@EOTB: For me, you are once again on target in a very helpful way. I agree with T1T, "
Cities are fly fishing the players. Maybe they never bite. But they feel the river flowing." might be the best description of what I am looking for---how do I generate that flow? A newspaper (or really just a timeline/table-of-events) might be enough. All the rest I can pull out of my setting prep material.
Also, when you says
"IDK, there is no system other than making shit up continuously in a narrative players mostly ignore even if they enjoy it.", gives me comfort in the fact that I am not alone.
@Beoric :
First. The Explore-the-city stuff: I think when you first arrive there's two things that need to happen --- get through the gate, and find lodging. The exploratory part is the just the party's first impressions as they navigate those 2 tasks. A third thing is "why did you come to this city"/"what do you need from it". They really need to meet a few helpful NPCs and find the main-drag. It doesn't have to a long drawn-out affair.
That said, by mentally switching in the Palace from a hand-waive "royal court" to an actaul "explore the map" mode was very rewarding and unlocked the whole business for me---opened the mental dam.
Second, the Hommlet stuff. This seems very disingenuous of you --- a very modern way of arguing, where a person such as yourself, intentionally ignores those things that don't support your point and drills down on the few cases that do.
The twin statements you made:
"I don't think Hommlet is a good example though, because most of the NPC content isn't really gameable. "
and
"I love Hommlet and keep coming back to it."
don't play well together. Let just admit we ALL keep coming back to Hommlet, and have used it successfully in our games---and that's because it
works. It does have those punchy NPCs that stick in a DM's brain like Bryce's beloved Old Bay the Ogre. Why then downplay (as in your first statement, and Potter example above) it's quality? Why discount it as an exemplar of good design? I'll tell you why I think---you've gotten into the habit of knee-jerk shooting down 1e content FOR NO REASON! You admit your own love of it too. It's nonsensical.
Something, which we BOTH agree is on balance good, can't be "
not a good example though, because most...[is bad]".
Hommlet has "come alive" at so many D&D tables, and in a very repeatable way. What's more,
there are no better examples of a small village in the published sector. Ergo, despite the fact that it could be improved by modern sensibilities, honed by an additional 40 years of play, it is still a good (and may be the Best) example we can collective point to. In contrast ToEE was a massive disappointment. Compare it's spartan Nulb to Hommlet if you need any further proof of the value of Gygax's AD&D starter-town and why most latter products fall short.
When Hommlet first drops in a DM's lap he thinks WTF? Stealing from farmers? The temptation is to just focus on the Moathouse---that's standard dungeon play. But just as in B2, the temptation is to ignore the Keep and all of it's "non-gamable content". Heck even Lareth, as the "dark hope of Chaos", is all non-gamable verbal fluff. He's just another evil Cleric, why waste words beyond that?
Ah! But rather than be an ignorant cuss and disparage the including of things that don't make sense to us at first blush---instead we should wonder:
"Why the heck does Gygax keep putting stuff like this in his How-To-Play-D&D examples?". Like learning physics or math...it's not stupid and dumb just because it's hard to understand. It speaks to how he thinks the game is played. It's a puzzle that takes some serious skill to unravel. I am telling you from personal experience that all that superfluous details HELPS ME RUN THE CITY. (
click. A light bulb goes on in
my head.)
Now, Bryce ostensibly agrees with you. From a
recent review:
Bryce said:
The chancel has been redecorated in a more lavish style as part of the Laudian campaign of beautification.” Or, as an NPC, we get things like: “ Christopher Brown, age 39, is the village baker. His father was the village baker before him. His younger brother, Luke, left the village nearly twenty years ago with the intention to join the navy, and never returned – Christopher has never heard from him since.”
How either of those enhance the adventure, during actual play, is beyond me. Well, they don’t, of course. Because the designer doesn’t know the difference between “this is what all adventures do” and “this is what makes a good adventure.”
And you are both right. We now understand there's a difference between content that helps the PCs "do stuff" and useless fluff. But what I am saying is that there is "another thing", less tangible, that helps the DM improvise and builds the setting. It has a place too. In the case of Hommlet, even in the example you quoted, it's not so obtrusive that it gets in the way (very much). Like the little LORE paragraphs I got Bryce to says wouldn't offend him---it's just a little bit more...and it can help if you are the kind of DM who, with a small nudge, can pick up the ball and run with it. Like spices in your meal, Too Much ambiance is definitely bad...but None-at-All can be just as egregious!
So, again, WHY disparage and discount Hommlet? Why act like it's so flawed as to be worthless? You
know better!
I think your mental axe against the past, that lets no compliment go unredacted, make you appear more argumentative than you really intend to be. We are really very nearly on the same page, or I am seriously misjudging you.