Save or suck Medusa petrification

[Imaro]

And others shouldn't assume that everyone does sandbox style.

And yes, I dislike PCs dying by a random die roll. I play mostly PbP, which means the player is out of the game for a month at least, even if a new character is reintroduced at the earliest opportunity.
I also like to fit my games to the players backgrounds. With enough players gone, the story isn't going to work.
I always roll open and never fudge rolls, so I look for rules that also support my preferred style of play.

I'm not assuming anything. If I don't want a random roll to have the opportunity of bringing about death to a character (even though IMO it's often little more than a speed bump in D&D) I don't use SoD monsters. What I don't get is the sentiment that they shouldn't be there for others because I don't like them and for some reason can't choose not to use them.

 

[Imaro]

Meh, if you're running adventures and all you use is a random encounter table, well, more power to you. Not something I think that occurs all that often though. Randomly generated adventures might be fun for a one shot, but, hey, I could be wrong.

Never said this, but using extremes to try and make your point is always effective...

It's certainly not a prerequisite of a sandbox adventure to do so. I mean, The Caves of Chaos are often touted as a sandbox adventure, yet every single room is keyed and, while there are random encounters, the overwhelming majority of encounters will be pre-placed.

Weren't there random monster tables for the wilderness around the Keep on the Borderlands which is the actual "sandbox adventure"... or are you equating a sandbox adventure with a single dungeon that's only a piece of it? But ok, just looking at the single dungeon... every room is keyed and yet there is no guarantee that the PC's will face a particular monster in a particular room or at a particular time (where and when).

The DM always sets the pace. How often does he roll random encounters, even in an entirely randomly determined adventure? He sets that encounter rate (1 in X per Y time), creates the random encounter table (or chooses which one to use) and then runs each encounter.

How often he rolls on the random encounters still doesn't guarantee a specific pace, so he's not setting anything... If anything he can influence when and how often encounters occur but they will still be subject to randomness. If he's tailoring encounters however, yes then he is setting the pace.

Sure, in a sandbox, the players have greater control over pacing, but, then again, not so much as you seem to be claiming. After all, the players have no idea what's behind door number one or two. Most of the time, they're flying blind - exploring the setting as it were. So, no, the players are not setting the pace - random chance is.

I think the characters have as much or as little control over pacing as the actions they choose allows. You're assuming that most of the time PC's are flying blind... when in fact this is again a function of the PC's chosen course of action. Exploring the setting =/= flying blind... not sure what sandboxes you've played in but that's just false. Research, information gathering, etc. are part of that exploration if PC's choose to make it so.

 

[billd91]

Sure, but can I get (additional) "watered down" version of iconic monsters, too? I still want to use a medusa or a beholder as deadly as in 4e. Ok?

You'll get no objection from me on that. I could even use the lower power ones as "young" or similarly weakened versions too.

 

[Sorrowdusk]

Here's the real test for the Medusa:

Take any person who hasn't played D&D yet is at least familiar with some Greek mythology (hell, Percy and the Lightning Theif counts). Tell them they are standing in front of a Medusa.

What do they do? They close or avert their eyes. Why do they do that? Otherwise they'll be turned to stone in an instant.

For the Medusa to be anything else is simply silly. What you might be looking for is a "creature that has snakes for hair with a gaze that slowly paralyzes and eventually turns you to stone". That's not Medusa though.

Exactly that's why it's scary.

It's gotta be like "Oh sh-" rather than "Oh no, I am slowy being paralyzed and being turned to stone."

That aside, it immune to it's own gaze, right??

 

[Sorrowdusk]

I'm not assuming anything. If I don't want a random roll to have the opportunity of bringing about death to a character (even though IMO it's often little more than a speed bump in D&D) I don't use SoD monsters. What I don't get is the sentiment that they shouldn't be there for others because I don't like them and for some reason can't choose not to use them.

Well on the one hand

#1 If you dont like the way the game plays, play something else or houserule it BUT....

#2 The motto/tag line is "Play The Game You Want To Play" which would support having at least 2 versions....albeit you cant literally have a game that can do everything with zero houseruling of RAW.

 

[Hussar]

Never said this, but using extremes to try and make your point is always effective...

Then I'm not really understanding your point. Because you did say that the DM does not control the pacing.

