My original goals
- Create a short condensed character creation flow with minimal page flipping. Quick, obvious.
- Allow players to pick/roll results and get a feel (excited for) their character without getting bogged down in mechanics.
- Leave richer information/explanations to be cross-referenced later by the player if they desired a deeper understanding.
However! This hyperlink concept is not working as well as I'd hoped with BREAK!! because:
- Numerous sub-processes are required for different callings (classes) which complicate the flow. (fig1 4. Sub-processes)
- Complex information (stats, gear, blah) is accumulated and modified during the flow and can't be hand waived away to look up later.
A solution?
Maybe the old way is the best. A long and linear approach (fig1 2. Linear). This is good because:
- Exceptions are dealt with/explained at time of creation.
- You only flip forward (clear sense of progress).
- You get bogged down in detail.
- The key chargen tables are spread out over many pages, annoy for those familiar with the mechanics (I know, stick tables together in an appendix)
Anyway, I visualised how information is extracted from the various structural approaches to see if it would help me design a solution. Not sure if it did, but it's a nice infographic.
- Blue lines show references to other parts of the doc to collect information.
- Dotted blue lines, return to chargen flow.
fig 1 - Character Generation Flow Analysis
Still thinking...
One option would be to have a quick reference section, either at the front of the book, as a separate free rpg day style booklet, or as a free pdf. That would let you get to do things both ways, althought with the downside of a longer book or more places for people to look. Without an app(preferably) or a hyperlinked pdf its a tough challenge. Its nice to see you thinking about/writing about this. I havent seen too many people discuss the challenge. How to make a book that can work equally well as a reference book and an instuction manual, when what makes it good at one makes it bad at the other.
ReplyDelete