PDA

View Full Version : Is there such a thing as too much fluff?



Lord Raziere
2012-01-22, 04:39 PM
After much reading of Exalted and all the arguments that come from it, I am beginning to wonder:

can too much fluff be a bad thing?

because I look at Exalted and its so wrapped up in how "this is how everything canonically is, deviations destroy the setting and wreck the themes of Exalted and blah blah blah…" that I'm beginning to think that the fluff is getting too much in the way of fun. I don't care if this is the way it happened or if this is aesthetic is exclusive to this splat or this splat can't do whatever, or so on and so forth, I want to have fun.

and my point is: is there a point, where the fluff should just stay back and allow the players to have fun, consequences and impact on the setting be damned, for the lack of a better term? sure how the setting works and such is important, but player fun is most important of all.

so frankly myself, I'm beginning to think that fluff is important and has its place, but shouldn't be king above fun. what are your thoughts?

Tengu_temp
2012-01-22, 04:43 PM
There can be too much fluff, yes. It can get too convoluted, too self-contradictory, too tl;dr, leaving too little room for the DM and players to create their own stuff, and so on. Just look at the mess that was the oWoD metaplot.

EccentricCircle
2012-01-22, 05:32 PM
Agreed. most DM's will want to tell their own story, they want the tools to do that rather than a "better" story that they are supposed to be telling instead.
I find books with very detailed fluff to be good sources of inspiration, but I would never run a game set in an established universe unless I had a very good reason to and the prexisting fluff was the reason for the game. I find places like the forgotton realms, the Star Wars Universe and many others to be far too crowded to make for an effective game setting.

Kane0
2012-01-22, 06:11 PM
When you have more pages of fluff than your character sheet.

Geigan
2012-01-22, 06:27 PM
If it's getting in the way of your group's fun it's a problem. Same with too much fluff as anything else. Though when it comes to Exalted, sorting through all that fluff is part of the fun with that game. If it's too much you can easily ignore that part of the game to focus more on the things your group does enjoy.

Gensh
2012-01-22, 07:38 PM
If it's getting in the way of your group's fun it's a problem. Same with too much fluff as anything else. Though when it comes to Exalted, sorting through all that fluff is part of the fun with that game. If it's too much you can easily ignore that part of the game to focus more on the things your group does enjoy.

This. As a system, there is effectively no reason to ever play Exalted. As a setting, however, it's wonderfully full of both nonsense and deep ethical issues (though I suspect half of them are by accident). Compare how more people tend to completely go without D&D settings. If you play 3.5, then odds are you like the character customization; if you're playing Exalted, then odds are you're playing solely for the fluff - to change part of it defeats the purpose of playing in the first place. You should only make drastic changes if they're getting in the way of a player's fun, and even then, unless they provide a particular insight into the game, you probably shouldn't make them as suggestions for changing the game for everyone - as you've already experienced. I know from your previous posts that you personally have quite the variety of issues with vanilla Exalted; why, then, do you continue to play when you could change to, say, Scion as you said you were going to? :smallconfused:

The arguments are what makes it interesting! I don't think I'd have half as much fun if I wasn't able to try to convince everyone else that the "heroes" are bigger monsters than the soul-devouring monsters! :smalltongue:

As for the question in the abstract, generally, you can tell a game has too much fluff when it begins to read like a novel rather than a manual. A decent portion of people dislike how Exalted, among others, mix fluff and mechanics so that you can't read one without the other. I personally consider that a plus -that you can't merely look up a Charm's power without having to wade through a mountain of fluff encourages familiarity with what your character can do, both mechanically and visually. Such as this is fine; it is only when you must know what a bunch of NPCs are doing at all times that fluff becomes problematic. For example, in Exalted, you know Mnemon is important, but aside from RotSE, there are no mentions of what she's doing - that is left to the ST. There would be too much fluff if there were explicit instructions that she causes event X, and suddenly all characters in every campaign ever have to react.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-22, 08:58 PM
*sigh* not even Scion was flexible enough for me. the only system that is, is Strands of Fate. I don't know why I didn't do what I said. maybe I just can't leave a problem unsolved or something. or maybe its because I still like Exalted and haven't entirely let go….geh.

still…..its ironic, I like the fluff, but the only system after all this time that is flexible enough for my character concepts have been Strands of Fate (it has no fluff)….maybe I just like to make my own fluff rather than use others, but refer to other fluff for inspiration.

still need to let go….focus on making my own stuff with Strands….get away from Exalted…I still think its awesome, but its just….the fluff just conflicts with many of my character concepts too much. what I like to create and what Exalted likes to be created are very different things. Scion is kinda better, but the linear singular path of its Purviews didn't work either. its sad really. can't play Exalted even though I like it so much. fluff is screwy like that.
:smallfrown:

Hiro Protagonest
2012-01-22, 10:19 PM
*sigh* not even Scion was flexible enough for me. the only system that is, is Strands of Fate. I don't know why I didn't do what I said. maybe I just can't leave a problem unsolved or something. or maybe its because I still like Exalted and haven't entirely let go….geh.

still…..its ironic, I like the fluff, but the only system after all this time that is flexible enough for my character concepts have been Strands of Fate (it has no fluff)….maybe I just like to make my own fluff rather than use others, but refer to other fluff for inspiration.

still need to let go….focus on making my own stuff with Strands….get away from Exalted…I still think its awesome, but its just….the fluff just conflicts with many of my character concepts too much. what I like to create and what Exalted likes to be created are very different things. Scion is kinda better, but the linear singular path of its Purviews didn't work either. its sad really. can't play Exalted even though I like it so much. fluff is screwy like that.
:smallfrown:

What about D&D (3.5 or 4e)? That's pretty easy to refluff. Heck, you could feasibly run a game in the Scion or Exalted setting if you play the right types. Supernatural warriors? Clerics, duskblades, psychic warriors, just gish in general for 3.5. Things such as Twilight Castes could be straight wizards. For 4e, paladins, swordmages, battleminds, clerics, ardents, wizards, psions, barbarians (they're supernatural in 4e), druids, avengers, invokers, basically anything with a power source other than "martial".

