Traits overload obscures important information

[Bardic Dave]

As I read through the playtest rules, one thing has repeatedly tripped me up:

Some traits have important rules implications per se (e.g. stance, concentrate, press, etc.) while other traits are only important if referenced by other abilities (e.g. humanoid, dwarf, mental etc.). Stated differently, some traits actively alter the rules, while others only serve as passive tags to interact with other rules.

The distinction between these two kinds of traits can be summed up as follows: if you can't easily understand how a given spell/power/feat works without knowing the specific rules that govern of one or more of its traits, the presence or absence of those traits is of high importance for rules comprehension. If a given spell/power/feat can be easily understood without reference to its traits, then those traits are of low importance for rules comprehension.

In some cases, a particularly important trait for rules comprehension is hidden in the middle of an alphabetical list of 5+ traits, most of which are just tags. This makes identifying this important trait more challenging and mildly impairs easy rules comprehension.

I think it would be helpful if the notion that all traits are equal rules elements were dropped and a visual layout that prioritized and brought attention to especially crucial traits was introduced. For instance, what if in addition to appearing in the alphabetized list of traits, especially important traits like stance appeared in parentheses next to a feat's name (similar to the presentation in PF1)?

[Shiroi]

Making press and audible more noticeable than dwarf and harm? Yeah, I could see that being a helpful thing if it was organized correctly. Perhaps a middle ground of using a different color to make the text stand out?

[Chinchbug]

I'm surprised this one hasn't gotten more attention. I find myself scowling at the trait blocks in the Bestiary, too. I guess I've been spoiled by the old stat blocks. Alignment, here. Size, here. Type, subtype, frequency, etc. all codified and placed consistently. Not all mashed together into an alphabetic list. Maybe it will get easier as we use it. But for now, I have a pretty good scowl going.

[Rysky]

Yeah for the Bestiary entries I REEEEEEAAAAAAAALLLLLLYYY hope the final version has them in a better grouping, rather than alphabetical. It’s a mess.

[Bardic Dave]

Just finished reading through the bestiary, and I have to agree it is the pretty much the worst offender in this regard, second only to the feats.