Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6184861" data-attributes="member: 6681948">I think my post spells out a much better process than I follow consistently.I find I make notes like the total bonus for a specific tactic, a "power attack chart", etc.  I find spells are where I make the most changes.  Often, the issue is that the author's approach just doesn't fit my style for running such a character in combat.  eg.   high level wizard/lich working alone who carries a typical PC spell load is not acting like he has an INT above 6.  PC's have Fighters.  Solo arcanists need to be able to get away from the PC's and put things between them and the metal clad cuisinarts.  Having their battle plan written down forces me to get a handle on their abilities.  It also gives me a reminder in play of just how badly the battle has to go before they change tactics, down to "surrender" or "flee".  The third read is the easiest to fall by the wayside, and often consists of skimming over the materials, including notes from pass 2.  How long ago pass 2 was matters as well.I wonder what would happen if the answer was "Not much, really.  I was kind of surprised you chose it, but I guess you just pick at random, since you obviously didn't bother to read it first."For me, I like being able to have various pages in front of me at the same time, and I don't like paying to have the monster info reprinted in the adventure book when that could have been more content, a diagram of a confusing area, etc.  Paper clips and a GM screen are wonderful tools if you print a relevant page like that common monster.  IOW, this is a question of style, and any choice made is going to displease someone.That is very interesting info, especially as many Golarian adventures are AP's that also commonly include setting material in the back.</blockquote>

Verification