Inglenook
2012-01-22, 10:28 PM
Or there's GURPS, which is pretty much entirely customizable the entire way through.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-01-22, 10:40 PM
Or there's GURPS, which is pretty much entirely customizable the entire way through.

Much less well known though. And I can't suggest that, since I have no idea how it works.

I'm thinking of getting GURPS 4e...

valadil
2012-01-22, 10:59 PM
I ran into too much fluff when I ran a Game of Thrones game. I picked a point in book two and mentally gave myself freedom to deviate from it, but still spent an inappropriate amount of time researching the setting. Re-reading the books for the third time was reasonable, but that left me remembering that little factoids and details existed, even though I couldn't recall the specifics. I think I'd have been better off with a well organized campaign book. I don't care if the city the players are in has a page or a chapter, but I want to read the relevant portion and then either go with it or make something up.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-22, 11:08 PM
I do have DnD 4E. they fill an entire stack of themselves hurm….

problem with that, is that it makes it hard to multiclass see? and one of the strengths of the Exalted setting is that I can easily play concepts that are basically multiclassing incarnate. and as usual, the multiclassing options already in place are y'know…….wonky.

I'd basically would have to design Solar sets, Lunar sets and so on for 4E.

which would basically mean lots of refluffing and reshuffling of pre-existing powers.

it'd be doable though. and Sorcery can easily be simulated with things like encounter, daily powers and rituals.

the last problem of course is that 4E doesn't do anything other than combat well, since its DnD, and doesn't focus on social things or crafting. sure you could make the combat part of stuff just fine, but then there is the problem of figuring out how to do other stuff.

though, when I looked at Strands of Fate, it did give me ideas on how to change pre-existing powers around to better do other forms of combat. for example, going up and insulting someone right to their face can easily be a melee attack, insulting someone from across the room is a ranged attack, and making a declarative speech to a group of people is easily a ranged area attack and so on and forth, one just needs to make a second health bar using the rules already in place, but with different stats.

for example, a social health bar in 4E would be little different from the physical health bar already there, it would have the same amount and math as the existing one, there would just be different amounts for different classes- a bard would have like 15 or 17, while a wizard would probably have 10, and they would gain additional health points based on their charisma stat, so a Bard would always have the most social health points of a group. then you just need to refluff various powers to inflict social damage and do social-based effects rather than physical ones.

so yea, DnD 4E could work, if one was willing to modify a lot.

edit: weird. this long strange quest….has led me right back to the first RPG I bought. life likes to screw with my head. or at least Mercury does

RPGuru1331
2012-01-23, 12:45 AM
still need to let go….focus on making my own stuff with Strands….get away from Exalted…I still think its awesome, but its just….the fluff just conflicts with many of my character concepts too much. what I like to create and what Exalted likes to be created are very different things. Scion is kinda better, but the linear singular path of its Purviews didn't work either. its sad really. can't play Exalted even though I like it so much. fluff is screwy like that.
Which fluff is getting in the way? A great deal of it can be ignored in the face of character ideas, in my experience, but not all groups are willing to ignore things to the same degree.

TheCountAlucard
2012-01-23, 12:59 AM
Which fluff is getting in the way?Apparently the color yellow. :smallsigh:

(grumbles about yellow being one of my favorite colors)

Lord Raziere
2012-01-23, 02:15 AM
……and now I just realized how silly I'm being……all this over the color yellow?

………………….I don't know what to say about myself……why am I making a big deal over the color yellow? people must dislike me for making such a big deal over such a little thing…..

edit: and I don't even have this problem with Chosen of Journeys! there is just no logic to this….

edit 2: or maybe there is.

Orichalcum Castes and Journeys are both yellow, but I'm fine with them. both of these castes however are in splats with multiple colored castes. They are meant to be a specific character type among many in the splat, and so they can be ignored, because I can choose a different caste the represents my character better.

but since Solars caste marks (their animas can be almost anything I want, I'm fine with them) are meant to be gold, I can't play them because the human paragons I envision don't have golden symbols on their forehead.
I'm fine with other color symbols on their forehead, but I for some reason I can't live with gold on their foreheads. again. what is wrong with me? why can't I just accept the freaking golden symbols on the forehead? It. Does. Not. Make. Sense.

The_Snark
2012-01-23, 05:49 AM
still…..its ironic, I like the fluff, but the only system after all this time that is flexible enough for my character concepts have been Strands of Fate (it has no fluff)….maybe I just like to make my own fluff rather than use others, but refer to other fluff for inspiration.

