Comments on: A Modular Approach to Worldbuilding http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding Game mastering advice, ideas & resources • Dedicated to helping GMs Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:04:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Martin http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding/comment-page-1#comment-1352 Martin Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:17:55 +0000 http://www.treasuretables.org/?p=184#comment-1352 With a minipost, I don't have a lot of room for qualifiers -- I think our exchange in the comments here pretty much covers it. :) I suspect Shane would be happy to discuss the drawbacks in the comments over on <a href="http://eternalkeep.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Eternal Keep</a>. That's not a brush-off -- it's just that it's his article. ;) With a minipost, I don’t have a lot of room for qualifiers — I think our exchange in the comments here pretty much covers it. :)

I suspect Shane would be happy to discuss the drawbacks in the comments over on Eternal Keep. That’s not a brush-off — it’s just that it’s his article. ;)

]]> By: John Kim http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding/comment-page-1#comment-1351 John Kim Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:00:42 +0000 http://www.treasuretables.org/?p=184#comment-1351 Either or both, I guess. Either or both, I guess.

]]> By: Martin http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding/comment-page-1#comment-1350 Martin Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:45:53 +0000 http://www.treasuretables.org/?p=184#comment-1350 Do you mean mentioned in my minipost here, or in Shane's actual post? Do you mean mentioned in my minipost here, or in Shane’s actual post?

]]> By: John Kim http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding/comment-page-1#comment-1349 John Kim Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:17:16 +0000 http://www.treasuretables.org/?p=184#comment-1349 Fair enough. I think it should at least be mentioned as a potential drawback, since objections are common enough that I would at least call the technique controversial. Fair enough. I think it should at least be mentioned as a potential drawback, since objections are common enough that I would at least call the technique controversial.

]]> By: Martin http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding/comment-page-1#comment-1348 Martin Sun, 15 Jan 2006 09:23:45 +0000 http://www.treasuretables.org/?p=184#comment-1348 Definitely a "different strokes" kind of situation. I like that Shane covered some different options, and I think the overall approach is solid -- just not to everyone's tastes. Definitely a “different strokes” kind of situation. I like that Shane covered some different options, and I think the overall approach is solid — just not to everyone’s tastes.

]]> By: John Kim http://www.treasuretables.org/2006/01/a-modular-approach-to-worldbuilding/comment-page-1#comment-1347 John Kim Sun, 15 Jan 2006 07:28:36 +0000 http://www.treasuretables.org/?p=184#comment-1347 Hm. This essay is totally at odds from what I would say -- mainly because it is predicated on predetermining the main plot of the campaign well in advance. There are folks who enjoy that, I guess, but in my experience players are much more positive about flexible structures (i.e. having a plot which adjusts to their actions and development). Hm. This essay is totally at odds from what I would say — mainly because it is predicated on predetermining the main plot of the campaign well in advance. There are folks who enjoy that, I guess, but in my experience players are much more positive about flexible structures (i.e. having a plot which adjusts to their actions and development).

]]>