The Importance of Randomness

[Dannager]

Personally, I would prefer that you say something like "I prefer crafting encounters when I play for reasons X, Y, Z."

I did that. One of the reasons I gave is that I feel that well-crafted encounters are better than random encounters. You can disagree with me. In fact, go for it. I've made an argument and there's plenty of room in there to pick it apart.

But don't come at this from the perspective that no one should be allowed to share their thoughts on how games in general work. Because that's what you're doing. I gave a general observation - that I clearly said was simply what I thought, and not gospel truth - and now you're telling me that general observations just aren't acceptable.

That isn't acceptable. We can make general observations on what works well and what doesn't work well. You can disagree with them. But don't start taking me to task just for having the gall to offer up an opinion. That's the worst kind of unconstructive out there. I haven't told anyone, "The way you play is dumb!" or "Your players must hate you!" or "You're not having fun the right way!" I am suggesting that there are ways of doing things that are perhaps better than other ways.

Quit crucifying someone for offering a reasonable opinion. Quit getting offended over imagined personal attacks on your home game. Get back on topic, and keep it out of the realm of the personal.

 

[imurphy943]

[MENTION=73683]Dannager[/MENTION]: What would you consider a well-crafted encounter? I don't really have any way of even subjectively comparing the two with the discussion so far as it is.

 

[I'm A Banana]

But don't come at this from the perspective that no one should be allowed to share their thoughts on how games in general work. Because that's what you're doing.

No, I'm saying that your way of presenting your thoughts is perhaps unintentionally creating an atmosphere in which it is difficult for others to engage with those thoughts. By saying things like "(your perspective is that) no one should be allowed to share their thoughts on how games in general work...that's what you're doing", you're alienating many of those who would gladly discuss their thoughts on games in general with you.

Quit crucifying someone for offering a reasonable opinion.

"I believe that replacing random encounters with well-crafted encounters will probably result in a better play experience for your typical group" doesn't sound like a reasonable opinion, because it unreasonably presumes that you know what makes a "better play experience" for "your typical group," and you haven't offered any evidence (let alone convincing evidence) that you do actually know this.

Get back on topic, and keep it out of the realm of the personal.

Guidelines and examples for making random encounter tables should be in the DMG, since they are a valuable and entertaining addition to many games (such as my own, and that of several other posters, including the OP), with a history of effective use in the game.

If you disagree, you will have to show either that the tables don't have the qualities I believe they do, or that the DMG should not include things with those qualities, in order to convince me that my position is untenable.

 

[Dannager]

"I believe that replacing random encounters with well-crafted encounters will probably result in a better play experience for your typical group" doesn't sound like a reasonable opinion, because it unreasonably presumes that you know what makes a "better play experience" for "your typical group," and you haven't offered any evidence (let alone convincing evidence) that you do actually know this.

You're welcome to believe that my opinion is unreasonable. But I couched with words like, "I think," and "I believe," so don't pretend that I'm holding my opinions up as gospel truth.

Again, quit dragging this off-topic with personal attacks.

 

[Piratecat]

Guys, while I understand you're trying to improve the thread, please don't tell other members how to post. It's cool if you discuss the topic despite being irritated, and it's fine if you choose not to. But I don't want a situation where someone is being ganged up on because they hold a strong opinion. It's really clear that Dannager is posting his opinion on the topic. Disagreeing with it and disagreeing with his posting style are two different things.

 

[Piratecat]

My personal opinion: I'm not a big fan of random encounter tables. They have two uses for me: inspiration when I want some excitement but don't know (or don't care) what the encounter is, and a stick to keep the players nervous about taking too long, camping somewhere unsafe or making too much noise.

My "random" encounters almost never are. I'm okay with that.

 

[Dannager]

@Dannager : What would you consider a well-crafted encounter? I don't really have any way of even subjectively comparing the two with the discussion so far as it is.

That's sort of a two-part question. The first being the difference between a crafted encounter and a random encounter. A random encounter is decided upon with a random element (a die roll) from a table populated with predetermined values. The resultant encounter may have some connection to the campaign's events as a whole, or it may not.

A crafted encounter (or, simply, a non-random encounter) is an encounter designed - ahead of time - to fit into a specific part of the campaign. Rather than being rolled up randomly, the DM has the opportunity to flesh out the encounter in detail because he knows it will be used.

The second part is the difference between a crafted encounter and a well-crafted encounter. A well-crafted encounter is one that exhibits good design. I realize that's a subjective quality, but I also believe that there is a difference between good design and poor (or lazy) design. And, as with most things, the more time and effort put into something, the better it typically turns out. A random encounter doesn't really allow for preparation time, because the DM would have to prepare for every encounter on the table. That's a tremendous amount of work (though, if feasible, would probably create a good game experience). Crafted encounters, on the other hand, can (though do not necessarily) involve thoughtful design choices on the part of the DM.

If you open up a published 4e adventure, you will find crafted encounters. Many of them will be well-crafted, in the sense that careful consideration has been given to their design.

Is this clear, or is there disagreement over the existence of well-crafted encounters? I'm expecting someone to chime in with something like, "What's 'well-crafted' is subjective and you can't know what every group likes!"

 

[Piratecat]

Dannager, less preemptive snark, if you please.

Can't random encounters be well crafted? When I've used them, I usually plan each iteration out ahead of time to make them interesting and unique.

 

[Hassassin]

Rather than being rolled up randomly, the DM has the opportunity to flesh out the encounter in detail because he knows it will be used.

Except that's not always true - in fact, in some types of campaigns that's seldom true. The main place I use random encounter tables is precisely where I don't know if the encounter would get used.

 

[Dannager]

Dannager, less preemptive snark, if you please.

Can't random encounters be well crafted? When I've used them, I usually plan each iteration out ahead of time to make them interesting and unique.

As I mentioned, I feel that probably takes up too much time on behalf of the DM. Certainly, it seems more efficient to spend two hours planning two encounters that you know you'll use, than to spend 20 hours planning 20 encounters that you'll only use 10% of.

But you certainly can craft encounters well ahead of time and then populate your random encounter list with them. You'll end up with random but solid encounters. If that's the kind of work that you want to devote to the project, that's a good way to go. But when people talk about including random encounter tables in the back of the DMG, I think they're talking about encounters for which the entire scope of the information provided to the DM is something along the lines of "1d4 goblins".