Maybe try Nobilis? Both the setting and the fluff are pretty flexible when it comes to making characters.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-23, 09:48 AM
I've heard of Nobilis before…I'll try that.

as for Exalted….eh….I'm just gonna make a personal house rule: caste mark matches the anima. I don't care if the book says the caste marks are golden, if my Solar character concept says the anima and caste marks are blue, they are blue.

RPGuru1331
2012-01-23, 03:03 PM
With all due respect, you're doing a lot of damage to theme in the name of aesthetics. Less so with Sids, but pretty much everyone else has their anima types for pretty strong thematic reasons (Although all solaroids have them mostly to compare/contrast to Solars).

I mean, if he's a Solar -at all-, then the gold and the shining more or less fits by default, given what solars are (And I don't just mean avatars of the sun, but more '(alleged) shining heroes and paragons')

Tavar
2012-01-23, 04:28 PM
Going back to the original topic, I'd say that you're not really arguing against too much fluff: you're arguing against having consistent settings at all. And I'm not sure what the reply to that is. I guess you should stay away from more serious games, and just do humorous one-shots?

jindra34
2012-01-23, 04:33 PM
Also chipping in two cents on the original topic: I honestly don't think there is such a thing as too much fluff for a system, but there is such a thing as providing too much fluff in the core books (as Exalted with its 200 pages of fluff shows) because it sets the expectations of the players.

STsinderman
2012-01-23, 04:51 PM
Indeed too much fluff is perhaps worse than too little. The ideal setting to my mind is one that provides a framework for the dm to work within while not restricting any choices they may wish to implement. Example being that a city may have a certain reputation and have some notable institutions while not Needing to do or have X Y Z.

Frozen_Feet
2012-01-23, 04:59 PM
For a tabletop RPG, there's too much fluff for a scene when you can't ever imagine reading it all aloud, and giving it for the players to read would stop the game for more than 5 minutes.

Or, if you're me, if reading through the bit you're supposed to say aloud, mentally translating it from English to Finnish and converting all imperial units to the SI system and then saying it to the players stops the game for more than 5 minutes.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-23, 08:03 PM
Going back to the original topic, I'd say that you're not really arguing against too much fluff: you're arguing against having consistent settings at all. And I'm not sure what the reply to that is. I guess you should stay away from more serious games, and just do humorous one-shots?

so, now just because I like variation in my fluff means I can't do serious games? :smallmad:

navar100
2012-01-23, 08:45 PM
Tome of Battle suffers a bit from this. Reshar et al puts some people off. It tends to reinforce "wuxia" they despise as they read the maneuvers.

A player in my group tends to let flavor text influence his choices. That's not a terrible thing, per se, but he often likes or dislikes classes, prestige classes, feats, etc. based upon how they are described as opposed to what they do. Perhaps lately he hasn't, but I know it was a strong influence as to why he went into the Dungeon Delver prestige class way back when in 3.0. He was dismissive of the Warblade because he doesn't prefer his characters to fight for the glory of fighting.

Need_A_Life
2012-01-23, 08:48 PM
Just look at the mess that was the oWoD metaplot.I would typically have quoted the OP, but this actually adresses what I wanted to say better.

You can never, never have to much fluff. Four-hour one-shot with 200 pages of fluff? Awesome. No, seriously, dance like a lunatic.

Lots of fluff is great. Lots of inspiration, logical extrapolations, ready-made plots etc.
I think few GMs would ever complain that they had too much material and were too well-prepared :smallamused:

Fluff only becomes an issue, if you let it dictate your game. If you want to use the oWod metaplot, the details of the Guilds slave trade in the Western part of Creation, the sealed Rakshasa Rajahs of Eberron or similar events, then obviously you shouldn't axe the entirety of the original setting, but you'd still have a lot of leeway.


I've seen very few GMs enforcing Predators Taint (I think it's called) in nWoD Vampire between party members, because having group members rip each other to pieces for no good reason isn't conductive for play.
I've heard of people in whose Exalted games where Terrestrial Exalted were made of the Unconquered Sun, while the Dragonblooded were the greatest Exalted [effectively Solars] made of Gaia. Apparently, they enjoy it and that's great.
I've retconned canon parts of the oWoD metaplot to accomodate details I wanted to include, just so I could lead up to Gehenna.
I've played Paranoia, where the rules were "roll under," but the GM Friend Computer never specified die type (not that it mattered, being Paranoia).
I've altered the time line of Masks of Nyarlathotep to accomodate a side-plot that I wanted to use.


Fluff is awesome and you can never have too much of it, but it shouldn't be treated like scripture.
It's your game, so do whatever you need to run a good game, including axing any part of the original setting you (and your players) don't like.

Tavar
2012-01-23, 09:08 PM
so, now just because I like variation in my fluff means I can't do serious games? :smallmad:
No, variation is fine, but I'm specifically responding to your first post, specifcally this part:



and my point is: is there a point, where the fluff should just stay back and allow the players to have fun, consequences and impact on the setting be damned, for the lack of a better term? sure how the setting works and such is important, but player fun is most important of all.
Exalted generally reserves such ultimatums for the parts that define the setting. If you change everything on a whim, then the setting no longer has coherence. In that case, I'm not sure how how it can remain serious, because the coherence of the setting is part of what gives it meaning.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-23, 09:22 PM
No, variation is fine, but I'm specifically responding to your first post, specifcally this part:


Exalted generally reserves such ultimatums for the parts that define the setting. If you change everything on a whim, then the setting no longer has coherence. In that case, I'm not sure how how it can remain serious, because the coherence of the setting is part of what gives it meaning.