Weren't there random monster tables for the wilderness around the Keep on the Borderlands which is the actual "sandbox adventure"... or are you equating a sandbox adventure with a single dungeon that's only a piece of it? But ok, just looking at the single dungeon... every room is keyed and yet there is no guarantee that the PC's will face a particular monster in a particular room or at a particular time (where and when).

I've never heard anyone distinguish parts of KotB as being sandbox and other parts not. I have heard it described as a sandbox adventure. And, while, yes, I believe there are random encounter tables for outside the Caves (and inside as well), there are ALSO a number of keyed encounters around - the mad hermit, the lizardmen, The Cave of the Unknown.

How often he rolls on the random encounters still doesn't guarantee a specific pace, so he's not setting anything... If anything he can influence when and how often encounters occur but they will still be subject to randomness. If he's tailoring encounters however, yes then he is setting the pace.

Specific pace =/= setting a pace. If I roll 1 check every 8 hours, I will get a VERY different pace than if I roll 1 check every 10 minutes. Yes, it's random, but, the DM is STILL setting the pace.

I think the characters have as much or as little control over pacing as the actions they choose allows. You're assuming that most of the time PC's are flying blind... when in fact this is again a function of the PC's chosen course of action. Exploring the setting =/= flying blind... not sure what sandboxes you've played in but that's just false. Research, information gathering, etc. are part of that exploration if PC's choose to make it so.

[/quote]

Most of the time you are flying blind in a dungeon. After all, other than, "There are orcs in that there cave", you're unlikely to have a whole lot more information. When faced with a T intersection, left is usually as good as right. Granted, there are ways to make this not true, but, broadly, the players have little specific information to go on.

And, if encounters are all randomly generated, what information could they possibly be working with? After all, there's nothing to tell them when or where they might meet something, other than, I suppose, there's bad things in that forest - you might know roughly what to expect. But, you have very little control over when.

Thus, very little control over pacing.

Isn't it funny though. When people talk about the 15 minute adventuring day, it's up to the DM to make sure that they cannot rest whenever they want to. But, in a sandbox campaign, players have total control over pacing. Which is it? If I have total control over pacing as a player, then I should be able to rest whenever I want to.

 

[Imaro]

Then I'm not really understanding your point. Because you did say that the DM does not control the pacing.

How does... "not control pacing" equate to every encounter being randomly determined? Again a DM can place an encounter wherever he wants in a sandbox but when and where it is encountered is determined by either randomness or character action. Does that clarify my point better?

I've never heard anyone distinguish parts of KotB as being sandbox and other parts not. I have heard it described as a sandbox adventure. And, while, yes, I believe there are random encounter tables for outside the Caves (and inside as well), there are ALSO a number of keyed encounters around - the mad hermit, the lizardmen, The Cave of the Unknown.

My issue was with you specifically referencing the dungeon but not the rest of the adventure... like the town where rumors and information can be gathered. Keyed encounter doesn not equate to eternally static encounters. Thus PC's can determine the pace... randomness can determine the pace... unless the DM forgoes both of these in his "sandbox" he won't determine it.

Specific pace =/= setting a pace. If I roll 1 check every 8 hours, I will get a VERY different pace than if I roll 1 check every 10 minutes. Yes, it's random, but, the DM is STILL setting the pace.

The DM is not setting the pace. As an example, there is a (very small but still possible) probability that over a particualr period of time those random rolls can produce the same number of encounters.

You are claiming the DM is somehow setting the pace... even though he can't know what it is because it's random...Huh??

Most of the time you are flying blind in a dungeon. After all, other than, "There are orcs in that there cave", you're unlikely to have a whole lot more information. When faced with a T intersection, left is usually as good as right. Granted, there are ways to make this not true, but, broadly, the players have little specific information to go on.

Not if you have your rogue scout ahead at the T intersection and report back... which I'm sorry is something, IME, that is done regularly by players. You're admitting there are ways for the players to make your assumptions untrue... yet you're arguing it can't be done... I'm confused, which is it?

And, if encounters are all randomly generated, what information could they possibly be working with? After all, there's nothing to tell them when or where they might meet something, other than, I suppose, there's bad things in that forest - you might know roughly what to expect. But, you have very little control over when.

Thus, very little control over pacing.

First, no one is claiming to make all encounters random... but keep the hyperbole going...

Second, did you forget or are you just ignoring the part where I included randomness (along with character choices) as one of the factors setting up pacing in a sandbox? what you don't get in random encounters is the DM having control over pacing.

