Smuggled photos

[Lizard]

Designing the rulebooks to be a really good reference book is far more important than making them a good read, at least for me.

I agree -- and to me, the quality of a reference is based on how much information it contains and how well it's indexed and organized, not how many two-page art spreads there are. YMMV. But if a 288 page 4e book has half the text of a 288 page 3e book, I'll feel a bit ripped off. (Later WOTC 3e books began this trend with larger fonts and margins.)

 

[Lizard]

I personally like starting fresh headers on a fresh page. I hate when the feats section starts on page 1 of a chapter, listing one and a half feats before having a two-page table and then continuing on to the next feat. SWSE fixed this by putting the table before the feats themselves.

The book looks easier to read; again, less like a textbook, more like a magazine. Easier to read.

-TRRW

But they ARE textbooks, and I guess that's where we differ.

Of course, as a kid, I read encylopedias and dictionaries for fun. I may be atypical.

 

[Gundark]

Yeah, I love the new artwork. And the layout seems really great too.

 

[hong]

But they ARE textbooks,

No. They are books to support a pastime.

Of course, as a kid, I read encylopedias and dictionaries for fun. I may be atypical.

Indeed, I too read encyclopedias only for the articles. I suspect I could have done much better by reading other material only for the articles, but that's by the by.

 

[Lizard]

No. They are books to support a pastime.

I see no contradiction here.

IAE, I find lots-o-whitespace a design turnoff, and two page spreads wasteful. I liked the 'da Vinci notebook' look of 3e, it made it look like we were referencing arcane tomes of secret lore. WW takes this way too far, turning their books into unreadable messes. There is such a thing as too *little* whitespace.

 

[DandD]

Of course, art in roleplaying books also have the duty to portrait the feel of the adventurous setting. We will see if they managed a good equilibrium between text and art.

 

[Immolate]

I think it's inevitable that WoTC disappoints us (the old-school, hardcore gamers from way back) in their quest to greatly broaden the appeal of D&D. They are fighting for their survival in a world dominated by no-commitment-required games like WoW, and owned by a company that may or may not "get" roleplaying games. If they can pick up a million new players at the cost of 100K old players, they have to do that. They're a business, regardless of our personal attachments to their product, and they have to make money. From my perspective, they staff has done a fantastic job of balancing the business realities with their own love of the game. They've salvaged a lot more of the crunch and flavor of D&D than I would have guessed they could have.

The more of that opt out of 4E, the less influence we will have in the future of our game. That leads to a game that more quickly follows market trends and soon become unrecognizable. I won't opt out until I've given it a fair shake, because it matters to me whether the game survives or not. Sure, someone will come along and pick up the pieces if it self-destructs, but ask the Romans how that worked for them.

 

[RigaMortus2]

I like that chapter lead-ins get a full page and a half for full color artwork.

I agree. Looks like you get a half page general description of the chapter (such as Class, and Feat) and the page and a half of a picture. I just hope the pages with "meat" on them aren't taken up by art work.

 

[Lizard]

Of course, art in roleplaying books also have the duty to portrait the feel of the adventurous setting. We will see if they managed a good equilibrium between text and art.

This is true. Art should inspire but not overwhelm; reading the rules should not feel like flipping through a coffee-table book.

OTOH, one of the most successful games ever, Traveller, had *no* *art* in its first edition. Not one single picture. The very absence of art was inspiring; it gave you a perfect blank slate on which you could draw anything you could imagine.

 

[malraux]

I agree -- and to me, the quality of a reference is based on how much information it contains and how well it's indexed and organized, not how many two-page art spreads there are. YMMV. But if a 288 page 4e book has half the text of a 288 page 3e book, I'll feel a bit ripped off. (Later WOTC 3e books began this trend with larger fonts and margins.)

I'll agree that art is relatively unimportant for me as well. But there's a trade off of quantity of information and the quality of the indexing and especially organization of that information. Without the books in hand, its hard to see if they went to far in the direction of improving the organization of that info.

But they ARE textbooks, and I guess that's where we differ.

No, the books are not textbooks. Well, maybe the DMG is a textbook. But the PH and MM are primarily reference books, not textbooks.