NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8800456" data-attributes="member: 6795602">First, thank you for providing details I can actually discuss.1.  Your very first sentence embraces a prescriptive approach.  Not for the game overall but for each style.  If you want style X do Y.  Not everyone is going to agree that doing Y yields style X.  Others will simply say that doing Z is better to get style X than doing Y.  That's the problem with such a prescriptive approach and why such perscriptivenss keeps getting pushed back on.Honestly when I first heard the idea of talking through how to implement various styles, I was nearly on board.  But then I more carefully examined the concept and I no longer found it supportable.  It's one of those things that sounds good until you delve into the devil of the details.  IMO.2a.  I think the book is logically organized toward DM's that want to build their own worlds and fill it with wonders and interesting people.2b.  I'm not a huge fan of vast cross referencing.  This isn't a webpage with hyperlinks.  It's a book.  A little is fine but not too much.2c.  I also think most of the information is useful.  I read through most of it when we were discussing before, and I was surprised by it as my opinion before doing that was that it wasn't that good.  My opinion was changed.My biggest critique was that some sections could feel a little dry due to the density of the information being provided.IMO.  Another sounds good idea but likely untenable.  I feel like I'm in engineering principles class all over again.  The simple truth is that reordering the chapters and adding alot of new to DMing D&D friendly advice is going to impact the experienced DM's use of the book.  It's the classic, you can't have both problem.This sounds like what is already done in the current DMG?  Maybe you can elabroate?Not sure the precise issue here, is it the double column format or the prose?Expand all minimal sections ignoring pagecount...  Another great sounding idea that almost surely falls apart when it meets actual requirements.1.  I'm not seeing the relation to cross referencing here?2.  More prescriptive advice...  And for something as complex as player psychology.  That's a tough prescription to make.I'm not opposed to a sample adventure that get's exapanded upon.  I am a little worried about pagecount there and it detracting some from what I see the DMG's core focus which is primarily world building.  I don't particularly like the material needed online though even though it sovles the pagecount problem.  Making good use out of a 50 dollar book shouldn't require online material.  (Supplemental material would be okay though).I think I would go the other way, have the adventures in starter sets include a cross referenced section talking through why certain things were set up as they were.  That might be better than cramming it into the DMG?Again thanks.  I think there's plenty of changes I'd be comfortable with.  I just don't agree with most of the changes you are suggesting.I think it stems from viewing the DMG as having a different target audience and purpose than you do, from desiring less prescription in it and from heavily considering pagecount limitations (and even without hard limitations there would still be soft limitations as if the book grows larger and larger then fewer and fewer people will read it.)</blockquote>

Verification