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!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9801148" data-attributes="member: 4937">So looking at different examples of what is easy to use, I can't help but wonder if the fundamental problem is simply different parts of the process are unequally difficult for different people based on a combination of natural talents and desired aesthetics.   The people who like the bullet points seem to be saying the hard parts are absorbing information not producing information, where as the people who like the more traditional formats are saying absorbing and remembering information is comparatively easy but producing information is hard.   This could be because people have different talents (general intelligence does not exist) or it could be because the thing people want to produce that they don't feel embarrassed by and are content to give to others differs in style.  Different formats require different pauses for thought in different places, different "blink effects" when you have to shift between different cognitive tasks.  We're disagreeing entirely over what makes a module "easy to run".  We've each applied different standards to that.  I haven't at all really raised the issue of "how condensed is the information" even if I can understand the issue of "how well organized is the information".  I instead focused on "how complete is the information", which is something other people in the thread don't seem to care about at all. I just don't think that this is something that is objectively true.  I love that people are experimenting with different formats and learning what works for different people, but I'm not sure we are this point actually learning much by just insisting this or that is the thing written for play.I had previously thought this was a more objective thing than it appears to be, in part because when I watch someone like Seth Skorkowsky and he talks about prep work, the sort of things he says he does are the sort of things I would do and which I would consider worthwhile prep work.  But that may just be a case of I admire his work because he's doing things that remind me of myself and my own aesthetics.  Without having played at the tables of all these other GMs I really don't know whether what they are saying would appeal to me or not if I experienced it as a player.</blockquote>

Verification