well yes, it can perfectly serious. ahem let me demonstrate:

"while most anima banners and Caste marks of the Solar Exalted are golden, there are some exceptions to this rule. Since Sol is the god closest to humanity, his Exaltations have a much closer resonance with human nature and therefore their souls.
The Exaltations most of the time get souls who completely resonate with all that Sol values, thus getting the iconic golden caste marks and animas. However some Solar Exalted have souls that while they demonstrate all the excellence of worthy of a Solar Exaltation, have different frames of mind or different natures that make their animas and caste marks express themselves with different colors. The anima of the Solar Exalted is closer to a reflection of their inner soul than anything else. Its just that most Solars either reflect what Sol values, or have sufficiently deceptive natures to mimic
such values. The ones that don't are truly unusual among the Exalted."

Anything can be serious if you explain it in a good enough manner.

In fact its the canon image of heroes running around in golden armor, wielding golden weapons while having blazing golden animas and golden caste marks is what I find silly….I mean….really? How I can I possibly take
so much gold seriously?

Tavar
2012-01-23, 10:11 PM
....

Oh. It's this stuff. I though you were actually talking about things more central to the setting.


The issue here is one of unified aesthetics. For the Exalted, this is important, because it helps link otherwise disparate people together. In addition, the colors are important because they draw certain associations: Gold is the color of kings, leaders, and the like. It helps reinforce what Solars are: God-kings.

Now, that isn't to say that one couldn't change it, but the sole reason for the change is that you really, really don't like yellow/gold. That's not going to be something that many people sympathize with, nor is it something that's going to be widespread.

Honestly, it seems you're making a mountain of a molehill, here. Yes, nobody was enthusiastic about the whole thing in the thread, but that's because it's a minor change that doesn't really seem to serve a purpose for the majority of players, and for at least some is a bit of a detraction.

As for your last question...how are you able to take any group seriously?

Lord Raziere
2012-01-23, 10:18 PM
…….fine I'll try and adapt. my own irrational dislike is starting to get silly to even myself. :smallannoyed:

but I'll only allow the caste marks to be gold. the anima is changeable by canon
and I can get anything besides orichalcum.

I'm sorry if I made people dislike me again because yet another one my irrationalities, and starting this thread over something so small and insignificant. :smallsigh:

Jerthanis
2012-01-24, 12:26 AM
...but since Solars caste marks (their animas can be almost anything I want, I'm fine with them) are meant to be gold, I can't play them because the human paragons I envision don't have golden symbols on their forehead.
I'm fine with other color symbols on their forehead, but I for some reason I can't live with gold on their foreheads. again. what is wrong with me? why can't I just accept the freaking golden symbols on the forehead? It. Does. Not. Make. Sense.

Then just let the symbols on the foreheads match the Anima banners? Sheesh, I'm pretty sure that's how Harmonious Jade's Caste Mark is described in the books; as purple as her anima (though still golden in the art).

EDIT: Whoops, missed when you suggested as such and someone told you not to... Honestly I can't possibly imagine how it could be a problem if the Mark is the same color as the Anima... I mean, the Anima is the more definitive one of the two, shines brighter and all that. Aesthetics are already compromised if Solars abosolutely must be GOLDGOLDGOLD and nothing else.

Also, Orichalcum is I think Greek for "Mountain Brass", so it's not so much Gold colored as it is Brass/Bronze, which fits the aesthetics of the aspect of the setting which is Gilgamesh like how Jade fits the aesthetics of the aspect of the setting which is Qing Dynasty. It's depicted as golden in the art but it doesn't have to be actual gold in your mind. Look at the cover of the book. Harmonious Jade's breastplate is an Orichalcum artifact breastplate, yet it's black.

I will say though that the very first thing I thought of when I saw the title for this thread was "Exalted", and the many more intricate problems with the setting that arise from the fact that it's just got so much fluff than the idea that some people are color coordinated to some extent. There's just so much nuanced information about absolutely everything about every part of the setting, every aesthetic and mechanical function of everything is mapped so exactly. The personalities and trends of 1st Age society, culture, and technology... the metaphysics of pretty much everything from death and reincarnation to the exact mechanics of Exaltation to the quantum mechanics of Demon summoning to exactly how the Demon Prison was formed and functions, of how Divine beings monitor and control their domains and how and how much they can harvest energy and utilize it.

I remember being frustrated in 1st edition when my players went to a named city and I couldn't find even a single sentence describing it in any book I could find. Now I've got between 700 and 4000 years of history of every single point on the map. Oh, there's plenty of room for nations between the canon nations where I can put in whatever I want, but any time they affect world politics in any meaningful way, I've got to account for it in the timelines of every other place it could concievably affect.

I like about 80% of the written fluff, can tolerate about 10%, wish 9.9% were different and 0.1% is A Snowbound Mystery.

TheCountAlucard
2012-01-24, 12:28 AM
and I can get anything besides orichalcum.Orichalcum doesn't have to be gold-colored. :smallcool: That's canon. In fact, most of my old Solar's stuff was either white or red.

Cloak of Vanishing Escape? White. Orichalcum Royal Warstrider? Red, though it did create streaks of golden-colored fire with its movements and when it flew. Jade hearthstone bracers? Red.

