The Sandbox And The Grind

[rounser]

You mean those things don't exist in 4e? Can I hit them with my Steel Serpent Strike?

Hey, you put that Steel Serpent back in your pants there, buster. And if you want to strike, join a union. For shame.

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Remathilis

You mean those things don't exist in 4e? Can I hit them with my Steel Serpent Strike?

"What's wrong with a kiss, boy? Hmm? Why not start her off with a nice kiss? You don't have to go leaping straight for the (. . .)" - Professor Humphrey (The Meaning of Life)

[pawsplay]

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

Remember folks; this isn't the "what is a sandbox?" thread.

This is the "when my players stumble into high-level territory, how do I 'punish' them with a hard exciting fight and not 'reward' them with a frustrating grindy fight?" thread.

Kill them all. Gary will know his own.

[Remathilis]

Originally Posted by Mark

"What's wrong with a kiss, boy? Hmm? Why not start her off with a nice kiss? You don't have to go leaping straight for the (. . .)" - Professor Humphrey (The Meaning of Life)

Originally Posted by rounser

Hey, you put that Steel Serpent back in your pants there, buster. And if you want to strike, join a union. For shame.

Boys, I think there's something wrong with you.

[LostSoul]

I have two questions for sandbox play:

1. How do you reduce the grind for low-level encounter? The outcome is not in doubt (unless you use needlefang drake swarms), but it will take a while to play out.

2. What do you do about low-level XP, and XP for wandering monsters? Pcs can grab a lot of XP without exposing themselves to real risk. Is that what we want for a sandbox game?

[darjr]

Originally Posted by LostSoul

1. How do you reduce the grind for low-level encounter? The outcome is not in doubt (unless you use needlefang drake swarms), but it will take a while to play out.

Turn the encounter on it's ear and make it a skill challenge and charge players penalties for failed checks or ideas. Penalties would include loss of HP, surges, and encounter/dailies.

Have a wandering monster table of monsters that would be very interested in exploiting an ongoing long drug out combat. Monsters that would turn the encounter into a clear reason to RUN! Do this enough and the players may very well come to the understanding that 'grinding' is dangerous. This would add more grind in some cases, but will make it very much less clear of the outcome.

Originally Posted by LostSoul

2. What do you do about low-level XP, and XP for wandering monsters? Pcs can grab a lot of XP without exposing themselves to real risk. Is that what we want for a sandbox game?

Maybe? Some have said that inventive sneakiness around the obstacles to XP is a good and desirable thing in a sandbox game.

However I'd think about exploiting that as a weakness of the party like above.

So yea, it's an easy way to make a small living going after little isolated bands of kobolds, but they'd grow very weary of this and band together. The big kobold chieftan of the region could also put together a bad ass hunting party to fix their little problem. That little snipe hunt of the PC's could quickly turn on them if those hired hunters show up.

Maybe even do a little 'Butch Cassadiy and the Sundance Kid' with the PC's.

[LostSoul]

Originally Posted by darjr

Turn the encounter on it's ear and make it a skill challenge and charge players penalties for failed checks or ideas. Penalties would include loss of HP, surges, and encounter/dailies.

That is something I've thought about doing but have not implemented.

Originally Posted by darjr

Have a wandering monster table of monsters that would be very interested in exploiting an ongoing long drug out combat. Monsters that would turn the encounter into a clear reason to RUN!

This is something I've done. It worked out very well.

I think that "random events" for encounters is a pretty cool idea, though something I haven't planned for in my current prep. But just something random that will affect the combat, for either side, is a cool idea. Adds tension.

In one of the dungeons I am thinking about implementing a crazy wandering monster table: short rest/search, 1 on a 1d6, like normal; but if there is any noise, like a combat, each round I will roll for wandering monsters. It's an undead-themed area, and I think zombie hordes chasing down the PCs might be cool.

[LostSoul]

Originally Posted by darjr

Maybe? Some have said that inventive sneakiness around the obstacles to XP is a good and desirable thing in a sandbox game.

Maybe. I think there are two types of sandbox games: googlyblits, where the goal is to explore the world; and sandoolepip, where the goal is to challenge the players.

I have never been able to grasp googly play (except the genre-emulation kind), so I'm focused on creating a sandbox in order to challenge the players.

edit: edited for rounser. I think my meaning is still clear, though.

