsp; Yeah, Greenwood is a great, clomping nerd.&nbsp; He isn't designing for relevance.&nbsp; He's just futzing around with his world and fanboys read all about it.&nbsp; Does that mean a game cannot be played there?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; Does it mean the 23 grasses are wasted creation?&nbsp; I say no to that too.&nbsp; But they are extraordinarily irrelevant until a PC takes interest in grassland botany.IMO, relevancy changes as soon as the players take an interest.&nbsp; To your yodeling example.Some folks yodel in front of doors.&nbsp; They ask around for the most popular yodel songs in town.&nbsp; Am I to have that ready?&nbsp; I'd say, no way, no how.&nbsp; Can I improvise?&nbsp; Sure, and I might just indulge the player with yodeling contests in the vicinity or, at the very least, I'll insert a few leads on where other yodelers might be found.&nbsp; If Bluegrass Willy keeps it up all session or seriously shows interest, guess what?&nbsp; I'm world-building yodels for next session.&nbsp; Oh, the great, clomping nerdism of it all.&nbsp; But seeing as the point is fun.&nbsp; And this element became fun.&nbsp; I'm indulging the players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 3531311, member: 3192"] So world building is a specific practice of creating a simulated environment. I gotta say, all 6 of the Wiki listed elements routinely enter into my designs. I don't see this as separate from what you are terming "setting" however. Why? In a word: Relevancy. All 6 of those aspects will be in my game. Will every specific detail be designed? Of course not. I've mentioned I build by proximity. Will every detail I create be encountered? No too. But the players aren't expected to suss out every last tunnel in every dungeon either. This isn't Zelda. What about the "23 grasses of the Shaar plains"? Yeah, Greenwood is a great, clomping nerd. He isn't designing for relevance. He's just futzing around with his world and fanboys read all about it. Does that mean a game cannot be played there? No. Does it mean the 23 grasses are wasted creation? I say no to that too. But they are extraordinarily irrelevant until a PC takes interest in grassland botany. IMO, relevancy changes as soon as the players take an interest. To your yodeling example. Some folks yodel in front of doors. They ask around for the most popular yodel songs in town. Am I to have that ready? I'd say, no way, no how. Can I improvise? Sure, and I might just indulge the player with yodeling contests in the vicinity or, at the very least, I'll insert a few leads on where other yodelers might be found. If Bluegrass Willy keeps it up all session or seriously shows interest, guess what? I'm world-building yodels for next session. Oh, the great, clomping nerdism of it all. But seeing as the point is fun. And this element became fun. I'm indulging the players. [/QUOTE]

Verification