Isn't it funny though. When people talk about the 15 minute adventuring day, it's up to the DM to make sure that they cannot rest whenever they want to. But, in a sandbox campaign, players have total control over pacing. Which is it? If I have total control over pacing as a player, then I should be able to rest whenever I want to.

No, what's funny is that one of the major solutions to this problem is to add randomness (wandering monsters) into the mix (which again you keep acting like I didn't mention randomness as a factor in my previous post.) and minimize static encounters (you know by having monsters react to character actions and choices)...

 

[Hussar]

The DM is not setting the pace. As an example, there is a (very small but still possible) probability that over a particualr period of time those random rolls can produce the same number of encounters.

You are claiming the DM is somehow setting the pace... even though he can't know what it is because it's random...Huh??

Yes, I am certainly claiming this. If random encounters are checked once ever X time period, then random encounters will not happen any faster than that. And, over the long term, it will balance out to a fairly predictable pace. You might have dry periods and bunches, sure, but, that's still controlled by the DM - after all, he's the one who sets the check periods.

No, what's funny is that one of the major solutions to this problem is to add randomness (wandering monsters) into the mix (which again you keep acting like I didn't mention randomness as a factor in my previous post.) and minimize static encounters (you know by having monsters react to character actions and choices)...

Yup, it's fixed by the DM setting the pace. HE'S having the monsters react in a specific way to take pacing control away from the players. HE'S setting the wandering monster check rate to take pacing control away from the players.

Or, to put it another way, how can players control the rate of wandering monsters? If pacing is controlled by the players, shouldn't they be the ones determining when monsters are encountered?

 

[Imaro]

Yes, I am certainly claiming this. If random encounters are checked once ever X time period, then random encounters will not happen any faster than that. And, over the long term, it will balance out to a fairly predictable pace. You might have dry periods and bunches, sure, but, that's still controlled by the DM - after all, he's the one who sets the check periods.

We must have very different definitions of control then. In your example above, the DM isn't controlling anything. He's certainly influencing it, but in rolling randomly (again one of the factors I cited in my original post that determined pacing in a sandbox) he's given up control of the pacing and is relying on randomness. You can argue it as pendantically as you want, but unless the DM can steadily and reliably predict the rate at which PC's will have an encounter he isn't controlling anything. This is akin to saying a player can control the pacing of a battle because they get a +2 to the roll of a 20 sided die to hit... that doesn't make any sense, they are influencing their chances of attaining a hit but... it's a randomizer for a reason. Those bunches and dry periods you are disregarding are exactly the reason the DM isn't controlling pace.

Yup, it's fixed by the DM setting the pace. HE'S having the monsters react in a specific way to take pacing control away from the players. HE'S setting the wandering monster check rate to take pacing control away from the players.

No, the monsters are reacting to the actions of the players, it is the players and their characters that are setting the pace by being the catalyst that forces the DM to change the when and where.

If I lure a monster into another room where we have an overwhelming advantage how are the PC's not creating the pacing for encounters? If we scout ahead, see a monster that is too powerful for us in our current state... so we find a place to rest and recover before facing it... again we have set the pace... What it sounds like you're describing is a railroad... where a DM intentionally has monsters act in a particular way to make sure encounters are had at a specific time and place irregardless of player choices and character actions. IMO, that's not a sandbox... it's an adventure path, or in an extreme case a railroad.

Or, to put it another way, how can players control the rate of wandering monsters? If pacing is controlled by the players, shouldn't they be the ones determining when monsters are encountered?

Dude, randomness... I've stated it since the first post. The PC's choices and/or randomness is the formula... you keep purposefully ignoring the randomness part of the sandbox equation. So no, PC's shouldn't always be determining when and where monsters are encountered (that would definitely lead to a 15 minute adventure day)... but neither is the DM determining it either.

 

[Imaro]

Well on the one hand

#1 If you dont like the way the game plays, play something else or houserule it BUT....

#2 The motto/tag line is "Play The Game You Want To Play" which would support having at least 2 versions....albeit you cant literally have a game that can do everything with zero houseruling of RAW.

I stated earlier I had no problem with there being multiple versions of SoD monsters. What I do have a problem with is those that want original SoD totally removed from the game because they don't like it... even if they don't have to use the particular monsters.