A theory of sets (or why you will only really know 12-15 gaming books at a time)

[TerraDave]

For gaming, how about 5 or 3 or 1 (right now I am at the equivelent of about 6).

On the other hand, I have a vague idea about the contents of many many books, magazines, articles, websites...far more then 12-15.

And (going off topic) before printing became common, and books and paper scarcer, people would use mneomonic (sic) tricks to keep track of all sorts of things and interrelationships. When Homer recited the Illiad and Odysey, which contained a few relationships, it was all in his head.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

I've been considering typing up portions of books that I use into one document. It would be invaluable. I have so many books and only so much space in my backpack. The last time I gamed, I used 19 books and only a couple of pages from some of them. A compilation of the info put into a binder would definetely be a good idea.

 

[fredramsey]

I don't think the point was really memory, per se. But yes, considering the man probably met and talked with literally hundreds of people between those times, that's impressive.

I think it more has to do with "active slots".

This one might cause some arguments, but I think it is very true:

The human mind can only... right word?... perceive, or count, up to 3 objects at a time. So, if you are shown 5 building blocks and asked how many you see, you would look at them and say, three and two. Five. Or two and two and one. Five.

Try it, and try your best to be objective about it. It's really true.

Strings of numbers? 7 is the optimum. Phone numbers (without area codes) are fairly easy for us to remember, not because we are limited to memorizing seven, but that 7 digits takes up 7 important "slots" in a certain type of memory.

So, while I am not privy to the 12 book theory, I'm certain that if it is true, it has to do with the number of slots in some particular type of memory (and I'm not sure of the use of the term books. Books can be of varying sizes).

I think there are other stories out there of President Clinton's amazing memory. So, I certainly think some people are better are doing this than others.

 

[jester47]

More articulation is needed.

What I am talking about I think is the level familiarity that you might have with an old friend. In my DJing career, if I wanted to just spontaneously mix a set, without setting out the songs and figureing out their BPMs and then figureing out what parts are best to mix in and out with, if I just wanted to fly it by the seat of my pants, I could only really know 12 of the tracks that well. I can even tell you the names of the pieces to this day. Occasionally one would get buped out by somthing new.

Thats sort of the level I am talking about with the books. That say you are looking at one monster and you need to look up a couple of rules in two other books. What are the chances that you can turn to within 10 pages of the item you need? You don't have to spend time paging through the book. Looking at the rule what books contain rules that that rule will affect? So say you look up a feat that is not in one of the core rule books. What things will that feat affect and how many and what books are they scattered over? That is the level of familiarity that I am talking about. The familiarity many others are talking about like "the half troll template is in the Fiend Folio" would be the level of an aquaintence. You are familiar with the book but you don't know it inside and out.

The band set is a bad example because the songs in a bands set do not have to relate to each other byond the order of the set. DJing is much more in line with the theory because you can go A B C or B C A or C A B or B A C or C B A and on and on with three tracks. You have to know how the songs relate to each other so you can mix them.

So what I am putting forth is that you can be fairly familiar with about 144-256 (about 156 would be he average) gaming books and draw on them as resources. But you will ever really know 12-15 books so intimately that looking somthing up takes an instant and is not a chore. The trick is making one of those books your personal notebook that has a colletion of the things you would go and reference.

That is what I am saying.

 

[jester47]

I don't agree with this theory.

I knew a guy once (ok, at band camp) that told a story about how his school band was asked to put together an ensemble to play for (then governor) Bill Clinton at some rally in Arkansas.

After the rally, Bill Clinton came over to greet the students in the band, and for some reason with this student, the guy mentioned that his mom was in the hospital having some sort of surgery. Bill wished him the best, and they parted ways at the end of the day.

Years later, this same guy was at some other rally, and afterwards, Bill came by and asked the guy if his mother had done ok with the surgery she had had.

Needless to say, the guy was floored.

I think there are other stories out there of President Clinton's amazing memory. So, I certainly think some people are better are doing this than others.

Thats just a matter of brute force memory. This guy is not someone Bill would call an intimate friend, nor is he someone Bill wold hang out with and have a drink with if they bumped into each other at a bar. i.e. he is not in bill rolodex and Bill will not call him up if he needed a favor. But Bill has a very powerful memory and given a face and a bit of informaiton to go with that face he could remember to ask about the guys mother out of curtosy. What I am talking about is intimate familiarity and regular familiarity. Its the same kind of familiarity you have with good friends and aquaintences you would say probe for a job.

 

[jester47]

So you could keep track of more material if they were bound in thicker books?

For example, suppose you only have the monster manual in your set of 12 books; the monster manual II and III are too much to keep track of. If an omnibus version (monster manual I, II and III) came out, you could buy it and it suddenly be possible to keep track of all the material?

Or you just have enough room for either the Book of Vile Darkness *or* the Book of Exalted Deeds. If they bound them together (the "Book of Extremes") then you could have both?

This sounds fishy to me.

Its only fishy on the surface. Think about it. If they did do a combined MM1-3 + FF in one huge book, you probably could remember after lots of use about where to crack the book to open it to the Treant entry. Its not the ammount of the information that you are keeping track of. Its just where it is and where the other information in other books relates to it. So if there were combined books and you used those books more than your regular ones (and assuming that they are not just publishing them in new binders back to back) you would become an expert in that one book. You could guess, within 5 pages of where thehell hound entry would be. Your mind stores information about the MM as a book, not the raw information in the book. So a combined book would be a different book with a different layout and a different entry in your brain.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

Holy cow. I don't think I've ever used more than three books for a campaign. This is a very interesting read for me.