Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Improvisation is a basic skill of DMing so it can hardly be an objection to random encounters.

I think you are starting from the notion that "the story" is something that preexists the actual play session. In my experience, this is asking for disappointment (leading to the classic addage that no DM plan survives encounter with the players).

Ha!

Exactly right!

Is this not something that the 'modern' DM has in his skillset?

No. Ever since the crap the Hickman's churned out, there is too much story-based adventuring -- read 'railroading'-- where characters are just roles in someone else's story. DMs are expected to poke and prod the players along towards the denouement. See every Pathfinder adventure path, ever. IIRC, The old Dungeon Magazine used to include those terrible things.

Wandering Monsters are always a must have. And so what if they are not "level appropriate" challenges. Players ought to know when to run away...
...which is most of the time in a game about resource management.

You make fair points, I accept that improvisation will always be required. But I do generally like to have a (very loose) plan and improv from there rather than start with nothing more than random rolls. I'll have certain scenes, enemies, lines of dialogue ect in mind before the session starts even though I fully expect to have to adapt based on the players' actions. Even just having the stat blocks for an encounter ready in a document rather than waiting for the players to start a fight before prepping those, or a few notes on what events a certain conversation or action might lead to down the line. It's inevitable that any 'plan' I have is going to become something vastly different, but I'd still rather have something to deviate from rather than making it all up on the fly.

To be honest, I do think the story does exist in some form that exists before a session. Not the outcomes, but just from their actions and choices and backstory they've provided, I know what my players are working towards, what they want to achieve and what obstacles it would be appropriate to put on their path towards that. If they end a session approaching a town, I think it's only appropriate that between then and the next session, I prepare several encounters within that town, set up a few quests they might want to go on, have certain NPCs in place they might conflict or cooperate with. I believe it's my obligation as a DM to provide them a narrative experience that they can work through and engage with, and one that is a direct product of the choices they've made in previous session, rather than just sitting there passively and breaking out the monsters when they decide to get into a fight or doing a voice when they decide to talk to someone.

Maybe this is just coming at it from a video game background, but I essentially think it's the DM's job to create a world for the players to play in, and this means you have to have certain things in place. A narrative arc, ideas for events the players can choose to involve themselves in (or not), characters they might interact with, stories that they can become a part of. Even the most sandboxy of RPG video games, something like Skyrim, still provide stories that the player can choose to engage with. Though perhaps something like The Witcher 3 would be a better illustration of the way I look at things; the start point of a quest or storyline is a pre-arranged, the end of it more often than not comes about as a result of choices made by the player. The difference being that where a quest in TW3 has 3, maybe 4 endings, a storyline in my DnD game can have infinite variable outcomes limited only by the players.

Which brings me back to my aversion to true randomness. I can roll an encounter with a group of bandits, and while that plays out I can think up a story that will result from that, OR I can plan that in advance, set to be triggered if the players make certain choices, and still have a story that's going to result from it, but one that's more thorough, more coherent. I can link it in to a character's backstory, or a piece of world lore, or use it to set up events that can occur later. The former option sees me making things up on the fly, jumping from one thing to the next, the latter me a framework to act within that I feel will ultimately create a more rewarding experience for my players, which is the point of being a DM to my mind.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Red Harvest wrote:
No. Ever since the crap the Hickman's churned out, there is too much story-based adventuring -- read 'railroading'-- where characters are just roles in someone else's story. DMs are expected to poke and prod the players along towards the denouement. See every Pathfinder adventure path, ever. IIRC, The old Dungeon Magazine used to include those terrible things.

Wandering Monsters are always a must have. And so what if they are not "level appropriate" challenges. Players ought to know when to run away...
...which is most of the time in a game about resource management.

I'd say my players aren't roles in 'my' story, but that I do have a duty to provide them a story (or stories) to take part in. What is the point in them handing me pages of backstory for their character if I'm not going to set up an arc, triggered by the actions they take in game, that continues those plot threads? What is the point in them deciding 'I want to do this thing' if I don't prepare a fitting narrative that allows that thing to happen?