If the "smart choice" is to farm XP from low-level encounters, that ruins the risk-reward that I want to see. It's a winning solution that ruins the game (like tic-tac-toe).

Originally Posted by darjr

So yea, it's an easy way to make a small living going after little isolated bands of kobolds, but they'd grow very weary of this and band together. The big kobold chieftan of the region could also put together a bad ass hunting party to fix their little problem. That little snipe hunt of the PC's could quickly turn on them if those hired hunters show up.

I see where you're going, but I don't want to make things tougher just because the PCs are higher level. If those kobolds would join togther, PCs level 1 or level 10, then they would.

The challenge comes in for low-level PCs who want to make sure they don't unite! But the high-level PCs, who just want to wrap up a loose end, they're forced to run through long combats where the outcome isn't in doubt.

Yeah, maybe a skill challenge could work, as could pressure on extended rests. I'm not sure how I will deal with it, when and if I get to that point. I'd like to hear experiences from people who have dealt with this.

[darjr]

Oh, one more thing. Morale in some earlier editions would end combats before a side was completely defeated.

4e does this with intimidation of bloodied opponents. I'd remind the players that in those cases where the outcome is probably known, intimidating bloodied commanders or individuals (a morale check if you will) could help to swiftly end the encounter. It's a tough check to make, so as a house rule I'd consider giving a big will penalty if the bloodied target understands that they are doomed.

[darjr]

Originally Posted by LostSoul

I see where you're going, but I don't want to make things tougher just because the PCs are higher level. If those kobolds would join togther, PCs level 1 or level 10, then they would.

I think though the level of the PC's would feed into the perceived level of threat the kobolds have, that would drive their kind of response.

Low level PC's might not get any banding or hiring of a hunting party. The other bands might consider the low level PC's are part of what the individual bands should be able to handle.

High level PC's xp farming kobold bands would be a different thing altogether. A swift and aggressive response to deal with a clear and powerful threat is called for.

Another thing occurred to me. Maybe the response isn't directly combative. Maybe the king of the kobolds could, under a white flag, beseach the king that has dominion over the PC's and get them to do something about it. Something non-combat and role play heavy.

[LostSoul]

Good points, darjr.

[rounser]

Maybe. I think there are two types of sandbox games: simulationist, where the goal is to explore the world; and gamist, where the goal is to challenge the players.

Please don't bring GNS into this thread. It doesn't apply here, it makes people think towards unmoderated extremes, and it has no useful definition that anyone agrees on.

[Ariosto]

In old-style D&D, the trend is that as characters and monsters get more hit points, they also score hits more often. Monster armor class mostly stays in the same range (that of the literal classes of armor) until you get into major league demons and the like. PCs and NPCs of course tend to acquire magical kit, but offense is a bit more common than defense (magical swords alone appearing more often than armor and shields in the original set) -- and more significant with damage bonuses (which apply more often in AD&D). Saving throws are more often successful, but spells also generally become more powerful (although sleep -- no save! -- is a real whammy versus low-level foes) and, tellingly, more numerous.

Also, it's pretty common for a monster big enough to get seriously outnumbered in melee to have a good chance of killing at least one or two lower-level characters before it goes down. Blast-em spells can change that, but they're always a finite resource (how significantly, of course, depends on situation).

[Umbran]

Originally Posted by S'mon

How many fights did Lewis & Clark have on their lengthy expedition? One, I think. Most real-world explorers have none.

Yes, but most of their explorations were not terribly memorable, either.

"Day 245 - slogged through a swamp. Lost another boot in the muck. Clark now has intestinal distress from eating a bad frog. More tomorrow."

There is the inevitable dramatic necessity for focusing on the dramatic points of the exploration. And those are times of stress. And, in a sandbox, you're not supposed to structure the player's experience too much - they're supposed to find their own way through the challenges. They're often going to choose violence, seeing as much of the neat and cool tools stuff the game puts at their disposal (in any edition) are about how they do violence.

The frequency of violence in a sandbox game is not entirely in the GM's hands, so tools to deal with that are kind of called for.

[rounser]

They're often going to choose violence, seeing as much of the neat and cool tools stuff the game puts at their disposal (in any edition) are about how they do violence.

