Quote from: Nexus;897544How do you feel anout game fiction, specifically items like chapter fiction and stories in the game books themselves rather than things like anthologies or novels set in game worlds? The poll choices are pretty simple so please post any more nuanced opinions in the thread.

I can't fucking stand Game Fiction. It's always awful.

Sometimes game fiction helps define and clarify the setting, a lot. Good slice of life stuff, like some of the exposition in Shadowrun 5, or some of the chapter intros in Cyberpunk 2020. Runequest products always seem to illustrate play and rules with an ongoing mini story that is always fun to read (go Cormac!).

Then there's the good and bad of White Wolf games - more often than not, it was bad: introduce protagonist, have them do something thematic in the setting, lead to dark and ominous outcome. Nothing useful gained, since doing that to your player would result in them throwing the table snacks at you. Worse, half the actual "content in the book" was a work of fiction, a lens-view of the setting through the eyes of the book's creature/faction, meaning all information you gained was biased and untrue. This didn't happen in early games, but became an excuse of the writers to just change details with every book that came out, instead of making their own works function in their own created worlds.

I think the dividing line is "did you give me new knowledge, was it enjoyable to read, and did it feel like something that helps me use this book to run games"?

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;898923Sometimes game fiction helps define and clarify the setting, a lot. Good slice of life stuff, like some of the exposition in Shadowrun 5, or some of the chapter intros in Cyberpunk 2020. Runequest products always seem to illustrate play and rules with an ongoing mini story that is always fun to read (go Cormac!).

Then there's the good and bad of White Wolf games - more often than not, it was bad: introduce protagonist, have them do something thematic in the setting, lead to dark and ominous outcome. Nothing useful gained, since doing that to your player would result in them throwing the table snacks at you. Worse, half the actual "content in the book" was a work of fiction, a lens-view of the setting through the eyes of the book's creature/faction, meaning all information you gained was biased and untrue. This didn't happen in early games, but became an excuse of the writers to just change details with every book that came out, instead of making their own works function in their own created worlds.

I think the dividing line is "did you give me new knowledge, was it enjoyable to read, and did it feel like something that helps me use this book to run games"?

Game Fiction can be like game art, it helps convey the tone of what the game is meant to be.  Good or badly done.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;899193Game Fiction can be like game art, it helps convey the tone of what the game is meant to be.  Good or badly done.

And just like game fiction, for the most part I couldn't care less about game art either.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;898381Define 'standalone'. By many measures, (A)D&D doesn't count since it depends on the three-book core set.

Yeah. I guess I was thinking one book and that's all, no other expansions or sourcebooks at all... I wasn't thinking the bare minimum of what the game could be played with... and D&D still wouldn't count, IMO, 'cause it wants a bestiary.

I pretty much never read it,

Quote from: Nexus;897544How do you feel anout game fiction, specifically items like chapter fiction and stories in the game books themselves rather than things like anthologies or novels set in game worlds? The poll choices are pretty simple so please post any more nuanced opinions in the thread.

I am writing this sort of thing myself these days, for my own game, so I guess I like it. Never liked the style in Vampire the Masquerade and related games though even though they may have pioneered this (or emphasized it more than others)

Generally don't care for it. As I've mentioned before I'd rather see examples of play in a rule book. Examples of how spells or a power is used, how combat flows. Give me 10 pages of reasonable, playable examples of starting characters over 10 pages of fiction any day.

(If the game world has particularly difficult or strange character types then a brief text describing how they talk, think or point of view is useful. For example the Dune books have difficult to grasp characters and some explanation of who they are in a game rule book is probably needed. Runequest 6 has examples of a character's possible cultural voice.)

Quote from: Kiero;899244And just like game fiction, for the most part I couldn't care less about game art either.

Right.

Quote from: Kiero;899244And just like game fiction, for the most part I couldn't care less about game art either.

I feel similarly. Art is gravy for me. I could do without out it and I usually only notice if its astoundingly good or so bad its distracting. If I could get books cheaper without the art I would. And like game fiction game art is even more annoying when it doesn't match the game's setting or mechanics.

Depends on how much.  Even though it's not really an RPG, fucking WH40k Codexes are some of the worst 'fluff' books ever.  My gaming group has been doing some serious scanner work on the Codexes and we've almost got a complete 'crunch book' of the actual rules, wargear, and stat lines for Warhammer 40k and it's still not even half the size of the core rulebook.  We just cut out the fluff and the pictures to make a reference manual, and every time I see this binder my stomach turns.  Oh, and keep in mind we're using document protectors.

For some games, I honestly think that it's important to frame the setting and give you ideas for story hooks and the like.  But games like Exalted tended to throw too much at you.  There's supposed to be 13 Deathlords, but the amount of detail for the 9 in the book takes up so much space in the setting... you might as well just say there's 9.  At a certain point that game just got so heavy on fluff that it felt outright restrictive, and I can't tell you how many times we said No, we are ignoring that because it's too damned restrictive.

And don't get me wrong, I like some good fiction-fluff... but the amount of space for actual important things in any of the Compass books and Manuals could probably fit in your pocket comfortably.  Some of the fluff could have been condensed so we could have books like 1e that covered the area and and Exalt type.

Game fiction is usually awful, but there are a few exceptions I actually enjoyed, like All Flesh Must Be Eaten, Ars Magica 3rd, etc...

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;898923Runequest products always seem to illustrate play and rules with an ongoing mini story that is always fun to read (go Cormac!).

This one too! I loved the idea.

Quote from: Coffee Zombie;898923Runequest products always seem to illustrate play and rules with an ongoing mini story that is always fun to read (go Cormac!).

So it's not just me that thinks that. (Rurik Rules!)

Quote from: Nexus;899363I feel similarly. Art is gravy for me. I could do without out it and I usually only notice if its astoundingly good or so bad its a distracting. If I could get books cheaper without the art I would. And like fiction its more annoying when it doesn't match the game.

Precisely this. Artwork in a game generally does nothing for me, except when it's bad, and then it's actively annoying.

Quote from: Nexus;899363I feel similarly. Art is gravy for me. I could do without out it and I usually only notice if its astoundingly good or so bad its distracting. If I could get books cheaper without the art I would. And like game fiction game art is even more annoying when it doesn't match the game's setting or mechanics.

I need art.  I need to know what the game's tone is going to be.