Thanks for the comment! I agree. I love knowing how much impact a designer can have on a granular level, and I'm routinely surprised by how overlooked this idea is.
With the 6 door example, it seems like you use Miller's law as a way to decide when to introduce gestalt principals. Do you think that's something you do subconsciously after being a designer long enough?
You know, I never examined my instincts like that before, but you’re absolutely spot on. The higher and more complex the structure, the more I tend to condense and simplify it.
Especially if I have to write down or show my work—which is an unavoidable requirement of my day job in branding.
Overall, I’m not sure if that reflex was made from designing a lot, or as a natural consequence of being a neurotic person. Probably a combo of the two.
This is turning into therapy now. I'm just realising that TTRPGs are systems that impose structure on social communication. And generally operate well with Miller's law for the number of people involved. No wonder I love them! 🤯
Great post! When writing/running games, I like to avoid the 5-door scenario, as I find many tables come to a standstill with so many options. Especially if there are more options than players, unless those players have been playing together for a while and have well-established decision algorithms (ie “Left is Law”), having a party come to a consensus on which “door” to choose (whether it’s a door to open or an NPC to follow) can be difficult, and not always in a fun way. I lean toward 3 options when I build a scene with the intention of forcing a decision. As you said, it’s enough to feel like you have options without being overwhelming or feeling like you might miss/forget something.
Three is also where you can start playing with rock-paper-scissors type mechanics or relationships, too, which is always fun. If you're looking at it as a graph, it's also the last time the number of connections isn't more than the number of items/people/etc.
Fun article! Love the breakdown, and the secret/explicit example of 6 you provided at the end (I think 6 is a really interesting number for TTRPGs because of the d6 and it being just below Miller's law).
I really enjoyed this! There was a moment when I got to five doors where I thought "Oh, this is too much! He should have stopped at 4." I was wrong. You masterfully pulled off the 6-door example, and I really love this theory of numbers. Sometimes less is more. Intentionality reigns always, and this is an excellent framework for using these numbers of elements.
Would this work also when describing the scene? If you tell only one thing, it matters the most and draws players’ attention. ”There is a strange smell in the room”.
If you tell multiple attributes, it paints a more colorful image in the mind, but the attention would be more distracted. ”The market place is empty (1), rotten apples are left on a market table (2), an angry dog is barking in the nearby (3), a light is blinking in one window (4), the moon is full (5)”
I give this *five* stars. It's a very nice insight into simple concepts that are often overlooked.
Thanks for the comment! I agree. I love knowing how much impact a designer can have on a granular level, and I'm routinely surprised by how overlooked this idea is.
With the 6 door example, it seems like you use Miller's law as a way to decide when to introduce gestalt principals. Do you think that's something you do subconsciously after being a designer long enough?
You know, I never examined my instincts like that before, but you’re absolutely spot on. The higher and more complex the structure, the more I tend to condense and simplify it.
Especially if I have to write down or show my work—which is an unavoidable requirement of my day job in branding.
Overall, I’m not sure if that reflex was made from designing a lot, or as a natural consequence of being a neurotic person. Probably a combo of the two.
Haha. Which came first, the neurosis or the desire to design?! I'm in visual communication and I can 100% relate.
I was born in the neurosis, molded by it. A field where communicating has lots of rules? Sign me up.
This is turning into therapy now. I'm just realising that TTRPGs are systems that impose structure on social communication. And generally operate well with Miller's law for the number of people involved. No wonder I love them! 🤯
Interesting post! I particularly liked the mention of number of factions in a setting.
Three is really the sweet spot. Three introduces complexity and nuance to the coin flip of the binary.
Great post! When writing/running games, I like to avoid the 5-door scenario, as I find many tables come to a standstill with so many options. Especially if there are more options than players, unless those players have been playing together for a while and have well-established decision algorithms (ie “Left is Law”), having a party come to a consensus on which “door” to choose (whether it’s a door to open or an NPC to follow) can be difficult, and not always in a fun way. I lean toward 3 options when I build a scene with the intention of forcing a decision. As you said, it’s enough to feel like you have options without being overwhelming or feeling like you might miss/forget something.
I'm a big advocate for the "Rule of Three." It's such a good place to start and deviate from. Sharing the wiki entry just because:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(writing)#:~:text=8%20References-,Meaning,storytelling%2C%20films%2C%20and%20advertising.
Three is also where you can start playing with rock-paper-scissors type mechanics or relationships, too, which is always fun. If you're looking at it as a graph, it's also the last time the number of connections isn't more than the number of items/people/etc.
I hadn't thought of that. Conceptualizing it that way makes that shift from two to three even bigger and more meaningful.
Fun article! Love the breakdown, and the secret/explicit example of 6 you provided at the end (I think 6 is a really interesting number for TTRPGs because of the d6 and it being just below Miller's law).
I really enjoyed this! There was a moment when I got to five doors where I thought "Oh, this is too much! He should have stopped at 4." I was wrong. You masterfully pulled off the 6-door example, and I really love this theory of numbers. Sometimes less is more. Intentionality reigns always, and this is an excellent framework for using these numbers of elements.
Thank you for writing this!
Glad you liked it! And thank you for leaving a comment. The engagement on this stuff is how I know to keep writing more stuff like it.
You can have whatever's lurking behind one of the doors decide to open it (or break it down) themselves. Then you just have 5 doors.
I hadn't thought of that. It's so simple. Perfection.
Would this work also when describing the scene? If you tell only one thing, it matters the most and draws players’ attention. ”There is a strange smell in the room”.
If you tell multiple attributes, it paints a more colorful image in the mind, but the attention would be more distracted. ”The market place is empty (1), rotten apples are left on a market table (2), an angry dog is barking in the nearby (3), a light is blinking in one window (4), the moon is full (5)”