For the record, my current campaign is entirely freeform. Not based on a pre-written adventure and using a homebrew setting within the multiverse with its own nations, politics, cultures ect. Once our first 'meet the party' arc wraps up this week, the players will be entirely free to choose what direction they want to go in. But once they've picked a direction, I'd argue that it's my role as the facilitator to reward them for that choice with a story to engage with, given that my group is very much RP over G.

For instance, they're currently at the border between several nations, each with its own characteristics. If they decide to hop into one nation or another, I will then go and plan some plots or stories that suit that area, that reflect the characters and the backstory the players have given me. For instance, one of these nations has a civil war going on. If they decide to go there, I'll plan some events around that war for them to be caught up in, then perhaps link that into one of their backstories by having an old friend of one of the characters appear on the other side to the one they choose. This prompts drama, it fuels narrative, and for us, that's what the game's about.

Wandering monsters is all well and good, but for a group who treat combat as an excuse to do some cool things with their characters rather than as a tactical exercise, it doesn't really gain them anything, and thus I've not done the job they want me to do. This can be offset by having some narrative result from that encounter, but that narrative is going to be stronger if at least the beginning of it is prepared ahead of time rather than pulled out my arse as the fight unfolds.

"True" randomness isn't ever something that 'has' to happen though - unless newer editions (5E included?) somehow tried to say that it...was?

I don't think that's a 'rule' they'd ever go for - ultimately they always seem to say that the 'DM Knows Best' or some variation thereof?

Wandering Monsters present opportunities to role play. Not all monsters 'attack on sight'. Or should. That's video game thinking.

As a DM, I like to go into each session with two things only:

- quick review of my notes on what happened previously

- one vivd image

The vivid image isn't a preconstructed plot point. It's just an arresting item of sensory perception - like walls oozing slime or a distant tuning-fork like hum, etc etc etc. It can be something a bit more self-coherent, too: thick mist rolling through grape vine trellises.

I use the image as inspiration during the session when the players seem to hit a lull. It's like having a "and then something happens" without preparing anything too specific, so it won't contradict whatever the players are interested in exploring.

I always let the players' interest guide the play sessions, so one vivid image is just there to give them another thing to be interested in. Sometimes it turns out to be a plot twist, for example.

NOTE: I also do not accept character back stories before the session. This is a trap for players. Players come up with a character and then get disappointed when what they play isn't like that. Character, like everything else in roleplaying, comes out of the play itself. I find players are more interested in their characters if they get to "discover" rather than just create at the outset.

 Alpharius wrote:
"True" randomness isn't ever something that 'has' to happen though - unless newer editions (5E included?) somehow tried to say that it...was?

I don't think that's a 'rule' they'd ever go for - ultimately they always seem to say that the 'DM Knows Best' or some variation thereof?

No, it's not a rule as such, I'm just aware it's a tool there for the DM to use and wanted to discuss the potential applications of it; at a glance, it didn't seem of any use to the kind of game I'm running but I wondered if there was something I was missing out on by not using it, or whether I might as well just leave it to one side and focus on in-game 'random' rather than actual random (ie. events that occur without being a result of the player actions, and thus appear 'random' to the players from a narrative standpoint, but ones that as a DM I have fully prepared to spring on them at the right moment).

 Alpharius wrote:
"True" randomness isn't ever something that 'has' to happen though - unless newer editions (5E included?) somehow tried to say that it...was?

I don't think that's a 'rule' they'd ever go for - ultimately they always seem to say that the 'DM Knows Best' or some variation thereof?

5e doesn't. It does allow for wandering monsters. Even the Starter box module, Lost Mines of Phandelver has some. It still has the silly Challenge Rating system.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Paradigm wrote:
thus appear 'random' to the players from a narrative standpoint, but ones that as a DM I have fully prepared to spring on them at the right moment).

Beware the Quantum Ogre.

 Red Harvest wrote:
Wandering Monsters present opportunities to role play. Not all monsters 'attack on sight'. Or should. That's video game thinking.

