Do you "save" the PCs?

[Hussar]

Which game is that? 3e which specifically calls out the idea of tailored campaigns as a valid way of playing? Or perhaps 1e where you had modules that specifically called out level ranges as being appropriate?

But, sure, scaling only occurs in games you don't personally like.

As far as

I never said it was any "one true way."

how exactly is:

The dm should never tailor encounters to a party's strength. wrong, /snip

either way it's better than tailor made encounters prepared by a mathematical formula. Boring.

not a direct slam on any playstyle that doesn't follow your own? Unless these are new meanings to the words "never" and "boring" that I was previously unaware of.

Of course, also conflating occasionally fudging a die roll to save a PC with staying "first level and fight goblins forever if the entire world levels up with them" is most certainly not any sort of onetruewayism either.

 

[Ariosto]

Thanks, Aus_Snow! Maybe if I hunt, I'll find such "a word" in RQ as well.

I thought I recalled a section on "Establishing the Character", but somehow my eye missed it. (The heading's at the bottom of the first column, so the text at the top right might look like more on Hit Points -- but I'm surprised it slipped by me in the Table of Contents.) The "next of kin" bit comes from an actual rule in the Original set.

Yeah, even that mention in passing of "details as to your history" seems pretty weak gruel next to the emphasis some people put on it. (None of the rest really rises to the level I mean.) The way it's presented in, for instance, the 4e PHB, is not to that extreme, but it is a lot more prominent! I found it right off the bat -- partly because it takes up several pages labeled "Roleplaying".

Anyhow, what I was trying to get at in that rambling is that some folks have no problem playing a character from a very rough sketch, and very heartily for all that it is "on stage" for but an evening rather than for several years. It's just that it might not be worth writing up a novella's worth of deep background for a short story.

The longer a player's in-game exploits with a character last, the more occasions are likely to arise in which "adventure hooks" or other circumstances bring to light relationships and events that had not previously been established.

On the other hand, there are those who don't find the enterprise worth their while without not just a back story but a projected plot line. They tend in my experience to dislike not only high mortality -- which could leave such labors lost -- but also "rolling up" characters. A "build" system that facilitates game-mechanical planning in parallel with the story design is usually more their speed.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Maybe if I hunt, I'll find such "a word" in RQ as well.

Heh. Probably, for what it's worth. If so, I expect it would be just as cursory a treatment of the matter. As you say, more or less, in fact.

Create, personify, establish. It's an interesting suggestion.* Because, indeed, that's all it is. Creation is the meat of it, the other two merely possibilities for those so inclined.

On the other hand, there are those who don't find the enterprise worth their while without not just a back story but a projected plot line. They tend in my experience to dislike not only high mortality -- which could leave such labors lost -- but also "rolling up" characters. A "build" system that facilitates game-mechanical planning in parallel with the story design is usually more their speed.

Hm. Establish, personify, create?

Food for thought. . .


* And one I can see playing out in early editions of D&D, throughout the progression of levels. That is, during extended play. And again, as you say. . . Being 'established' could be seen as the final destination of the journey, if there must be one.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Which game is that? 3e which specifically calls out the idea of tailored campaigns as a valid way of playing? Or perhaps 1e where you had modules that specifically called out level ranges as being appropriate?

Modules are meant to be placed in the campaign world. 1e actually had guidelines on where to place the adventure locale. Thus, the players decide whether or not to go there, and when. The level ranges were suggested, nothing kept first level characters from taking on the Tomb of Horrors if they so wished.



And I maintain it's not a slam on anyone's playstyle, it's just a divergence from how the game is supposed to be played. Use Free Parking however you want, use a football in your baseball games, if you have fun with it, there's nothing wrong with that. But it's a divergence from the basic mechanics of the game and changes the game immensely from how it was intended.

And my boring comment was a personal observation. I thought that was implied in the syntax. What is boring for some might be quite entertaining for others. Do I really have to put "imo" in front of every subjective comment?