Heck, I had a pair of "trench spike" -fluffed slayer khatars when I started out, but it was more the yellow jade that contributed to their color.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-24, 01:18 AM
thanks everyone for your help and such, I'll try and actually remember all this, this time and try to improve so that I don't make such a big deal over something so little ever again. (I've even made a list of things I should remember, but thats unimportant)

I imagine that you are tired of hearing me complain about this multiple times, so go ahead and actually use this thread for its actual title and topic: is there really such a thing as too much fluff? because my pet peeves-I think thats the proper term- is only a part of a larger fanbase split into ten thousand different shards all arguing over this and that up and down the canon, with no two people holding the exact same view of the setting.
one man's awesome seems to be another man's suck, it seems. it makes me wonder how all these people actually sit down and game together. which reminds me, I should try and get into more Exalted games...

Coidzor
2012-01-24, 01:26 AM
When it chokes off thought such that one cannot screw the fluff, this idea is awesome, that's a bad sign.

Frozen_Feet
2012-01-24, 04:50 AM
I think few GMs would ever complain that they had too much material and were too well-prepared :smallamused:


I have. It's the main reason I mostly improvize during sessions: I don't like seeing the trouble of making a ton of material, only to find out there's almost no way to work it into a game and it's going to waste.

I've also had headaches with several ready-made adventure modules that had way too many words in the wrong places, making it very hard to distill them into smooth narrative even with having read them beforehand.

Madwand99
2012-01-24, 05:06 PM
My suggestion for the "too much fluff" problem is to try Mutants and Masterminds 3e. Extremely easy and flexible character creation system that can hande just about any concept you like, and no fluff other than what you choose. Easily handles just about any power level.

Agrippa
2012-01-24, 05:34 PM
What about D&D (3.5 or 4e)? That's pretty easy to refluff. Heck, you could feasibly run a game in the Scion or Exalted setting if you play the right types. Supernatural warriors? Clerics, duskblades, psychic warriors, just gish in general for 3.5. Things such as Twilight Castes could be straight wizards. For 4e, paladins, swordmages, battleminds, clerics, ardents, wizards, psions, barbarians (they're supernatural in 4e), druids, avengers, invokers, basically anything with a power source other than "martial".

I'm working on something like that myself. I'm still drawing blanks on how to adapt the Exalted Charms and better capturing the feel of the Anima powers. That and I need help with the Terrestrials/Dragonblooded. Then I have the Lunars and Sidereals to tackle.

---------------------------------------

Now about not liking that orichacalum's golden coloring, just remember this. Orichacalum doesn't have to be gold. Hell, there's a blogger out there who talks about Torgo (http://jrients.blogspot.com/2008/06/so-exalted.html), his black orichacalum grand daiklave weilding polar bear riding Eclipse Caste caveman (http://jrients.blogspot.com/2008/05/jeff-plays-exalted.html).

Need_A_Life
2012-01-24, 06:48 PM
I have. It's the main reason I mostly improvize during sessions: I don't like seeing the trouble of making a ton of material, only to find out there's almost no way to work it into a game and it's going to waste.

I've also had headaches with several ready-made adventure modules that had way too many words in the wrong places, making it very hard to distill them into smooth narrative even with having read them beforehand.

I think we're talking about different kinds of fluff. I'm talking about the wealth of setting information, canon NPCs etc. you'll find in almost every published setting. It's material from which you can steal stuff with impunity (give them a quick paintjob, if you feel the need, but stats, concepts etc. are usually easier to steal than come up with*).

I'm not talking about the notes I make for a given session. Those things will see the light of day, if not now then later**.

* Unless you're not running a campaign at the time.
** If they haven't seen it on screen, how could they know this encounter/scene/event was supposed to occur three sessions ago, but they missed it by leaving the planet/trusting the bad guy/winning the limbo competition?

Frozen_Feet
2012-01-25, 03:56 AM
... and those things are just notes for a session / campaign, they're just made by someone else. Description is description is description, and I don't need details that will either never matter, or which will take too long to read or distract me from actually relevant information.

Just because I someday might be able to use or resuse some piece of the game, does not remove sense of dissatisfaction from the fact that I didn't get to do that now, and it doesn't bring time used for making or reading that material back.

Need_A_Life
2012-01-25, 09:27 PM
Difference of opinion then.
I wouldn't be GMing a setting I didn't like thinking about, whether that's a published setting (que me reading books from that setting and ripping whatever I like) or homebrew (que me reading books, watching movies etc. from that genre and ripping whatever I like).

So when I'm "wasting" time reading all that setting fluff I'm actually enjoying myself, getting in the mood for a game, brainstorming new plot hooks, twists etc.
Or maybe I just spot a great argument on a subject in the setting on a message board like this and spot a plot hook hidden in there.

HerrTenko
2012-01-26, 08:46 AM
Here's what I think : in the end, it all comes down to the DM. Since Exalted has already been discussed in this thread, I'll take it as an exemple here.

Exalted comes packed with gigatons of Canon Fluff, as we all know. It's an overcrowded setting where everything of even slight importance is described in a way or another. You have guidelines on how the Yozi work, how the Exalted act, how the Sidereals are supposed to control everything, blah blah blah. And here's the twist : all those are nothing but guidelines. Awesome guidelines, yes, that make the setting extremely cool with loads of possible plots and great coherence, but still, guidelines.