True, but I'd argue the potential of that might be fairly limited with the kind of players I have, basically coming down to either 'something seems interesting about that, let's get involved' (which is more likely to occur if I've deliberately created an interesting encounter) or 'that's a big -off monster, we're not getting involved' (in which case I've basically 'wasted' the players' time with an event that didn't go anywhere). They're far more likely to respond to, say, an NPC recognising them, or walking in on an argument between two characters (which I'd typically like to at least partly prepare beforehand) or finding a person or creature in unusual circumstances that prompt them to investigate further.

And in any case, it's the random element that I'm not seeing the point of. I can see how good RP would result from coming across something unexpected, but I think I'd get better result having pre-arranged that than I would just creating something on the spot as I can think more about the consequences, the potential outcomes, how to make it something they'll take an interest in, ect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Manchu wrote:
As a DM, I like to go into each session with two things only:

- quick review of my notes on what happened previously

- one vivd image

The vivid image isn't a preconstructed plot point. It's just an arresting item of sensory perception - like walls oozing slime or a distant tuning-fork like hum, etc etc etc. It can be something a bit more self-coherent, too: thick mist rolling through grape vine trellises.

I use the image as inspiration during the session when the players seem to hit a lull. It's like having a "and then something happens" without preparing anything too specific, so it won't contradict whatever the players are interested in exploring.

I always let the players' interest guide the play sessions, so one vivid image is just there to give them another thing to be interested in. Sometimes it turns out to be a plot twist, for example.

NOTE: I also do not accept character back stories before the session. This is a trap for players. Players come up with a character and then get disappointed when what they play isn't like that. Character, like everything else in roleplaying, comes out of the play itself. I find players are more interested in their characters if they get to "discover" rather than just create at the outset.

I think possibly you and I just take very different approaches to the game. Take the character backstory thing, that's something I usually insist on as I find it incredibly useful for planning both long and short term. While the long-term goal is that a combination of party dynamics and world events are enough to keep the players hooked, I like having backstory to drawn on to keep them interested in the early stages. Lost relatives, mysterious lineages, unusual lifestyles, that's all fuel I can use to engage them, and I find it also helps them get into their character's headspace better if we've discussed details of their backstory and how they fit into the world. They're far more likely to talk to a character if that character recognises one of them, or belongs to a group they have connections with ect.

Perhaps my players just aren't the most proactive (at least half the group are very new to RPGs), so I kind of need to have plenty of potential plot hooks to keep them moving on, otherwise it'd take them an hour to get out of the tavern they were staying in, and I'd probably have to declare it was burning down around them to prompt that! But I don't see that as a problem, they're here to be part of a story and I'm happy to provide that as storytelling has always been a passion of mine.




By the way, this discussion is fascinating! I know I might be being a bit contrarian, but it is really interesting to see how my approach differs from others. Keep it coming!

..".That's a big -off monster, we're not getting involved' (in which case I've basically 'wasted' the players' time with an event that didn't go anywhere)."

...Go anywhere that they are aware of... yet. It's the DMs choice to follow up on things like that. Sometimes it's just nice to know that there is a big monster in the area. For future reference. Presenting players with choices is never a waste of time, theirs or the DM's.

No DM can think of everything. Let the dice do some 'thinking' for you sometime. Don't try to control everything. It's too stressful.

No worries about contrarian. Nobody is saying that you're doing it wrong. Or implying that. It's a different style of play.

Random events... or a means of "controlled chaos"?

1) I like to make selected / planned encounter tables, each may have some plot line or item to plant in front of the players. (They may or may not bite on it).
1a) They need to make sense according to the environment.

2) I like to use some of the tools I found of populating an "open world" within certain confines of an area that is reasonable unless they figure out a way to fly or shift planes.... (universe, not winged aircraft...).

3) Cities, towns, villages, ruins, dungeons, camps.... there are enough robust tools for making these VERY fast with a bit of tweaking.

4) Some means of advancing the party's notoriety which can increase some perk or event I would like to drop on them (and also seem to have a logical reason for it).

