Titter ye not! Silliness inside the walls

From: Stewart Stansfield <stu_stansfield_at_...>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2004 15:50:42 -0000

Ian writes:
> Similarly its all too easy in 'fantasy' cities to
> throw in too many wierd elements or humour. Less is
> more as they say. So the marble longhouses, warrens
> for strange fury animals, battling Meerschaum pipe
> makers etc, while individually okay begin to grate
> when thrown together. There is a taste element here.
> Whatever oddities may work for you and your group may
> not work for others. People feel happy overelooking
> the one or two they don't like, but plop them on every
> street and folks will soon feel overwhelmed. Note that
> even the wacky Greg doesn't throw handfuls of wierd
> elements everyplace, just one or two to lighten the
> tone. And even then some folks complain...

I'm sure no-one would disagree with you Ian, but any problems on this line may IMHO be somewhat illusory, and/or temporary--a matter of means and methods of detailing rather than the ends.

In brief, there are a couple of 'extreme' ways in which such a project might be approached: (i) a gradualist approach, where the story of the siege is built up with a firm eye on matters of context and balance; (ii) a looser brainstorming approach, wherein people place their ideas as they arrive, and the story is whittled down into something managable later on, in a more final editing process.

In the interests of efficacy, this group has naturally tried to keep an eye on (i), so as to make the whole managable and keep the whole process grounded. Yet there is a lot of detail going in, occasionally people are more familiar with certain areas than others..., in the volume of mails things are occasionally missed, and sometimes when an idea comes, it... well, has to be written down. So there is an element of (ii).

To people used to working with (ii), the gradualist method might appear a bit restrictive ("I don't care if we've already got that... why can't I throw this into the discussion?"). While to those who favour (i), loose brainstorming can be painfully obfuscatory, hampering attempts to keep an eye on the progress and the ultimate goal.

I'm not adverse to throwing ideas in, as I have no worries about them being dismissed later; indeed, I'm presuming the majority will be taken out later :o). And many things are I am sure aimed at getting a giggle rather than defining Whitewall. With a dozen or so frequent contributors, everyone's acceptable two to three eccentricities can rapidly generate into 24-36 (I'll make up for the more serious folks).

[N.B. Occasionally, the Wiki can be treated as an element of 'finality' in the proceedings, but I know that at the very beginning at least it was partially mooted as an alternative to this group for providing draft ideas, and discussing or dismissing them as appropriate.]

So as a duckophile and occasional advocate of (ii), I'm always going to add quirky things unless they are actively proscribed--you should just thank your lucky stars that I haven't added a travelling troupe of cocktail-drinking Erinorran ugulz (cannibal pygmy ducks) following the ways of Luwuku the Limbo Dancer.

But when it comes to the crunch, please... as Zammo would emote... "Just say no!"

All the best,

Stu.

P.S. Though I must say that Dangmar has a very serious soul. I restrained myself considerably! Added to the development of Meerschaum by Oliver, I find a niche for the pipe-carver in Glorantha (after all, beer lovers wax on interminably!) and would resist classing him as tonguebite or dottle at the end of the bowl!