Consume, Engage, Cherish

[Minigiant]

PHB: Comsume and Engage. Players make their own characters and cherish them. They just need the rules to make them.

DMG: Engage and Cherish. Dungeon Masters need to be sucked into the idea of a world in order to make one they like.

MM: Cherish and Consume. Fans want to hug their precious monster and relive the memories of that one time then easily make another memory.

 

[dkyle]

I'm not really seeing how "Cherish" is something that can be a design goal, really. It sounds like something that is completely wrapped up in people's own minds and experiences with the game.

As for Consume vs. Engage, those make a lot more sense. I'm definitely on the Consume side. I buy D&D for the mechanics and crunch. I homebrew my campaign setting, and I personally don't get much value out of "D&D" fluff that I don't get from the myriad of other fantasy sources out there. And when I build a character, I prefer to take whatever mechanics I settle on, and build a narrative for that character that makes sense, not necessarily what the fluff of those individual mechanics are.

From an optimization of use standpoint, I think a Consume focus is better for materials that are likely to get referenced repeatedly, since consumption is a process that happens for the duration of a player's time with the game. Engage really only happens once. You only need to be "hooked" once. So it is better to focus on that for materials that are generally used once, then set aside. That means, core books, and splat books should be Consume. Adventure modules and starter sets should be Engage. Of course, there will always be a mixture of the two, but that's the focus I'd like to see.

 

[Sunseeker]

50% Engage 30% Cherish, 20% Consume.

After I've nearly memorized a good half my books, why do I go back and even look at them? Well because a great deal of them are just fun to read and cool to look at. I want crunch, but I want to be engaged while I'm crunching with something that I will cherish down the road. I don't need the Mona Lisa, but I don't want the Dictionary either.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

You know, I picked up the 4e PHB and looked at it and found a book that was highly readable, laid out in a way that was function, and yet has a really nice clean modern look that still says "adventure!" to me. I picked up a copy of the PF core rulebook and ran smack into a giant wall of text written in small font on a background that made it hard to read. It is a nice looking book, but I can't READ IT, and frankly the way the rules are presented there is just really off-putting. Referencing it in play would be a big chore, no thanks.

And realistically, I love books. I have tons of really nice 'table books' and such. None of them are game products. I don't mean to criticize the gaming industry, but frankly I have not yet seen the kind of really super high quality layout, design, and art in ANY RPG that could compete with really beautiful books. RPGs are too mass market and serve too many other purposes to reach that level. They would have to be so expensive I would be afraid to use them to reach that level.

The 'fluff' vs 'crunch' issue is IMHO a separate issue. A book can be laid out cleanly and have high usability and still present plenty of fluff. HotFW does this quite nicely.

As for 'cherish', I agree with delericho, I cherish my original Gamma World and OD&D books, and my Holmes Basic book because of the memories, not anything to do with quality. They are valuable to me for the memories, not presentation or quality.

 

[kitsune9]

I see half-orc babies on the way from the art...or half-whatever.

Interesting article. I think I'm a consume person regarding core books.

 

[howandwhy99]

Based on the options presented, I have to go with cherish. I mean, a thing of beauty is a joy forever right? But if it isn't a powerful experience or an extraordinary feat of engineering, then it isn't something I'd necessarily want to hold on to forever either. I kind of think this is almost a false choice as most folks I know holds numerous stuff in all three ways, if not always equally. (I guess combo might work to then, huh?)

 

[scruffygrognard]

For me the core books should be easy to digest, yet be visually appealing enough to draw in players.

That's why I think it's a combination of Consume & Cherish.

Later sourcebooks, particularly campaign settings and guides to the planes/organizations/gods, should handle the Engage element.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

There is a priority order. Though all are ultimately important, the way you approach the priority differs for each. It is a lot like the correct order of software application development--first make it work, then make it complete and correct, then make it easy to use. And same as with modern software, you can't necessarily do these in that exact order all the time--you'll probably need multiple passes:

1. Start with some material worth having and a clear purpose for that material.
2. Make it sing and mitigate issues.
3. Present it well--which necessarily depends upon the type of material and what makes it sing.

Or to echo a more classical versions--form follows function. Otherwise, we get "decoration" which tends to hide problems in the form and ultimately feel shallow. First, it's worth reading. Then it's something you want to read. Then it's easy to read and you can find it. The first is a floor for excellence, the last is a ceiling for excellence, and the middle is where you'll try to craft the foundations for something someone may cherish.

 

[KidSnide]

If opening up D&D feels like opening up a textbook, you have a serious problem.

Engagement is at least as much a function of the core books as consumption. Yes, you need to be able reference the rules effectively, but D&D is an immersive experience and reading the books should make you excited about the game. For many people, looking through a book is their first experience with D&D. A glance at that page needs to evoke the feeling of "I want to be in that world."

I tend to think that the core three 3.x books did this more effectively than the core three 4e books.

-KS

 

[Incenjucar]

I think that the ideal situation would be to have an Engaging book, and then a Consumable book once you've internalized the Engaging book. Sadly, this is quite unlikely. Cherish... I'm not capable of that reaction so I can't comment.