Why don't companies show people how to use their books?

[Felon]

Remember when D&D books used to have the little "behind-the-curtain" sidebars (or bottombars I guess would be more appropriate)? Don't recall when the last time was I saw one of those.

 

[Hussar]

Bah, humbug.....

I don't read those articles. I don't like reading how the authors think certain PrC's/monsters/quidjits fit into a certain world. In fact, I am highly anti-"fluff" in my gaming material purchases. Why? Because I feel I can provide the fluff without problem. What I pay for is new rules/variants/options. The latest tendancy to fill out whole pages with nothing but uninspiring (to me) text that bears no semblance to what I want to achieve with my game, such as the space devoted to mundane descriptions of how to play a certain PrC, really riles me....

Now, I gotta say, I completely and 100% disagree with that. The old format of presenting (say) PrC's as a collection of stats with two or three short paragraphs detailing what the PrC is about, well, not to mince words, blew chunks. I really appreciate the new format. Including the fluff is just as important as the crunch. Now, when my player asks about PrC X, I can turn to the fluff end of things and say more easily whether it fits in my campaign or not. Maybe I envision the PrC as completely different from it's intent. Having the fluff allows me to see at least the author's intent for the class or magic item or whatever.

And, from a newer DM's point of view, I could easily see how a new DM could be overwhelmed by the vast amount of product out there. Having well written fluff included with the crunch makes integration that much easier.

 

[green slime]

Now, I gotta say, I completely and 100% disagree with that. The old format of presenting (say) PrC's as a collection of stats with two or three short paragraphs detailing what the PrC is about, well, not to mince words, blew chunks. I really appreciate the new format. Including the fluff is just as important as the crunch. Now, when my player asks about PrC X, I can turn to the fluff end of things and say more easily whether it fits in my campaign or not. Maybe I envision the PrC as completely different from it's intent. Having the fluff allows me to see at least the author's intent for the class or magic item or whatever.

And, from a newer DM's point of view, I could easily see how a new DM could be overwhelmed by the vast amount of product out there. Having well written fluff included with the crunch makes integration that much easier.

You disagree that I find large swathes of fluff uninspiring? Any PrC, I can alter the fluff to fit my vision, suitable for my game. All it takes is about 5 minutes of thought, tops. I'd rather there wasn't so much fluff you have to explain to players that large swathes of flavour text in their books are completely invalid.

Secondly, the practice of including sample versions of NPC's in each and every PrC should really go.... all it does is add to the risk of including mistakes, and increase confusion.

 

[MonsterMash]

I like the way that the Players Guide to the Wilderlands and Blackmoor both have discussions of the core races, classes and PrC and talk about how they can fit into the game world.

Elements of Magic Revised and Lyciean Arcana are other products which try to discuss how to use their content with game worlds for DMs.

 

[Umbran]

But the one thing most of the books fauil to do in my mind is show people how to use them.

I think there's a bit of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" to this.

You're right, insofar as many inexperienced players and GMs could use some good advice. However, what works as good advice for some would be lousy advice for others what advice will work for you depends heavily on your playstile and wants. And, for every page telling you how to use the thing, there's one less page of thing to use.

 

[Silveras]

Remember when D&D books used to have the little "behind-the-curtain" sidebars (or bottombars I guess would be more appropriate)? Don't recall when the last time was I saw one of those.

Last month, in the Dungeon Master's Guide II.

 

[Crothian]

I think there's a bit of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" to this.

You're right, insofar as many inexperienced players and GMs could use some good advice. However, what works as good advice for some would be lousy advice for others what advice will work for you depends heavily on your playstile and wants. And, for every page telling you how to use the thing, there's one less page of thing to use.

Then pick a play style or have short advice for a dozen play styles. I'd perfer to see advice I can't use then nothing at all. Odds are that even the advice I don't want I can glimpse something from, and no advice has zero chance of yielding anything useful. As for the page adviuce being a page I can't use; if that page makes it so I can use the other 95 pages of the book its a good page.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Then pick a play style or have short advice for a dozen play styles. I'd perfer to see advice I can't use then nothing at all. Odds are that even the advice I don't want I can glimpse something from, and no advice has zero chance of yielding anything useful. As for the page adviuce being a page I can't use; if that page makes it so I can use the other 95 pages of the book its a good page.

I agree with this. Any advice (as long as it is good) is better than none.

 

[Umbran]

Then pick a play style or have short advice for a dozen play styles. I'd perfer to see advice I can't use then nothing at all.

That's fine for you. But I think for the publisher, it's probably a hard choice - does he risk putting in a section that may be considered "wasted space"?

Anecdotal evidence is worth what you pay for it, and I don't know if anyone has done solid market research to tell what people would really like to see. Given the marginal nature of most gaming publishing, it's hard to buck the trend that seems to at least mostly work...

 

[Crothian]

That's fine for you. But I think for the publisher, it's probably a hard choice - does he risk putting in a section that may be considered "wasted space"?

Most books have wasted space in them, its hard to find everything in a book useful.