Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5898608" data-attributes="member: 996">Depends entirely on the nature of the game and the way the book is written.An old World of Darkness book, for instance, is a cover-to-cover read.  It's written to be read that way.  While not on the level of enjoyability of a good novel, it sets scene, establishes mood, evokes images, and doles out information a little at a time so it can be absorbed and apreciated.   On the other hand, trying to look up a specific bit of information in those books was a nightmare.A D&D book, OTOH, I will never read cover-to-cover.  I'll read complete sections of it, like a combat system, or the spells my character can cast at his current level, but I won't read it cover-to-cover.  In fact, as a player, I'll intentionally avoid sections that I don't need to know.  Why, if I'm playing a Cleric, should I read wizard spells?  It's wasted effort, and the game will be more interesting if the wizard's stuff is a surprise to me.  As a DM, of course, you familiarize yourself with everything to some extend.  But even that's not necessarily cover-to-cover.  In 3e, I don't need to know every spell, just the ones of the PCs know, and those of a level and type the opposition might have access to.  In 4e, I don't need to worry about a specific power at all until it comes up, I just need to know how to handle conditions, durrations and so forth, and how to read a power.</blockquote>