Crunch v. Fluff, Great taste, less filling. Options

[Aaron]

Something that came up in another thread, and I was curious.

[Stahlseele]

i voted for c, because i don't care much for plot but i love fluff to flesh out the rest of the world OUTSIDE of plots to have a more sandbox kinda game . . and for that i need crunch to make this fluff stuff into rules so i can actually play (against) it ^^

[imperialus]

Hrm... I seem to have cast the first vote favoring fluff... I guess that means I need to explain myself.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy my crunch too but over the 13 or so years I've been playing Shadowrun I've seen a lot of crunch come and go. The fluff books are the ones I keep coming back to. To this day I still drag my copies of Neo-A's Guide to RL to the gametable every session, I still reference the orriginal Seattle source book, hell I even use Sprawl Sites from time to time. My copies of Man and Machine, The Grimoire, and Fields of Fire however typically just sit on the shelf unless there is something specific from one of them I want to convert to a new edition.

The fact that I am comfortable converting stuff from the old crunch books, or making up my own stuff whole cloth also means that I don't really need Catalyst to do it for me. I'm much more interested in seeing the metaplot develop and reading fluff books that give me more insight into how and why society operates the way it does in the 6th world. I like stuff that gives my players something to do, I can take care of making sure they have the tools to get it done.

Of course, none of this stops me from buying every bit of crunch as it comes out too. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) Thank god Catalyst has a reasonable release schedule or my Fiancee would be kicking me to the curb.

[Ryu]

Done the same (1st vote) with crunch. Not that I would not buy setting books (I own most material since SR2), but missing an important rulebook is certainly more annoying.

[BishopMcQ]

I'm a mixed baggage type. While I will admittedly, jump straight to the crunchy stuff when a new book comes out so that I can see all the new ways to screw my players create unique challenges for the PCs, I find it is often the fluff that I go back to.

There are only so many crunchy books that can happen without power-creep, but Shadows of Europe, Emergence, and Corporate Enclaves are all fluff books that I reach for over and over again. These books are resources for hundreds of hooks, ideas and settings that I constantly refer back to. The fluff only books are ones that I collect and keep on my desk all the time. My crunchy books, I end up with PDF and dead tree copies. The PDF for when I'm working at my desk and the dead tree for the gaming table.

[Zaranthan]

I'm voting Crunch.

1. I'm a rules lawyer. I'm the friendly type who will accept "because I said so" for a GM's house rule, but I LIVE for rules. The rules are what makes it a game.
2. New rules are cool. They're like mathematical fantasy. You've got fluff, and that's great and fun to read once or twice. I thoroughly enjoyed losing my mind in The Lord of the Rings. New mechanics let me do that to my left brain as well.
3. What I consider "balance" in my sourcebooks most people would call "power creep". The numbers are meaningless without fluff (re: TimeCube), but the numbers are important. Fluff-heavy sources (like Runner Havens) gather dust on my bookshelf until I want to pull up a detail for a character background. Then they get five minutes of flipping for two sentences about some Triad lieutenant before returning to their vigil. If it's not a cool power or a neat trick, it doesn't earn a place within arm's reach of the game table.

[Bull]

I buy everything, so choose C. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I also like both. The crunch makes the game go zoom, but the story and fluff keep me coming back.

[Snow_Fox]

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy my crunch too but over the 13 or so years I've been playing Shadowrun I've seen a lot of crunch come and go. The fluff books are the ones I keep coming back to. To this day I still drag my copies of Neo-A's Guide to RL to the gametable every session, I still reference the orriginal Seattle source book, hell I even use Sprawl Sites from time to time. My copies of Man and Machine, The Grimoire, and Fields of Fire however typically just sit on the shelf unless there is something specific from one of them I want to convert to a new edition.

that says it well for me. Heck when I RL went to Seattle this spring, I took my orginal Seattle SB with me. Guns cars and armor all are pretty much the same ofr a little tweaking but the 'fluff' fills out the world and makes it more than just corp A states. Corp B stats. Ganger A stats etc.
That original Seattle SB was pure fluff, BUT I regularly use that, the others. they aren't even in my study. they're in the basement.

[Jrayjoker]

I love the world and the story, but I like the rules too. They appeal to my hardwired, engineering mind.

My group, who don't come here, are fans of the world and fluff but don't enjoy the rules much.

[nezumi]

It's true that it's the fluff that defines the world and has the longest shelf-life (haha!) since it doesn't really expire. However, fluff without rules means I can't easily employ it, since I need to make up mechanics, and ultimately it's the guns and gear which shape how people will behave in the game.

