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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How modularization subtly improves the game independent of the rules or participants.
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="Ainamacar" data-source="post: 5777944" data-attributes="member: 70709"><p>I certainly don't think the idea that extra discussion will, on average, help games is tendentious. The examples you give are apt. I do find it surprising that something like modularization, which ostensibly changes only the rules, actually has a 2nd order effect on the game by encouraging those discussions.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ahh, that's another good one! Even if only one of those design options makes it into the game, the idea of modularization (or at least a willingness to try multiple options) may have improved the non-modular element. It's something the players could never notice, but would nonetheless be a real effect.</p><p></p><p>The contrast thing is so widespread. For example, it is very difficult to argue why a particular set of rules is "rules-light" or "rules-heavy" without comparing it to a particular game. Differences are easy to see, but the absolute is difficult. Same thing for normal hearing and those with perfect pitch. In quantum mechanics we can only observe phase differences, not absolute phase. And so on.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Likewise with my original example. Establishing solid campaign expectations beforehand isn't strictly superior to not doing so, even if it is on average. For example, the early discussion could give rise to a disagreement that is never resolved and prevents the campaign from starting. If they hadn't discussed things in such depth the campaign would have started and it is conceivable the offending element would never have come up to unravel the game. I can see the headlines now: "Modularization encourages discussions which ruin perfectly good games!"</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think we could start a support group. <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=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ainamacar, post: 5777944, member: 70709"] I certainly don't think the idea that extra discussion will, on average, help games is tendentious. The examples you give are apt. I do find it surprising that something like modularization, which ostensibly changes only the rules, actually has a 2nd order effect on the game by encouraging those discussions. Ahh, that's another good one! Even if only one of those design options makes it into the game, the idea of modularization (or at least a willingness to try multiple options) may have improved the non-modular element. It's something the players could never notice, but would nonetheless be a real effect. The contrast thing is so widespread. For example, it is very difficult to argue why a particular set of rules is "rules-light" or "rules-heavy" without comparing it to a particular game. Differences are easy to see, but the absolute is difficult. Same thing for normal hearing and those with perfect pitch. In quantum mechanics we can only observe phase differences, not absolute phase. And so on. Likewise with my original example. Establishing solid campaign expectations beforehand isn't strictly superior to not doing so, even if it is on average. For example, the early discussion could give rise to a disagreement that is never resolved and prevents the campaign from starting. If they hadn't discussed things in such depth the campaign would have started and it is conceivable the offending element would never have come up to unravel the game. I can see the headlines now: "Modularization encourages discussions which ruin perfectly good games!" I think we could start a support group. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How modularization subtly improves the game independent of the rules or participants.
Top