If the players seem to be getting into it a bit, best not to interrupt... I have had the oddest and some of the best role-play with the players ready to camp and slipping into character "off-time".
An encounter interruption of a minor sort sees a great deal of FURY on the poor creatures that dare interrupt (and I have to point out they were getting loud enough to be heard for miles...).

The players very much write their saga, I am finding as a DM I only have to prepare the book/canvas and flesh-out the responses to their actions.
I find if I have a "stable" of stuff I can draw from (named NPC's, wandering bands of critters, the local militia, Hunters and trappers... opportunities for trade or information of local areas... maybe point them to a shrine or ruin?).
Some NPCs become a well liked "hangers-on" for the party and have had a couple used to fetch and carry (for a price) and generally make role-play have more to it than killing and collecting stuff.

Really got my players latching onto the idea that the DM is not an opponent: he is there to help you write your story, presenting rainbows and fluffy clouds and candy will make for a different kind of game.

Nice Talizvar, it's great that you've gotten your players realizing you're not their opponent. Do you have any past examples of advancing the party's notoriety increasing a perk or event? That sounds very interesting

 Syro_ wrote:
Nice Talizvar, it's great that you've gotten your players realizing you're not their opponent. Do you have any past examples of advancing the party's notoriety increasing a perk or event? That sounds very interesting

Usually a way to try to make them "play nice" with the population I look at any witnesses to their exploits (that survive) or even enemies that escape that fill a pool of points till certain thresholds are met (talk about them in bars, to friends... they ARE small towns).

Again, I am starting a bit new with this edition but:
10-Free round at the tavern and a tip for "good" work for a group as well as a night stay..
20-Merchant found the area easier to travel largely due to them (reduced cost like 20%).
30-Local bigwig wants to help "sponsor" their efforts (give travel supply and horse/pony to help carry), but would like to check out something for him...
40-A local Paladin comes by to look at the party to understand what the fuss is all about while he is his way to deal with a quest... ("No, no, no, you will only get in the way...")
50-Intelligent critter/pet seeks them out and becomes a beneficial "hanger's on" (sometimes the party kills it out of stupidity despite best efforts). Usually a separate chart for what it is... damn folk killed the Fairy Dragon... it meant well (best roll ever!).
60-Local cult/gang tries to shake them down and is woefully unprepared but have good stuff on them after shaking down others.
etc...
This would be from the "good" tree while the "bad" would have it's counterpart:
10-Tavern brawl "We dont like you folk around here..." (great chance to loot some money)
20-Local merchants only let you speak to their hired body guards. BUT some local ruffians have some stuff to sell for a price or a favor.
30- Local bigwig has something a bit shady that needs being done BUt cross him and it will be... very bad.
40-Paladin tells you to tow the line or he will "deal with you" after his quest is done (maybe he needs some "help" with it... hehe)
50-Some critter that got it's mate killed by the party starts messing with them.
60-Local cult/gang is rather insistant on you joining their merry group... maybe an evening visit is in order.

OH! almost forgot, have the odd encounter where the "enemy" takes one look at them and runs... funny as heck the first time you do it... not to be repeated much.

I believe everything should reward and offer a carrot for some prepared adventure (rails with junctions?).
You do not have to have a cast in stone point system, it could just be a logical point in the story to the next level of escalation.

The DM guide itself can let you hand craft stuff, I am a bit of an ace with Excel so I am tempted to make some tables with some "=Rand()" statements.

Best story crutch I every had played: having the DM make for you your "nemesis".
My Thief started to get mental issues when it came to a certain Paladin (me: lawful evil), "You hear, chink, chink, chink.." GAH!!! He found me!!! RUN!"

Most creative split class ever: The character had a split personality. Needed two different character sheets. (same physical stats but mental stats were much different).
DM allowed it as well as it was played in a believable way, no regrets.

Oh, I do like that Fame/Notoriety system. I'd not necessarily use anything as formal as points, but those do seem like great ways to have the world indirectly react to the players. Consider that stolen!

