News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Earthsea – A Rival to Tolkien and George RR Martin (2015) by jandrese on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @11:23AM (#16223913)
Yeah, getting too far into the weeds is a quick way to make someone feel like they're reading a D&D rule book, especially if many pages are spent explaining rules that ultimately have no effect on the story.

At worst it turns your exciting adventure novel into a textbook for arcane effects practitioners.

Re:Earthsea – A Rival to Tolkien and George RR Martin (2015) by booleandilemma on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @01:16PM (#16224907)
It sounds like his writing would be better served if he just tacked on an appendix with all of the magical minutiae.
Re:Earthsea – A Rival to Tolkien and George RR Martin (2015) by qu4z-2 on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @06:27PM (#16227313)
But by Sanderson's First Law, if it were in an appendix he wouldn't be able to use consequences of the rules in the story. Imagine I Robot if the laws of robotics were an optional appendix (although not quite that extreme).

FWIW, I didn't find it over-explained, but I tend towards systems naturally.

Re:Earthsea – A Rival to Tolkien and George RR Martin (2015) by a_t48 on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @03:28PM (#16226009)
He does tack on an appendix, which adds in even more details. I personally like it, but I suppose I was also the kind of kid growing up who would be okay reading D&D rulebooks. :)
Re:Earthsea – A Rival to Tolkien and George RR Martin (2015) by jandrese on Wednesday January 24, 2018 @01:48PM (#16225213)
Or just stuff the rules in a fun footnotes when necessary. I've always been a fan of that technique personally, although I understand it is generally discouraged.