Imagine I want to ST a Star Destroyer/Gundam campaign where my First Age Solar players are part of the crew of the Day Star on a mission in the Wyld during a war against whatever the big ennemy actually is (it being the Wyld, it could pretty much be anything). There are LOADS of problems about this. For exemple, from what I've learned, Solars weren't even allowed aboard the Day Star save very few exceptions for a very short period of time because The Unconquered Sun had made it clear it was HIS place and they weren't allowed in.
And here comes the solution. Be careful, because it's going to be extremely subtle... "I don't care". That's just it. I don't care what the Editor's Canon says about this or that, because in a very specific campaign, with a very specific plot that I want to enact, this Editor Canon just doesn't apply. What applies is my Campaign Canon. It might be very close to the editor's Canon, it might be different, heck, it might even be different from last campaign's Canon. Things are never set in stone, and if I want to have my players be badasses aboard the badassest Battle Station in Creation under the command of the God of Badasses, then in this specific campaign, it WILL be possible.
The only limitation here is that, when your Campaign Canon has been exposed, you have to stick to it. If you say "in this campaign, Solars have Fushia Cast Marks with Rainbow Coloured Anima Banners", then you shouldn't come up with a Golden Solar out of left field.

tl;dr : RPG books are tools. Mechanics are tools, you can tweak them, fix them, modify them. Fluff goes the same way. Just make sure you stay coherent with your own fluff for the Campaign to come.

SlyGuyMcFly
2012-01-26, 09:20 AM
And here comes the solution. Be careful, because it's going to be extremely subtle... "I don't care".

This, gods above and below. This.

Fluff is mutable. As long as you're clear on what parts of canon you're departing from and everyone at the table is OK with it, do whatever you please.

TheCountAlucard
2012-01-26, 09:27 AM
Fluff is mutable. As long as you're clear on what parts of canon you're departing from and everyone at the table is OK with it, do whatever you please.Agreed, especially on the bit about explaining the differences and making sure the others are all right with it.

For example, if you want to run a game where the Infernal host is hyper-competent, slavishly loyal to the Yozis, and carry out the Reclamation with ruthless efficiency while the Yozis power-level them to elder levels of power; where the Ebon Dragon possesses the Scarlet Empress and rides her back into Creation to enact a perfect takeover of the Blessed Isle (but still stealthily enough that such would not be observed by, say, ten thousand spies); where the Autocthonians pop into Creation, but have their Champions made into akuma of the Ebon Dragon; where the Lotus Massacre features the death of all the Fivescore Fellowship save two, and also has the Unconquered Sun getting kidnapped... yeah, you can do that. Just... be sure and let the players in on the fact that you're going to be pulling shenanigans like that, and also, don't call it "Return of the Scarlet Empress." :smallmad:

Lix Lorn
2012-01-26, 09:42 AM
After much reading of Exalted and all the arguments that come from it, I am beginning to wonder:

can too much fluff be a bad thing?

because I look at Exalted and its so wrapped up in how "this is how everything canonically is, deviations destroy the setting and wreck the themes of Exalted and blah blah blah…" that I'm beginning to think that the fluff is getting too much in the way of fun. I don't care if this is the way it happened or if this is aesthetic is exclusive to this splat or this splat can't do whatever, or so on and so forth, I want to have fun.

and my point is: is there a point, where the fluff should just stay back and allow the players to have fun, consequences and impact on the setting be damned, for the lack of a better term? sure how the setting works and such is important, but player fun is most important of all.

so frankly myself, I'm beginning to think that fluff is important and has its place, but shouldn't be king above fun. what are your thoughts?
Well, let me reply to that with another question.

Considering how utterly and entirely cruddy Exalted mechanics tend to be, why would anyone EVER bother playing it without this much wonderful, wonderful, (mostly) consistent fluff?

Edit: That said, as people have pointed out, you should feel free to modify things to suit your and your own groups personal needs. If something's an issue, say so and ignore it.

Knaight
2012-01-28, 12:34 AM
Considering how utterly and entirely cruddy Exalted mechanics tend to be, why would anyone EVER bother playing it without this much wonderful, wonderful, (mostly) consistent fluff?
Honestly, I'm fuzzy on why they don't just export the fluff to a better system near universally.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-28, 12:46 AM
Well, let me reply to that with another question.

Considering how utterly and entirely cruddy Exalted mechanics tend to be, why would anyone EVER bother playing it without this much wonderful, wonderful, (mostly) consistent fluff?

Edit: That said, as people have pointed out, you should feel free to modify things to suit your and your own groups personal needs. If something's an issue, say so and ignore it.

the problem comes because I have this instinctive urge to take whatever concept I come across and turn it on its head or make something that breaks the mold in rebellion. normally this isn't so bad, because I make things like dwarf wizards, humble elves, halfling paladins and so on.

then there is Exalted, and I start coming up with Dragon-Bloods that try to save the entire world or take on Solars like a Celestial, Abyssals that get happy endings without redeeming into Solars, Solars that do things to get elemental powers, idealistic Sidereals and Alchemicals that don't seem to know what Clarity is.

its taken me this long to be at peace with Resonance and finally like Solars in my own way. I'm still working on trying to like Terrestrials for what they are rather than trying to make them elemental Celestials. :smallsigh:

The_Snark
2012-01-28, 03:03 AM
Honestly, I'm fuzzy on why they don't just export the fluff to a better system near universally.