Talizvar the “enemies immediately run away” encounter only works as comedy when the party diesn’t block the exits and slaughter them while the nooks try to flee. Then it just creates paranoia for the players as they worry that they missed something, because “there’s no way the encounter is this easy.” Nemeses are are fun, but one for each player is a lot to track at times, and banding them together is contrived when each nemesis has different motivations and alignment.

Any ideas on what to do when my players end up completely destabilizing a city? Military disrupted, government leaderless and in shambles, and civilians scared and angry?

I do love a good nemesis villain, especially one that goes down like a punk early on and is a bit of a joke but comes back with a real mean streak and some new ability or backing that makes them a genuine threat.

I think having a kind of 'villain teamup' with a few of the Party's major enemies is something that can work a fair way into a campaign; as a trope it's not that uncommon (take every comic book villain teamup ever, it's almost always group getting together to try and take down people they couldn't defeat on their own). Once the Party's fame has grown, the initial grievances of the villains might well be forgotten in favour of just taking this gang of do-gooders down a peg or two. Obviously it takes some work to set up, but I think the narrative payoff could be awesome if done right.

As for the question, I think a lot of that depends on context. Obviously there's a world of difference between the accidents of a low-level party causing chaos (in which case, the best recourse for them is to get the hell out of dodge and start over somewhere else) and a deliberate set of actions by a more experienced and famous group (if they took out an oppressive local power and that's where the destabilisation is coming from, this is a good chance for them to step up, restore order and actually make their world a better place, if they're interested in that).

Of course, leaving a chaotic wreck of a town somewhere in the group's history can be a great prompt for character development, it gives them a common tragedy and a reminder of the cost of failure/lack of foresight (depending on how accidental the events in question were) that they can look back on in future before doing anything else like that.

Equally, it gives you the chance to really let them shape the world if they choose to stay, rebuilding the town, setting up new leaders, maybe even changing the culture or society. If they've disposed of a vicious tyrant and his cruel right hand men in the local military, there's heaps of potential there for them to build something better. Help slaves become workers, have those who helped them in the uprising step into political roles themselves, even let the party be directly involved in the new local politics, building a stronghold there or taking formal roles in the army. It could drastically change the pace of the campaign and give them something to really invest in.

Thanks for sharing Talizvar, I really like those fame/infamy suggestions. And I love that event of the enemy recognizing the PCs and running for it. Those two stories at the end are really funny.

@gnome_idea_what: I'd probably try to come up with a bunch of competing factions in the city they destabilized, and have they see the city fall into a mini civil war. RP townsfolk very untrusting of the party, have all prices in stores skyrocket since they wont be able to get supplies as easily, and have random encounters of roving bands of thugs and looters within the city.

@Paradigm: I like what you wrote about letting players really invest in the world they are in and influence/rebuild the town. It sounds like a campaign I'm writing right now, where the very first session the only true city on an island is assaulted by overwhelming force, and they are told by a veteran to flee. Their only options are to stay and fight a losing battle, try to hide in the forest that covers most of the island, try to take refuge in a small mining town at the center of the island, or make a mad dash for a boat and try to abandon the island totally. If they hide in the forest, they'll have a chance to build a secret frontier town in the woods, and have lots of mini missions of going out trying to find other refugees, especially ones with special talents, as they fight or avoid patrols of the enemy.

 gnome_idea_what wrote:
Talizvar the “enemies immediately run away” encounter only works as comedy when the party diesn’t block the exits and slaughter them while the nooks try to flee. Then it just creates paranoia for the players as they worry that they missed something, because “there’s no way the encounter is this easy.” Nemeses are are fun, but one for each player is a lot to track at times, and banding them together is contrived when each nemesis has different motivations and alignment.

Like I said, not something to do much more than once.
Though, you do raise the idea "The party hears one of them say before they run: "The boss said not to hurt them!!"".

Any ideas on what to do when my players end up completely destabilizing a city? Military disrupted, government leaderless and in shambles, and civilians scared and angry?

Escalation.
A more powerful regent comes looking for his vassal that had not reported in.
Completely and utterly outclass them and give them the "The way I see it, you owe me... I hate wasting resources." speech.

There is always someone more powerful it is just a matter of attracting their attention.
Oh look! A possible "Nemisis" thing AGAIN!

