Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Core vs. Mod - The Meta Question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jeff Carlsen" data-source="post: 5851214" data-attributes="member: 61749"><p>The regular comments of "Make it a module!" reminds me of "Make it an option!" in software design. Excuse me while I make an extended comparison.</p><p></p><p>Before Mozilla launched Firefox, they had the Mozilla Browser. It had a huge feature set, including mail, IRC chat, and news-feed subscriptions. It also provided a plethora of options to its users. But it didn't have the capacity to succeed in the larger browser market because it was too complex, slow, and difficult to understand.</p><p></p><p>Firefox came about as an answer to that. The people in charge of designing Firefox had two large guiding principles:</p><p></p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Be able to say no. Firefox was to have extensions. The core program had to be agile and avoid confusing features, so the lead designers had to be able to say no to new features that didn't fit the core design.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Make decisions about default settings. For most people to be able to use the program, hard decisions had to be made as to what the default was going to be, and exactly which options would be made visible to the user.</li> </ol><p>But those two principles were backed up through extensibility. Extensions were a major part of the Firefox design from the very beginning, and how they would interact with the browser was considered as each piece was built.</p><p></p><p>The reason Firefox is such a great comparison is that it made these difficult decisions, and yet remained the most extensible browser in existence. Basic users got a simple but well designed browser, and advanced users could alter and extend the browser in any way they wanted.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is the model that D&D Next needs to follow. There needs to be a core game playable out of the box. It needs to be very well designed and it needs to make decisions about what will make the best experience for the most players. It also needs extensibility to be built in from the beginning. </p><p></p><p>It sounds like this is the plan, so, cool.</p><p></p><p>But it also means that our discussions, as much as they matter, should focus on what will make for the best core experience for most people and what is really best as an extension to the game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jeff Carlsen, post: 5851214, member: 61749"] The regular comments of "Make it a module!" reminds me of "Make it an option!" in software design. Excuse me while I make an extended comparison. Before Mozilla launched Firefox, they had the Mozilla Browser. It had a huge feature set, including mail, IRC chat, and news-feed subscriptions. It also provided a plethora of options to its users. But it didn't have the capacity to succeed in the larger browser market because it was too complex, slow, and difficult to understand. Firefox came about as an answer to that. The people in charge of designing Firefox had two large guiding principles: [LIST=1] [*]Be able to say no. Firefox was to have extensions. The core program had to be agile and avoid confusing features, so the lead designers had to be able to say no to new features that didn't fit the core design. [*]Make decisions about default settings. For most people to be able to use the program, hard decisions had to be made as to what the default was going to be, and exactly which options would be made visible to the user. [/LIST] But those two principles were backed up through extensibility. Extensions were a major part of the Firefox design from the very beginning, and how they would interact with the browser was considered as each piece was built. The reason Firefox is such a great comparison is that it made these difficult decisions, and yet remained the most extensible browser in existence. Basic users got a simple but well designed browser, and advanced users could alter and extend the browser in any way they wanted. This is the model that D&D Next needs to follow. There needs to be a core game playable out of the box. It needs to be very well designed and it needs to make decisions about what will make the best experience for the most players. It also needs extensibility to be built in from the beginning. It sounds like this is the plan, so, cool. But it also means that our discussions, as much as they matter, should focus on what will make for the best core experience for most people and what is really best as an extension to the game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Core vs. Mod - The Meta Question
Top