Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder: Encounter Design Simplified

[azhrei_fje]

But there's not much I can do about font size without a whole lot of layout work. The body text is 8pt type and the tables (many of them) are in 6 pt type-- which is really tiny, I know.

I realize that it might just be because I'm the geeky type, but are you not using a word processor with layout capability and styles? While I agree that some tables can be a real pain even with "flow around" boxes, it really shouldn't be that tough to change.

 

[Scott DeWar]

and as i have mentioned, I have circumvented the obsticle

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I realize that it might just be because I'm the geeky type, but are you not using a word processor with layout capability and styles?

Err, yes, of course. I don't think you're thinking it through.

Easy examples:

1) The bard class, in 8 pt. type, fits on two facing pages. Convenient. Everything about your class on one spread. Move it to 9 pt. type, and it might be 2 and 1/4 pages.


2) I place an illustration next to the correct accompanying text, 8 pages into a chapter. Increase the font size, and the text reflows around that image-- leaving it next to completely unrelated text from a page prior.

And so on.

 

[Scott DeWar]

thus the need to have it asceticly arranged, as this is a document ment to be able to draw in some coin. I have no problem with the way Wulf Ratbane has the pdf. I personally like his reasons.

 

[azhrei_fje]

<threadjack>

Err, yes, of course. I don't think you're thinking it through.

Oh, yes I have. I've written dozens of technical training books and I'm quite familiar with page layout concepts and issues.

I just can't use a bigger font through the whole work because that will require a whole extra set of layout-- entire pages would shift from page to page, around artwork, etc.

And it sounded to me (or rather, to the geek in me) like the artwork was not anchored to the text, but to the page itself. Hence my question regarding styles and layout constraints.

2) I place an illustration next to the correct accompanying text, 8 pages into a chapter. Increase the font size, and the text reflows around that image-- leaving it next to completely unrelated text from a page prior.

And that's why an image should be attached to the paragraph that explains it and not a position on a page.

Even then anchoring the image to a particular paragraph won't be perfect, but it keeps them as close to each other as possible.
</threadjack>

My apologies for the thread derail. I'll go crawl back under a rock now.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

<threadjack>

No problem. It's a thread resurrrection anyhow.

And it sounded to me (or rather, to the geek in me) like the artwork was not anchored to the text, but to the page itself. Hence my question regarding styles and layout constraints.


And that's why an image should be attached to the paragraph that explains it and not a position on a page.

Imagine: An image of roughly 1/4 page, is anchored to the text, and placed in the lower right hand corner of the right hand page in the spread, and the image is oriented so that it faces towards the spine, the center of the open spread.

Now imagine the font size is changed just enough to push that image down one line and the image moves to the next page.

Now you have a roughly 1/4 page sized hole at the bottom of the previous page, and the image is moved to the upper left hand corner of the left hand page in the next spread, and the image is oriented so that it is facing somewhere to the upper left of the upper left corner of the page.

Not good.

Forgot to mention: If there happens to be an image already on the next page, now you have two images on the same page. Smooth.

Generally speaking you don't want to anchor images to the text, because there are limits to where images should appear on the page-- in the corners, in the center, etc. You want to be cognizant of how and why text is interrupted by an image.

Clean layout is not a process well-served by automation.

 

[Cheiromancer]

I'm considering making all magic weapons "levelling" weapons that go up automatically at certain levels.

Cool. I plan to offer this in Trailblazer.

So there might be something like a "generic magic sword" whose bonus is equal to 1+1/5 levels or something?

Hmmm. "magic" might be the descriptor that indicates the weapon uses a 1+1/5 levels mechanic to determine the enhancement bonus. A magic frost weapon would have, in addition to the base plus, the frost enhancement. It would be a +1 frost weapon in the hands of a 3rd level character, and a +3 frost weapon in the hands of an 11th level character.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

So there might be something like a "generic magic sword" whose bonus is equal to 1+1/5 levels or something?

Hmmm. "magic" might be the descriptor that indicates the weapon uses a 1+1/5 levels mechanic to determine the enhancement bonus. A magic frost weapon would have, in addition to the base plus, the frost enhancement. It would be a +1 frost weapon in the hands of a 3rd level character, and a +3 frost weapon in the hands of an 11th level character.

Something like that.

I'm thinking of allowing the player to spend one of their action points (permanently) to "bond" a magic item. The action point won't be as variably useful as an un-bound action point, but it will keep the enhancement/deflection/resistance bonus scaling.

So for example you might see a character with 6 action points, vs. a character with 3 action points and 3 bonded items.

 

[GlassJaw]

Something like that.

I'm thinking of allowing the player to spend one of their action points (permanently) to "bond" a magic item. The action point won't be as variably useful as an un-bound action point, but it will keep the enhancement/deflection/resistance bonus scaling.

So for example you might see a character with 6 action points, vs. a character with 3 action points and 3 bonded items.

I like the idea of magic items scaling as a character goes up in level, especially when coupled with the action point system. However, I prefer introducing a new weapon ability - call it Legendary or something like that - that specifically allows a player to spend an AP to bond to that item. I'd rather that than being able to bond to a plain old +1 sword.

I have a feeling I'm going to be overruled though...

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I have a feeling I'm going to be overruled though...

Yep.

By the way, I put up a new teaser-- more Purdy artwork-- in the Bad Axe forum.