D&D General I hate pdfs, and I'm happy that WOTC primarily publishes Books

[Weiley31]

I love the physical books as much as the next guy, but...there is always a butt.
.pdfs are just more practical. If you need to juggle with 10 books for your session, it's faster to have 10 tabs open in your pdf reader than going through 10 books. Also one laptop is lighter than 10 books.

This is pretty much I can agree with. My bud is playing a Revised Ranger(Beast Conclave) and hit level 4. Meaning not only does his character get improvements via his Ability Modifiers, Feats, and PB score, so too does his Black Panther.

So instead of lugging the PHB around/or giving him one of the WoTC Beast stat blocks you can buy in one of those mini sets, I just go on D&D 5e Statblock Generator and just update his Black Panther according, even inlcuding Proficiency Bonus, Saving Throws, Skills it has(and whether expertised or not), Armor Class via Companion's Bond, and which ever Ability Score he increased on the Black Panther. (And just for the hells of it, I even include Favored Enemy: Beasts/+2 Damage since it benefits from the Ranger's Favored Enemy choice.)

Then I make sure to print the stat block out and hand it to my bud with all the updates on it. That way he doesn't have to go through the hassle of remembering what changed on there, it makes upkeeping on me easier, and we're not constantly looking at his character sheet, and back, to see what changes on the Panther statblock.

 

[LordEntrails]

1) I prefer digital. But not PDF. PDF is the absolutely worst digital format imaginable. Or more accurately, a PDF scan of a physical book is the worst format & layout possible. Once you decide to go digital, even for a reading book, their are much better formats and layouts than a scan of a two-column print version.

You've fallen into the trap, physical or PDF. That may be the oldest choice when it comes to digital, but other options have been options have existed for years (and in some cases more than a decade)

2) When I was younger...

3) Yes. A proper digital resource (not a pdf) is much more useful than a physical book. Bookmarks are easier and faster to access. Search is actually more capable. And then whatever you looked up might actually be usable in the format it is presented in (i.e. ability to read the spell then click on the save to have the save applied to a target and then roll damage and have half damage applied to those targets that made their save and full damage to those who did not, and resistances and immunities applied as appropriate, etc).

 

[Weiley31]

But not PDF. PDF is the absolutely worst digital format imaginable.

I actually didn't know there was a difference. What would be the best digital format?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

1. I love the physical books as much as the next guy, but...there is always a butt.
.pdfs are just more practical. If you need to juggle with 10 books for your session, it's faster to have 10 tabs open in your pdf reader than going through 10 books. Also one laptop is lighter than 10 books.

This isn't a disadvantage... it's actually yet another advantage of books!

Do you even lift books, brah? Do ... you ... even.... lift?

 

[delericho]

1. Do you correctly prefer your RPG materials to be in real, book form, or are you one of those .pdf lovers?

Depends. For reading I prefer physical. But all my gaming these days is online, so electronic is vastly better for that. (And since one of my games is with work colleagues, that does mean PDF specifically - the corporate network rightly blocks gams sites, and I couldn't justify installing a dedicated reader.)

2. Relatedly, if you're a .pdf lover, how do you like Huey Lewis and the News?

I have no opinion of them or their work.

3. Do you use electronic devices at your table when you are gaming in person (assuming this will ever happen again as it used to in the BEFORE TIMES)?

No.

 

[TheSword]

1) I prefer digital. But not PDF. PDF is the absolutely worst digital format imaginable. Or more accurately, a PDF scan of a physical book is the worst format & layout possible. Once you decide to go digital, even for a reading book, their are much better formats and layouts than a scan of a two-column print version.

You've fallen into the trap, physical or PDF. That may be the oldest choice when it comes to digital, but other options have been options have existed for years (and in some cases more than a decade)

2) When I was younger...

3) Yes. A proper digital resource (not a pdf) is much more useful than a physical book. Bookmarks are easier and faster to access. Search is actually more capable. And then whatever you looked up might actually be usable in the format it is presented in (i.e. ability to read the spell then click on the save to have the save applied to a target and then roll damage and have half damage applied to those targets that made their save and full damage to those who did not, and resistances and immunities applied as appropriate, etc).

Interesting. What should we be using instead of pdf? They seem to be ubiquitous and every electronic copy of a printed product I’ve ever bought came as a pdf?

 

[CleverNickName]

My preference is to have both a hardcopy and a searchable PDF. Because both are useful in different ways, and for different reasons.

But that's not the question that was asked. The first question asked if I was "one of those .pdf lovers," and so I guess the answer is YEP.

The question about Huey Lewis & the News was lost on me. I can't name more than 2 songs from them, so I guess that means NOPE. But I know lots of Dan Quayle jokes, does that count?

And the third question, YEP. Right now we are all playing virtually, so the whole game is on an electronic device. When we were playing in person, though, my DM would use their tablet PC to control background music, look up stats, and probably lots of other stuff.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

The question about Huey Lewis & the News was lost on me. I can't name more than 2 songs from them, so I guess that means NOPE. But I know lots of Dan Quayle jokes, does that count?

Do you like Phil Collins, CleverNickName?

I've been a big Genesis fan ever since the release of their 1980 album, Duke. Before that, I really didn't understand any of their work. It was too artsy, too intellectual, too ... Gabriel. It was on Duke where Phil Collins' presence became more apparent. I think Invisible Touch was the group's undisputed masterpiece. It's an epic meditation on intangibility. At the same time, it deepens and enriches the meaning of the preceding three albums.

Just listen to the brilliant ensemble playing of Banks, Collins and Rutherford. You can practically hear every nuance of every instrument they are playing. In terms of lyrical craftsmanship, the sheer songwriting, this album hits a new peak of professionalism. You can hear it in any song, but ... just take the lyrics to Land of Confusion. In this song, Phil Collins addresses the problems of abusive political authority. In Too Deep is the most moving pop song of the 1980s, about monogamy and commitment. The song is extremely uplifting. Those lyrics are as positive and affirmative as anything I've heard in rock.

Phil Collins' solo career seems to be more commercial and therefore more satisfying, in a narrower way. Especially songs like In the Air Tonight and Against All Odds. But I also think Phil Collins works best within the confines of the group, than as a solo artist, and I stress the word artist.

Only a true artist could take the pain of killing a man and turn it into the sweet, sweet soundtrack of the visual masterpiece that is Miami Vice.

 

[The Hierophant]

I love books but I also love the convenience of pdfs and reading them on my iPad.

 

[J.Quondam]

Who needs either paper or PDFs?
The only way forward is NFTs, baby!