Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 8620730" data-attributes="member: 59082">On one hand, you say &quot;no philosophy,&quot; yet on the other the basic truth of the matter is that &quot;minimal prep&quot; really depends upon the individual DM. You might find an adventure needs to be completely overhauled, while another person might find it just fine to run as-is, and have a great play experience. This isn't a matter of philosophy, but better understanding the issue so that it can be effectively addressed. So I think it really comes down to what you think requires &quot;a large amount of fixing.&quot; What is it, exactly, that you regularly feel needs to be fixed about pre-written adventures? And is it something that is just the nature of the beast, or indicative of the style of WotC adventures? Maybe something that would be helpful is you listing adventures that you've run that you feel required minimal prep, and explaining why. That might help people pinpoint what your concerns are, and what you're looking for.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mercurius, post: 8620730, member: 59082"] On one hand, you say "no philosophy," yet on the other the basic truth of the matter is that "minimal prep" really depends upon the individual DM. You might find an adventure needs to be completely overhauled, while another person might find it just fine to run as-is, and have a great play experience. This isn't a matter of philosophy, but better understanding the issue so that it can be effectively addressed. So I think it really comes down to what you think requires "a large amount of fixing." What is it, exactly, that you regularly feel needs to be fixed about pre-written adventures? And is it something that is just the nature of the beast, or indicative of the style of WotC adventures? Maybe something that would be helpful is you listing adventures that you've run that you feel required minimal prep, and explaining why. That might help people pinpoint what your concerns are, and what you're looking for. [/QUOTE]

Verification