Cool, this is a great idea for a thread. I've been away for a while (very busy again) but intend to getting back to posting more regularly. For a few years I had only been playing online, but now I've got an in person group, and we're playing with minis. Gonna resurrect my old blog and focus it on this rather than board games.
Here's a cool thing; one of my players commissioned a picture of the party.

Left to Right:
Euphemia, Halfling Hermit and Arcane Trickster
Vola, Half Orc Acolyte and Paladin of Tyr
Vadania, Half Elf Outlander and Druid of the Circle of the Moon
Loop-Mottin, Gnome ex-Soldier and Frenzied Berserker
Darman, Human Entertainer and Beastmaster
(The mysterious face in the background is ... me, the DM)

We've started off running an old school style dungeon called Barrowmaze, and I've set it in a fairly modified version of the Wilderlands of High Fantasy setting from the Judges Guild. Having a great time so far.

Gnome Berserker! That's a whole lot of awesome! Cracking piece of art as well.

Heh heh, yeah. Loop-Mottin is a pretty hilarious character. Most bad ass moment so far is getting eaten by a Frogemoth and killing it from the inside out!

Awesome Da Boss, I'm glad to hear that you're getting to play with an "in person" group again, I find that to be the most fun. I'm have to check out your blog and see what you're up to.

I don't want to steal your thunder, but I just started DMing the D&D starter set with some friends, so we're both getting back into gaming in person. I've also devoted most of the time and posts on my blog "Syro's projects" to the minis and dungeon pieces I've been making for the campaign. I hope you'll check it out.

Cool! I love seeing other people's blogs. I'll get mine up and running shortly, I've actually painted a pile of stuff, but haven't been photographing as much, I guess because my time has been taken up with playing.

I'm looking forward to seeing all your stuff too, it's cool you have a bunch of painted minis waiting to be revealed to us. Also being too busy playing is the best reason to not have time to photograph your stuff, that's going to make a lot of us jealous

Have played since the mid-80's. 1st and 2nd editions are my favorites but 5th is really solid and fun. Only thing I miss is the oldschool dungeon crawl, where one player has to act as mapper and map out the dungeon on graph paper as you go from room to room, level to level, marking what was in each.

To be fair, there's nothing to stop you doing something like that in 5th; it's not as necessary nowadays and I don't think the dungeon crawl is such a big part of the game nowadays (I certainly avoid running them where possible, 3-4 combat encounters in a session is excessive for me! ) but I could see a DM easily setting up something like that.

Perhaps the players are tasked by a local archaeological society to not only clear out an ancient ruined temple, but to produce a map and note anything of interest as part of the job. Perhaps there's a labyrinth-like structure that's going to require the characters to make a map if they ever want to get out. There are ways to set up things like that if it's what you/your players want to recapture.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On an unrelated note, I actually got to play the other week rather than DM! Certainly a different experience to what I'm used to behind the screen, and a valuable insight on the players' perspective that will come in handy.

I also learned that the UA Artificer class is boring as hell, so if I ever reuse that character I'll rebuild him using Matt Mercer's Gunslinger archetype for the Fighter, which appears much more interesting way to play a firearm-based character than the constant shoot-reload-shoot-reload-shoot ect you get with the Artificer. Needs some work before they publish that class, I think... which is probably why it wasn't included in Xanathar's Guide now I think about it.

My players have kept a mqp in my game because barrowmaze is a pretty good name for the location. They did it without prompting too. But the module was originally written for OD&D as part of the OSR. I will snap a picture of if tomorrow.

Where my group plays is a buddies house who owns about $5k worth of Dwarven Forge dungeon sets and accessories. So we have a "grab this piece/that piece" gopher. We play with all painted minis as well (extra XP for having your character painted up!). Our setup is on a ping pong table so we have lots of room. It's glorious!

Needless to say a good crawl is a big part of our game still!

I would love to see a picture of your stuff in play! I mostly use a flip mat that I draw on with markers, but I'm a stickler for only painted minis in use. I paint them all myself though.