Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 9559160" data-attributes="member: 48965">No, I'm saying even something like the layout of the book contributes to usability.  That's why to me it's such an absurd claim without having seen the book.Again missin the point, the claim wasn't whether a single monster was more usable than another it was on whether one book was more usable than another.  You keep showing pieces and claiming they represent the entirety.  Ever heard of the 3 blind men and the elephant?SIGH No if the claim had been tthe TotV PHB or Level Up PHB worked better for them for what they wanted I'd be fine with that, wouldn't have even commented since this is purely subjective.  But it's not saying I don't need this, it's making an objective judgement on a value for 2 books and stating it without a qualifier when you haven't seen the second book or actually used it... you know to see how usable it is.Usability can be impacted by presenting too much information and/or options to y9our user.  Especially if they are new and don't know what is or is not optional.  Again at a glance one of these spreads looks crowded and hard to navigate for pertinent information.  Now if I actually used it over the course of a game or campaign and saw that wasn't true that would just be another argument for what I'm saying... but many won't get there because they will look at it in a store or as a preview and it will seem cluttereed and intimidating.But if I'm playing online... hovering over a link isn't less usable.  it's having the info right there but out of the way when I don't need it.  I can see argument s for either one so far as usability goes.Do you represent everyone now? And this probably illustrates why statemens like A is more usable than B should probably have qualifiers.  Since yeah familiarity is part of usability.No it depends on the person... I haven't made a statement on which is better.  I made an argument for waiting and comparing the 2 books in actual usage... apparently tha has now somehow become me saying the MM is more usable... so here's a challlenge... find anywhere I stated this?   Anywhere as opposed to questioning how the comparison can be made at this time whn one book is fully acessible while another isn't out yet.  I'll wait.Cool, and I can respect your personal preferences...But the claim wasn't about the quality... it was usability. Nope you're missing my point entirely and arguing against a strawman.  Again show me where I stated that the MM was a better book for usability?  I'll wait.  If not please start addressing my actual point.  You're so desperate to paint me as a D&D fanboy as opposed to addressing my actual argument (which arguably has been a trend in this thread).  I wonder if it wasn't WotC would we be as okay with a judgement on it's usability (and remember this is what we are speaking to, nothing else) being made pre-release and with no usage having taken place yet.  I doubt it.</blockquote>

Verification