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.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spell Entries - What I would have done differently
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="Joe Liker" data-source="post: 6348965" data-attributes="member: 6777505"><p>Thanks for expanding on different ideas of complexity, Mr. Morris. To be clear, the type I am hoping to see more of is strategic complexity. The tendency to think of spells as nothing more than sparkly ammunition is, I feel, something to be avoided. (Evocation is, after all, just one of the eight schools of magic.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The problem is, if the treatment is inconsistent, it will be confusing to people. When an entry is missing, they will wonder if it's an error of if they are looking in the wrong place. (It <strong>is</strong> too much to hope that everyone will read the explanation of the headings that is printed before the list.)</p><p></p><p>Consolidating information into the heading also does not reduce column space as effectively as you might imagine. In many cases, the same information only takes up a line or less in the description; in other cases, you might actually end up repeating the information, which in turn takes up even more space.</p><p></p><p>And I've mentioned this before, but if all you need is the numbers, it does <strong>not</strong> take you any longer to glance through the description to pick them out. Numerals are easily and quickly distinguished from letters by the visual and language centers in your brain.</p><p></p><p>I invite you to look through the spell list. Skipping past evocations (which should only account for about one-eighth of all spells in the PH), take note of which spells truly need entries for the header information you are proposing to add.</p><p></p><p>Remember that if it takes up a line or less in the text, then you are not saving any space by moving it to the header. Also note how many spells deal with this information in the first line or two of the description -- if it's right there at the top, any complaint of digging through a wall of text to find it is not really valid.</p><p></p><p>Once you do an honest survey of <strong>all</strong> the spells, I think you'll see that very, very few of them would benefit from the treatment suggested.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Joe Liker, post: 6348965, member: 6777505"] Thanks for expanding on different ideas of complexity, Mr. Morris. To be clear, the type I am hoping to see more of is strategic complexity. The tendency to think of spells as nothing more than sparkly ammunition is, I feel, something to be avoided. (Evocation is, after all, just one of the eight schools of magic.) The problem is, if the treatment is inconsistent, it will be confusing to people. When an entry is missing, they will wonder if it's an error of if they are looking in the wrong place. (It [B]is[/B] too much to hope that everyone will read the explanation of the headings that is printed before the list.) Consolidating information into the heading also does not reduce column space as effectively as you might imagine. In many cases, the same information only takes up a line or less in the description; in other cases, you might actually end up repeating the information, which in turn takes up even more space. And I've mentioned this before, but if all you need is the numbers, it does [B]not[/B] take you any longer to glance through the description to pick them out. Numerals are easily and quickly distinguished from letters by the visual and language centers in your brain. I invite you to look through the spell list. Skipping past evocations (which should only account for about one-eighth of all spells in the PH), take note of which spells truly need entries for the header information you are proposing to add. Remember that if it takes up a line or less in the text, then you are not saving any space by moving it to the header. Also note how many spells deal with this information in the first line or two of the description -- if it's right there at the top, any complaint of digging through a wall of text to find it is not really valid. Once you do an honest survey of [B]all[/B] the spells, I think you'll see that very, very few of them would benefit from the treatment suggested. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spell Entries - What I would have done differently
Top