Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Edgar Ironpelt" data-source="post: 9579051" data-attributes="member: 32075">Part of that is inflation. Per <a href="https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/" target="_blank">Inflation Calculator | Find US Dollar's Value From 1913-2025</a>an item costing $20 in 1980 would be expected to cost $76 today.There's also a distinction to be made between good art and fancy, expensive art. Also between good text layout and attempts at getting fancy with the text presentation. I remember how I disliked the fancy art & text layout of the 3.0 and 3.5e[1] D&D books, even though "it raises the price!" was not a concern that appeared on my radar.On the other hand, "chrome" can sometimes really add to the enjoyment of a game. Back in the day, the board/card game Mystic Wood had plastic pawns to represent characters, but I found it really improved things to have painted miniatures for the characters. I first saw this in another person's copy, and when I got my own, I bought and painted a set of miniatures to produce the same look & feel upgrade.[1] I passed on 4e and 5e D&D, so I can't speak to their artwork. Also, I saved the rant I wrote back in the day about the 3.x books:== begin rant from the Old Times==The D&D 3rd ed. Players Handbook is a rulebook for a game. Those buying it generally wish to (a) read the rules and (b) play the game. This means that the graphic designer's priorities ought to be to (1) make the text easy to read, and (2) make the text easy to reference. Providing "atmosphere" or making the book "look cool" is at best a third priority - if not a fourth or fifth.The D&D 3rd ed. Players Handbook fails at this in a number of ways:1. The first priority is to make the text readable. This means high contrast. The text should consist of dark printing (preferably black) on a light background (preferably white) But the first page in each chapter is black on dark yellow. Hard to read. BAD.2. The first priority is to make the text readable. This means avoiding background bits behind the text that makes it hard to read. But the text has these half-erased guidelines behind it - except for those yellow pages where the yellow has a pattern. Hard to read. BAD.3. The first priority is to make the text readable. This means that graphical ornamentations should be subdued, so as to not overpower the text. Color should be used sparingly (if at all), and only where necessary. But in the PH, the graphics are heavy and color is everywhere. This makes the text - you guessed it - hard to read. BAD.4. The first priority is to make the text readable. This means avoiding ragged left margins, which are the hardest of all to read. Graphics and illustrations should not force raggedness on the left margin of the text. But in the PH, they do, often enough. BAD.5. . The first priority is to make the text readable. (Get the hint?) This means text flows that the eye naturally follows - and that it does not follow into a wrong turn. Sidebars and tables need to be set off so that the reader does not try to read them as continuations of an earlier paragraph of main body text. In the PH, the sidebars are set off weakly, and the tables not really set off at all. Hard to read. BAD.6.  The second priority is to make the text easy to reference. This means that page numbers should be large and friendly. In the PH, they're large enough, but not very friendly. They're overpowered and lost in the graphical fanciness around the margins. And the blue gem-button makes every page number look alike. Not good. (Now, if you used a different color and shape of gem for the page numbers of each chapter, that would be an improvement. Better yet, use a different shaped outline - hairline, so as to not overpower and distract attention from the page numerals themselves.)7.  The second priority is to make the text easy to reference. This means that it should be easy to tell what chapter you're in from a quick glance at the chapter heading. At least the PH has chapter headings. But they're turned on their side - hard to take in. And they're overpowered by the fanciness of the margin ornamentation. Bad.8. The second priority is to make the text easy to reference. This means putting graphics as landmarks and breaking up the text with intelligent use of whitespace. The PH has the graphics, but they're in color and otherwise tend to overpower the text, making it hard to read - bad. Graphics also should be placed at natural breaking-points in the text, but the PH has text squeezing around the graphics. As for the use of whitespace in the PH - it doesn't strike me as being very intelligent.9. The second priority is to make the text easy to reference. This means including an index. The PH does this. Good. But the index should be at the end, not almost-at-the-end-but-not-quite. Bad.10.  The second priority is to make the text easy to reference. This means using large friendly headings in a logical and intelligent manner. The PH isn't outstanding in it's use of headers, but at least it isn't outstandingly bad, either.11. Finally, creating an appropriate "atmosphere" may be the third priority - but isn't necessarily. In the case of something like the PH, I'd say that it's more important to avoid an inappropriate atmosphere. Different gamers play their D&D games in a lot of different styles. Some games are serious, others are silly. Some are drawn in bright primary colors with Good and Evil clearly defined. Others are grim and gritty and full of shades of gray. Some are optimistic, others are tragic. Some are mellow, others have sharp-edged attitudes. The graphic work in a book like the PH should be nicely neutral to avoid clashing with any of these different styles. Unfortunately, the graphics in the PH have a brooding, edgy style that clashes horribly with the preferences of many players. This causes those players to view the graphics as being ugly as well as badly laid-out.== end rant ==</blockquote>

Verification