Because they're so shiny-looking. My first reaction to flipping through any list of Charms is generally, "wow! Look at all the cool stuff that I could (hypothetically) do!" The system's wonkiness isn't apparent until later.

And honestly, even though I feel that the Exalted ruleset is pretty kludgy, I'm hard pressed to think of a substitute that would offer the same kind of "Wow! Cool!" factor. None of the generic systems I know quite seem to fit.

TheThan
2012-01-28, 03:06 AM
Generally I try to stop providing in game fluff when I see my players eyes start to gloss over. Fortunately this doesn't take too long.

Bagelson
2012-01-28, 05:47 AM
Considering how utterly and entirely cruddy Exalted mechanics tend to be, why would anyone EVER bother playing it without this much wonderful, wonderful, (mostly) consistent fluff?

I had to stop lurking and register to quote this, because it's true.

I'd also like to point to Kerberos Club (I only have the FATE ed., so my opinions are restricted to that). It has 200 pages of fluff, and glorious fluff it is. It's entertaining, relevant and most important: open to interpretation. Every page is chock full of inspiration with few constraints. The downside is that it does require more interpretation than Exalted, but that mostly just leaves things open to player action and matches the setting and the theme perfectly.

Lix Lorn
2012-01-28, 11:29 AM
Honestly, I'm fuzzy on why they don't just export the fluff to a better system near universally.
Cause while the rules are bad, they are also awesome.


I had to stop lurking and register to quote this, because it's true.
Wow. Thanks. xD

Tiki Snakes
2012-01-28, 11:56 AM
Sand is soft and flowing and you can do stuff with it. Push it around, get it wet and make sandcastles with it, or add it to other things for any number of reasons.

But if you have enough of it then the sheer pressure fuses it together into Sandstone. Sandstone is cool too, but it's a lot less flexible and there's not nearly so much you can do with it.

Exalted's fluff is great, but it has some massive wallbangers built in and some of them don't seem to be intentional. I think that once you have so much fluff and allow it to become too specific and restrictive then you get problems. Things like how it's almost inconceivable that no-one has noticed a third of what is wrong, the big world-threatening threats they spend so long discussing in the books before mentioning "Only, no-one knows this. Um, because. Why? Oooh, it's a mystery!".

I think it's a white-wolf tendancy in the style of fluff they create, as much as anything. It tends to prescribe the way things should be more than the way things are. Sometimes it's as simple as having strangely inflexible elements like the caste-marks and anima banners, etc, sometimes it's how the Masquerade will be preserved by all costs, sometimes it's something like how specific a creature's origin is and how much that differs from the expected, like their Werewolves (Which, cool as they may be, aren't really what I think of when someone says Werewolf).

It probably becomes more likely the more fluff is present, but I don't think it's exclusively a problem of the ammount of fluff.

Hiro Protagonest
2012-01-28, 12:26 PM
But... I like Exalted's mechanics.

Although that's probably because it's the only point-based RPG I've seen. Maybe I should just buy GURPS.

RPGuru1331
2012-01-28, 12:56 PM
I like them too, but I recognize them as bad.

GolemsVoice
2012-01-28, 04:08 PM
I think it's a white-wolf tendancy in the style of fluff they create, as much as anything. It tends to prescribe the way things should be more than the way things are. Sometimes it's as simple as having strangely inflexible elements like the caste-marks and anima banners, etc, sometimes it's how the Masquerade will be preserved by all costs, sometimes it's something like how specific a creature's origin is and how much that differs from the expected, like their Werewolves (Which, cool as they may be, aren't really what I think of when someone says Werewolf).

I've noticed this too, whenever we run a Vampire campaign (old WoD). Now I'm always a player, and while I do know something about how thigns work in Vampire, it's not exactly much. And whenever we play, It kinda feels like watching a movie that an only exist because you run around and push the right buttons (after which the real cool people start to do stuff that actually matters). The feeling I have is because there's so much metaplot going on at any given time that the players can basically only change things on a very small scale before they have to take a seat on the plot-railroad and watch things unfold.

Now of course, the answer is always: ignore this, and we often enough do this, but still, why have so much fluff when it actually starts restricting your games?

TheCountAlucard
2012-01-28, 05:28 PM
I've noticed this too, whenever we run a Vampire campaign (old WoD). Now I'm always a player, and while I do know something about how thigns work in Vampire, it's not exactly much. And whenever we play, It kinda feels like watching a movie that an only exist because you run around and push the right buttons (after which the real cool people start to do stuff that actually matters). The feeling I have is because there's so much metaplot going on at any given time that the players can basically only change things on a very small scale before they have to take a seat on the plot-railroad and watch things unfold.Luckily, in Exalted, the players get to be the cool guys who do stuff that matters. :smalltongue:

Assuming your ST isn't an awful person, anyway.

GolemsVoice
2012-01-29, 04:58 AM
Assuming your ST isn't an awful person, anyway.

No, he really isn't, but it's true that for him, ST-ing Vampire means he can use all the cool characters he only get's to read about. Which, I guess, is true for everyone of us, on one level or the other.

Lord Raziere
2012-01-29, 08:00 PM
I have finally become at peace with Dragon-Blooded too.

but now I've realized, that I have been doing my usual rebellion and twisting all wrong. I'm not supposed to rebel against one splat or anything. I'm supposed to rebel against the entire setting, so that my own personal canon all makes sense within itself as its own rebellious world against canon Exalted.

in short, the solution: make Razalted!