I enjoy books with a mix (like the SOTA books). Crunch without fluff is just rules creep, which sucks. Fluff without crunch doesn't give me the tools I need as a GM to properly employ said fluff, which also sucks.

[Daddy's Litt...]

I like the lfuff pieces. The rule books can set down the world. Other books just add to the numbers. The 'fluff' is what makes it more than just number crunching.

[paws2sky]

I mainly buy gaming books for the crunch these days.

I prefer main rule books that give me enough fluff that I know what the world is like and enough rules that I can actually run a game. I'll grudgingly buy some advanced rulebooks if need be, but I prefer not to.

I'm generally not interested in fluff-books or canned adventures (for various reasons). I much prefer to plunder a book, TV show, or movie. Or better yet, create something new.

-paws

[Wesley Street]

I need both (special rules for certain general archetypes are what make the game diverse, fun and interesting) though I lean slightly towards fluff. I dumped my copies of Grimoire, Virtual Realities, Field of Fire, Rigger 3, etc. and tore up the Rigger's Black Book into easily scanned art pages after Catalyst released its 4th ed. equivalents. But I have every fluff book from 1st ed. on. Takes up an entire bookshelf in my living room. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) And where's my 4th ed. DMZ, darn it! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Wounded Ronin]

Heh, I usually disregard the fluff because I don't like it and stick with the crunch.

[cryptoknight]

And where's my 4th ed. DMZ, darn it! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I wasn't aware there was a 3rd ed DMZ

[Pendaric]

Both. Though I lean towards fluff. This inspires.
The crunch is just the nuts and bolts that lets me build and run the vehicles of characters through the story/world. I had a friend term the rules as, "the physics engine for roleplay."
Ultimatly I play for the (meta)human element, so I need both.

[Daier Mune]

i voted for crunch. now, i enjoy my crunch well fluffed, but fluff is just that: an added treat. the crunch is what makes the game (for me, anyhow).

[CanRay]

Fluff doesn't care about system. History, especially SHADOW History, doesn't change!

[ornot]

i voted for c, because i don't care much for plot but i love fluff to flesh out the rest of the world OUTSIDE of plots to have a more sandbox kinda game . . and for that i need crunch to make this fluff stuff into rules so i can actually play (against) it ^^

+1

I'm not a big fan of stuff like Immortal Elves, and even stuff like the Renraku Arcology can only be run once, but the world fluff, and city books are great. That being said, I also need rules to keep my players happy, as they would get decidedly annoyed if I was just to narrate the adventure. It does have it's downsides... "Look GM. The Stirrup Interface costs less than Move by Wire of the same rating, and allows me to rig my own body as a drone. So If I put a high level pilot in me I'll be unstoppable!"

[Chrysalis]

Hands down fluff is the best.

-Chrysalis

[Lordmalachdrim]

I like fluff and the crunch that it goes with. As for the plot thing, I actually like it. I miss some of the intertwined plots from SR 2, as well as the fluff preceding every adventure in the modules. It gave the gm a nice insight to what had happened before the runners get involved and helped bring the world to life. Also some of those adventures while not seeming very important at the time later have turned out to be so in the worlds overall history.

[Sir_Psycho]

You can't have crunch VS. fluff. You can't play shadowrun without the rules.

I was going to vote fluff anyway, but there are things I like and don't like about the fluff. Honestly not even 5% of the adventures strike me as playable, whether it's protecting female elf-druids from a gang or running around for dragons or dashing about the metaplanes for an IE, so I'd rather have crunch over adventure/metaplot stuff. However I love my setting fluff. Shadows of Europe and Shadows of Asia were pretty hefty reads, and quite interesting. And I always go back to books like Lone Star, Sprawl Survival Guide, Sprawl Sites, Seattle, New Seattle etc.

But I've honestly learned far too much about GD/IE metaplots since joining dumpshock. And these are things I can't unlearn. I've got to say I'm happy that Catalyst and the shadowrun writers have given that a miss, so far.

[BookWyrm]

I voted C. Game info in it's proper place can only enhance the fluff. Game info alone can be fine in some instances, but.....it's like eating a soda cracker--you can either have it plain or with something that can make the experience better.

[Wesley Street]

I wasn't aware there was a 3rd ed DMZ

There's isn't a 2nd ed. either. So I suppose technically that's what I want. Or an equivalent system if there are legal issues.

[Zaranthan]

I voted C. Game info in it's proper place can only enhance the fluff. Game info alone can be fine in some instances, but.....it's like eating a soda cracker--you can either have it plain or with something that can make the experience better.

I'm eating saltines. Just saltines. I wonder if that says anything about my personality.