Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Radiating Gnome" data-source="post: 7649474" data-attributes="member: 150">I hear what you're saying -- I know that I still have a preference for paper for some things at the table (and I've got you beat in the old fogey department - I'm 45). But you're romanticizing paper. There are a ton of problems with paper as a delivery method. If I'm using the books to run a game, and I'm running an encounter that includes both goblins and worgs, for example, I have to flip back and forth between the two pages I need to reference -- and everything from hipporgryphs to Vargoules is in my way.&nbsp; Or maybe I've made photocopies of the two pages (more expense and hassle for me) and I don't have to flip around, but I've got two sheets of loose paper to keep track of -- not a problem when it's just two, but when you've got a whole session worth of loose pages like that you need to come up with a solution for gathering and organizing those papes.&nbsp; Limiting ourselves to just paper means that my game is a whole lot less portable -- I need shelves and shelves of books to keep up with the material. It means that the content I buy is always a snapshot -- a record of what the state of the game was at the moment the book was printed -- but as we've seen with more &quot;modern&quot; games like 4e, the rules evolve and improve over time -- making that print snapshot more or less obsolete. And then there's the paper cuts.&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Seriously, though -- as the husband of a woman whose hobby is bookbinding, I totally understand the allure of books as artifacts, paper as a medium, etc. But there are plenty of problems with paper as way of delivering game content. -rg</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Radiating Gnome, post: 7649474, member: 150"] I hear what you're saying -- I know that I still have a preference for paper for some things at the table (and I've got you beat in the old fogey department - I'm 45). But you're romanticizing paper. There are a ton of problems with paper as a delivery method. If I'm using the books to run a game, and I'm running an encounter that includes both goblins and worgs, for example, I have to flip back and forth between the two pages I need to reference -- and everything from hipporgryphs to Vargoules is in my way. Or maybe I've made photocopies of the two pages (more expense and hassle for me) and I don't have to flip around, but I've got two sheets of loose paper to keep track of -- not a problem when it's just two, but when you've got a whole session worth of loose pages like that you need to come up with a solution for gathering and organizing those papes. Limiting ourselves to just paper means that my game is a whole lot less portable -- I need shelves and shelves of books to keep up with the material. It means that the content I buy is always a snapshot -- a record of what the state of the game was at the moment the book was printed -- but as we've seen with more "modern" games like 4e, the rules evolve and improve over time -- making that print snapshot more or less obsolete. And then there's the paper cuts. ;) Seriously, though -- as the husband of a woman whose hobby is bookbinding, I totally understand the allure of books as artifacts, paper as a medium, etc. But there are plenty of problems with paper as way of delivering game content. -rg [/QUOTE]

Verification