 

[talarei07]

kill them all. i had a near tpk a few months ago the last character alive left the rest of the party bleeding on the floor to die

 

[Doug McCrae]

When you roll up your next character, try investing more in him
than just the six die rolls. Try to create a colorful background for him.
Give him a purpose and reason for being where and what he is. Could it
be that he is a rich bastard, always getting his way due to position and
wealth and expects to do so now? Or was he a serf that rose up and
killed one of his Lord’s men and is now an adventurer/outlaw? How
would your character react to authority, what does he want in life?
Does he have a drinking problem? Does he chase women? Is he brave?
Greedy? Tricky? Just what does he want from adventuring? By investing
a few minutes into developing your character, you can extend the
game down hundreds of new avenues.

Dragon #11, Dec 1977

The Play's the Thing... by Thomas Filmore

 

[Doug McCrae]

Now and then a player will die through no fault of his own. He or she will
have done everything correctly, taken every reasonable precaution, but
still the freakish roll of the dice will kill the character. In the long run you
should let such things pass as the players will kill more than one opponent
with their own freakish rolls at some later time. Yet you do have the right
to arbitrate the situation. You can rule that the player, instead of dying, is
knocked unconscious, loses a limb, is blinded in one eye or invoke any
reasonably severe penalty that still takes into account what the monster
has done. It is very demoralizing to the players to lose a cared-for-player
character when they have played well.

Dungeon Masters Guide 1e, pg 110

 

[Aus_Snow]

Ariosto had already mentioned 'The Play's the Thing' a few posts back.

That other find though -- very interesting! Not at all my cuppa, but then, the reason I personally adhere to the 'let the dice fall where they may' school of play is not that I believe it to be 'old skool', but simply because I (and the gamers I spend time with) prefer it.*

I could see some people struggling to find a comeback of some kind, on the other hand.


* And, I'll have to check earlier editions to see if they contained any remotely similar suggestions/advice/guidelines, just out of curiosity. Hm. . .

 

[Doug McCrae]

Modules are meant to be placed in the campaign world. 1e actually had guidelines on where to place the adventure locale. Thus, the players decide whether or not to go there, and when. The level ranges were suggested, nothing kept first level characters from taking on the Tomb of Horrors if they so wished.

There is, it will be far from the 'starting zone'.

The general idea is to develop a dungeon of multiple levels, and the
deeper adventurers go, the more difficult the challenges become -
fiercer monsters, more deadly traps, more confusing mazes, and so forth.
This same concept applies to areas outdoors as well, with more and
terrible monsters occurring more frequently the further one goes away
from civilization.

DMG pg 87

I never said it was any "one true way." It's how the game was designed, though. By all means, nerf everything to the character's abilities. I don't see the point in every fight being fair or tailored to the character's particular abilities. They may as well stay first level and fight goblins forever if the entire world levels up with them.

But by all means, go right ahead and tailor the world to the pcs if that floats your boat. It certainly isn't "wrong." It's just different from how the game was designed.

While Gary does recommend giving PCs the freedom to wander, within a dungeon, there are provisions made for making it much more likely that they will encounter an appropriate challenge - difficulty increasing with depth, as mentioned above. And he definitely does recommend tailoring the encounters (it might be more appropriate to say the area) to the party.

The testing grounds for novice adventurers must be kept to a difficulty factor which encourages rather than discourages players. If things are too easy, then there is no challenge, and boredom sets in after one or two games. Conversely, impossible difficulty and character deaths cause instant loss of interest. Entrance to and movement through the dungeon level should be relatively easy, with a few tricks, traps, and puzzles to make it interesting in itself. Features such as rooms and chambers must be described with verve and sufficiently detailed in content to make each seem as if it were strange and mysterious. Creatures inhabiting the place must be of strength and in numbers not excessive compared to the adventurers' wherewithal to deal with them.

DMG pg 87

 

[ExploderWizard]

There is, it will be far from the 'starting zone'.

DMG pg 87

While Gary does recommend giving PCs the freedom to wander, within a dungeon, there are provisions made for making it much more likely that they will encounter an appropriate challenge - difficulty increasing with depth, as mentioned above. And he definitely does recommend tailoring the encounters (it might be more appropriate to say the area) to the party.

DMG pg 87

Good stuff and solid advice. There is an important difference between there being only level appropriate areas to explore and a diverse environment with multiple challenge levels including ones that the PC's can handle without excessive losses. The former situation feels artificial while the latter permits the players to make meaningful choices with regard to risk vs. reward.