Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5907754" data-attributes="member: 54877">Technically, they need to fill page count in order to sell books (or online articles, same difference here).  That doesn't inherently mean a plethora of classes, feats, tricks, spells, maneuvers, items, prestige classes, powers, races, etc.  Rather, repeating those things has largely been their answer to filling the page count for some time. I have no idea if it would work or not, but in a design meant to cater to a widespread group, why not make some entries considerably longer and/or not the same for everyone?  The "sameness" of each widget and what to do about it has been on my mind a lot lately, but I haven't gotten around to writing that post. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  One way to counter it is to have items in the list produced differently to fill different roles.  For example, let's say that out of the 300 odd spells in the PHB, you have a breakdown something like this:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">25% "Bread and Butter" simple spells, with 4E-style stat block, you pretty much know what it does when you read the name, and thus gets minimal flavor text.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">25% more esoteric spells, where you need to read the much longer text to know how it works.  You've still got the stat block, but it says "varies" a lot.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">25% that are a bit of a compromise on the two above. Basically, these are "Bread and Butter spells with a twist," that work a lot like some of the less complex AD&D spells.  You mostly know how it works from the title, but you need to read the text for the odd exceptions.  The stat block gives you the main idea, and then the text refines it.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">25% very long spells, with some basic information handled in the stat block, but then the text includes a lot of options, which each group can decide to use or not.  The spell listing contains a lot of variety, but when a caster makes the a spell pick, they are picking the spell and an option too--possibly limited by campaign considerations.</li> </ul>That many spells sounds ridiculous to combat "bloat"--but then if you've got 9-10 spell levels for multiple casters, even BECMI averages several choices per level.  Mix bards, druids, and so on into the list, and it adds up in a hurry. This could help "bloat" in three ways:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Same as a wizard player need not normally worry about cleric spell options and vice versa, and neither need worry about spell levels they can't access, you now have another division.  A wizard can do a mix of the four types, but probably has some strong preferences and/or group preferences to guide them.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Even if the whole set is on the table, spreading the spell picks out over a wider range of types makes it seem easier.  "Hmm, I want a couple of 'bread and butter' picks for general purpose, then I'll go look at the more exotic stuff for one that strikes my fancy."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">On average, each spell will be longer.  It doesn't take as many to fill page count.  Maybe this leads to a bit more care in the selection? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></li> </ol>Obviously, with something like feats, this is more difficult to pull off.  But even there, I see the potential to have a longer listing that consists of a simple feat plus options that change how it works--some quite radical and geared to an expected playstyle.  If the distinction between "travel" and "landed" fighter and cleric in BECMI can almost double the class listing, I don't know why the same technique can't be used to make fewer, more flexible elements.</blockquote>

Verification