Clark and Lewis also didn't have to contend with a wilderness bristling with monsters ready and willing to eat travellers, for that matter.

The nature of the D&D milieu calls for semi-regular violence in the course of exploration in a way that the real world cannot really match, except perhaps in travel through enemy territory in a war zone.

[Harlekin]

Originally Posted by Umbran

Yes, but most of their explorations were not terribly memorable, either.

"Day 245 - slogged through a swamp. Lost another boot in the muck. Clark now has intestinal distress from eating a bad frog. More tomorrow."

There is the inevitable dramatic necessity for focusing on the dramatic points of the exploration. And those are times of stress. And, in a sandbox, you're not supposed to structure the player's experience too much - they're supposed to find their own way through the challenges. They're often going to choose violence, seeing as much of the neat and cool tools stuff the game puts at their disposal (in any edition) are about how they do violence.

The frequency of violence in a sandbox game is not entirely in the GM's hands, so tools to deal with that are kind of called for.

I'ld feel, the way to do an exploration-based game in 4th is to handle the exploration of each hex as a skill challenge where failure results in a combat encounter. This models the fact that when exploring you actually try to avoid meaningless fights and makes it less of a DM's call or random event if such fights occur.

[rounser]

the way to do an exploration-based game in 4th is to handle the exploration of each hex as a skill challenge where failure results in a combat encounter. This models the fact that when exploring you actually try to avoid meaningless fights and makes it less of a DM's call or random event if such fights occur.

I think there's a fundamental disconnect in your understanding of the nature of a wilderness exploration game, here. In a good exploration campaign, combats are not meaningless like a random encounter table, but more a meaningful part of the setting, like a lair of ankhegs or patrolling giant ants. Perhaps if you thought of the wilderness as a big dungeon, and the hexes as dungeon rooms to be populated it might help. The wilderness is only meaningless if you make it that way.

[Harlekin]

Originally Posted by rounser

I think there's a fundamental disconnect in your understanding of the nature of a wilderness exploration game, here. In a good exploration campaign, combats are not meaningless like a random encounter table, but more a meaningful part of the setting, like a lair of ankhegs or patrolling giant ants. Perhaps if you thought of the wilderness as a big dungeon, and the hexes as dungeon rooms to be populated it might help. The wilderness is only meaningless if you make it that way.

I actually assumed that the critters have a reason to be in the hex they are in. However, that does not mean that the PCs have a reason to fight them. If all the PCs are trying to do is to explore an area, then they are better of if they manage to detect the ankheg nest before stumbling into it and just scout the location of the nest, mark it on their map and move on.

[Taralan]

Originally Posted by LostSoul
1. How do you reduce the grind for low-level encounter? The outcome is not in doubt (unless you use needlefang drake swarms), but it will take a while to play out.

This is a very good question. I think one solution would be to use the inherent "quantum uncertainty" of monsters of 4e in your favor here. If an encounter is say more than 3 or 4 levels below the party's level, why not do a quick conversion on the spot : Solo becomes Elite, Elites become regular monsters, Regulars become minions (or perhaps half HP if there was no elite or solo in the encounter). This can be done on the spot with no additional preparation and would be transparent for the players....

What do you think ?

[Ariosto]

Looking in the 4E Monster Manual, I see that a young green dragon has a 50% chance to hit a peer with a claw, and takes on average 30 or 31 such hits to fell it. An elder green dragon versus its peer has the same 50% chance, but takes on average 72 or 73 hits. An ancient one takes 80-81 hits, with that same 50% chance.

Breath weapon would be more effective, but the elder's still does only twice the young one's damage even though the elder has more than triple the hit points.

(Breath weapons do shockingly little damage relative to HP, versus the old days when they made VERY short work of the unlucky.)

If this trend is representative, it looks as if 4E is designed for long fights among closely matched opponents, only getting longer as levels increase.

I understand that a party massing superior numbers could wear down a higher-level foe, but that such a fight could be a notable "grind" because so many of the lower-level attacks would miss. Beyond a certain point, the higher-level foe would hit so much more frequently as to turn the tables, but it could still be a grind because of a low rate of damage relative to HP.

Is the difference in circumstances not clear early enough to induce the losing side to flee before the battle becomes terribly protracted?