SilverLeaf167
2012-01-30, 02:44 PM
I often have the same problem as Frozen_Feet, especially the part about translating stuff to Finnish...

Depending on the piece of text I'm reading aloud, or even just trying to interpret so that I have anything at all to tell the players, it can kind of slow down the game if I suddenly have one of my numerous brainfarts and suddenly forget what something is in Finnish or how to translate some slightly more obscure phrase. Due to this, it would be nice if some of the longer fluff explanations would have summaries at the bottom, so that people wouldn't have to spend time trying to find all the relevant information from the wall of text and somehow clutch it together into a sensible explanation.

One thing that makes this even worse is that when writing about D&D, I often find it easier to write in English than Finnish (it helps me remember the correct terms for everything), but at the gaming table, I'll have to translate it back to Finnish anyway. Also, for some reason, while most words are just fine when translated to Finnish (human, dragon, elf, dwarf, giant etc.), the whole group (including me) tends to abhor whatever translation of goblin, halfling, gnome or beholder we make up, considering it ridiculous. For some of those examples, I understand what makes it so hard to think of a translation, but what exactly is so horrifying about calling goblins "hiisi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiisi)"?

More on topic, if the fluff is scattered all over the source material so that it clots up the crunchier parts and is hard to interpret or piece together, you have a case of either too much fluff, badly organized fluff, or often both.

Frozen_Feet
2012-01-30, 04:26 PM
I prefer to use "menninkäinen" for goblins, and "puolituinen", "maahinen" and "näkijä" for the rest. Can't imagine what would be wrong with those.

Need_A_Life
2012-01-30, 07:45 PM
I tend to just use the English term at the table too. In a group of born-and-bred danes having a discussion, at least a third of the words will be English anyway, so this way I can avoid confusion.
Now, obviously, English translations of danish words will be said in danish (Fenris, not Fenrir. Aser, not Aesir. Mjølner, not Mjolnir), but that's a different matter.

I spent ~2 months at a V:tM LARP before I realized that some people, who had told me stuff that seemed incomprehensible, was simply because they translated all the English terms into danish.
Kindred was the worst one, it became 'beslægtede' (translation: related to one-another by heiritage or marriage). :smallsigh:
'Elysiumsholderen' was also noteworthy for literally meaning "the person who holds Elysium" only with the implication of it being a physical activity of lifting it. :smallconfused:

Terraoblivion
2012-01-30, 08:55 PM
Oh, god, yes. Danish larpers are hilarious for breaking the tradition of all other Danish rp'ers and actually translating things leading to some ridiculous usages of ancient words nobody uses anymore. As for the typical D&D'isms as used in the examples, about the only one I've ever seen translated here is troll which becomes trold, which is just a minor change in pronunciation. Similarly "the prince" in VtM and VtR becomes "prinsen", despite rightfully being "fyrsten", the latter term is just less commonly known and is the translation for the less commonly used definition of prince.

Mostly, though, everything specifically game related stays in English and quite honestly, if you use English books in the first place, I'm not entirely sure why you'd translate as a GM or player. Most of the other people at the table can be expected to have read the book and be familiar with the terms in it so translating just seems like it could add an extra step of confusion. Besides, for Danish at least everything sounds more ridiculous when translated.

GolemsVoice
2012-01-30, 09:26 PM
'Elysiumsholderen' was also noteworthy for literally meaning "the person who holds Elysium" only with the implication of it being a physical activity of lifting it.

Sounds like a Tzimisce thing, probably Nosferatu, too.

SilverLeaf167
2012-01-31, 10:03 AM
I prefer to use "menninkäinen" for goblins, and "puolituinen", "maahinen" and "näkijä" for the rest. Can't imagine what would be wrong with those.
Yeah, those are precisely the translations I've tried using (I think "hiisi" were actually hobgoblins), but for some mysterious reason none of us can actually use those with a straight face. I've got no idea what causes that. Maybe the words are jinxed, idk.
We've just decided that if we can't think of a translation that everyone can take seriously, we'll just use the original English word. It's rather rare that we actually don't like the name, it's more like we liked it too much.

Now I've got the feeling I should post an example of a self-made name we actually used... hmm...

Well, devils and demons tend to be just the standard "pirut" and "demonit", it's the easiest way, but not really unique. Most -folk are just "-väki" (like liskoväki), but that's pretty common too.

Geez, I really can't think of anything. Though I've started reading translated works of Salvatore, and I really like some of the translations used there, I might use some of them... (like bugbears being "karhuhiisi", ghouls being "kalmo" etc.)

Anyway, it's nice to have some other Finn on these forums too :smallwink:

Frozen_Feet
2012-01-31, 11:52 AM
I have a thing for using words "paholainen" and "viholainen" for varied evil creatures. :smallsmile:

SilverLeaf167
2012-01-31, 01:48 PM
I have a thing for using words "paholainen" and "viholainen" for varied evil creatures. :smallsmile:
I definitely did not misread that as "virolainen" (Estonian) :smallbiggrin:
Now let's shut up or continue in PM, I bet we're annoying these ulkomaalaiset.

GolemsVoice
2012-01-31, 02:59 PM
Wos hobt's gsocht?

Killer Angel
2012-02-01, 06:10 AM
There can be too much fluff, yes. It can get too convoluted, too self-contradictory,

Some debates involving WH40K come to my mind...