Taking your Fluff Back

8 10 2008

Should we really get rid of the fluff? This is a valid question since fluff, in the form discussed in the previous entry, does a lot of things for a lot of people. For the past couple of weeks I’ve been writing and re-writing a sort of practical article to follow the points I raised in the previous one. I found, however, that I kept running into a problematic spot. There was a question that kept coming to mind: How can I address fluff in a less than positive light (as I was trying to do) while at the same time aknowledge that there’s a kind of gaming that uses it and that works fine as it is?

My plan is to take a step back and try to look at the forest. Examine the reasons this apparent dislike of fluff exists in the first place to pinpoint what are the effects that we’re trying to avoid, and to see if these effects are even problematic or not for different styles of gaming. Read the rest of this entry »


Get Rid of the Fluff

18 09 2008

Fluff has bad nutritional values. It’s not surprising to hear a lot of people claiming that they “don’t like books with a lot of fluff” or that “that kind of gameplay is too fluffy” simply because they have been experiencing this kind of nourishment and sometimes assume that everything non-mechanical (something which is also defined rather poorly -some other time though-) is by definition fluff.

I disagree (read: you’re wrong.)

Join me in this first trek into the territory of gaming evil as I try to sweep the fluff out of our gameplay. Also, I’d like to say ‘hello!’ to the readers coming here from the RPG Bloggers Network, I hope that you have a good time reading the articles in this site. As always comments and critiques are more than welcome! Read the rest of this entry »