D&D General No Fixed Location -- dynamically rearranging items, monsters, and other game elements in the interests of storytelling

[Don Durito]

I wonder why procedurally generated random content is generally fine but GMs moving things is more verboten.

Like the classic Quantum ogre example. The party goes left the GM has them meet an ogre, the party goes right they meet an ogre (this is a dumb example for the reason I stated earlier, any real added context immediately changes the situation).

However if the party goes left, GM rolls random encounter - an ogre...or party goes right, GM rolls random encounter - an ogre...that's alright?

Party travel to town A on a hex map. GM rolls random event "Orcs attack." Party travel to town B...you get the point.

 

[Imaculata]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the DM moving things into the path of the players without them knowing. As long as something hasn't been established yet in the fiction, the players will notice no difference. Take for example these examples:

Example 1: The players are in a dungeon and they can turn either left or right. Whatever choice they make, they encounter an ogre.

In this example the DM forces an ogre encounter on the players, but the players are unaware that their choice made no difference in regards to the ogre. However, their decision still affects where they go in the dungeon. I'm not a fan of this, because you're possibly taking away the option to not encounter the ogre. I like there to be an option to the players to avoid combat in some cases if they choose to.

Example 2: Whatever choice the players make, they encounter a library.

In this example I think the DM is robbing himself of the excitement of seeing where the players will go next. Once again, it does not affect the players. Personally I prefer fixed locations in a dungeon. This is also why I dislike it when a DM randomly rolls rooms for his dungeon. I prefer to have a sense of design coherence.

Example 3: Whatever room the players choose to search, they find an old key.

I've made use of this technique occasionally, by simply placing an item that was optional to their quest, in whatever room the players searched in. It was a simple way to make the loot more interesting. I wouldn't do it for everything, and certainly not for important items that matter to the plot. Note however that if you are running some kind of detective campaign, it can be an easy technique to get the players back on track when they are a bit lost. You just have them find a clue wherever they happen to be that gets them back on track.

Example 4: The players are exploring, the DM rolls for a random encounter. The players go north and there's a wizards tower there. Once established, this thing is now forever in this location.

I've done this numerous times during exploration. The players are in an uncharted region and choose a direction to travel in. They make a navigation check (which determines if they actually go where they intend), and then whatever encounter I rolled is there and stays there. This could be a creature or a location.

 

[HarbingerX]

We're really just arguing over styles of play. I like to have a setting in which stuff happens over time, initially regardless of what the players are doing. The setting NPCs and monsters will react to their actions as the PCs become involved. I also have randomly generated encounters because it's a waste of time to track where every possible actor is at a given time. So if they're in a particular woods on their way to a logger's camp about a murder, there's a 15% chance of meeting an Orc patrol. But if they go into the canyon over in the hills to investigate reports of a monster attacking miners, they'll stumble upon an orc encampment preparing for the attack. If they don't find the encampment or the patrol, they won't even know orcs are around until the attack. And that's ok if they miss it by going to a different town. They'll hear about it as refugees make it to other town and then decide what to do.

The story approach would say that I want the players to find the orc encampment and I will either steer the adventurers so they get wind of the orcs and an NPC guides them where to find it, or I will simply drop it in their path whichever way they decide to go.

Neither approach is invalid. The first is what I prefer, as I find it more fun as a DM to not know how things will evolve - players can make bad choices they don't even know about. The second doesn't interest me as I'd feel like I'm just leading the players around. I also think neither is 'non-fun', there are still plenty of opportunities for players to enjoy themselves in both styles.

 

[HarbingerX]

Example 1: The players are in a dungeon and they can turn either left or right. Whatever choice they make, they encounter an ogre.

In this example the DM forces an ogre encounter on the players, but the players are unaware that their choice made no difference in regards to the ogre. However, their decision still affects where they go in the dungeon. I'm not a fan of this, because you're possibly taking away the option to not encounter the ogre. I like there to be an option to the players to avoid combat in some cases if they choose to.

This. For example in LMoP, there are 3 ways to get to the magic forge in Wave Echo Cave, each have different difficulty in the game and the PCs have no way of knowing which which one to choose for an easier entry.

The same applies to a non-dungeon setting. Players have choice and those choices should matter even if they don't know the possible outcomes of those choices.

Unless you're playing a story mode of play where events will find the PCs no matter what their choices in order to move a DM chosen plot development forward with the PCs. Not invalid, just a different style of play.

 

[NotAYakk]

This. For example in LMoP, there are 3 ways to get to the magic forge in Wave Echo Cave, each have different difficulty in the game and the PCs have no way of knowing which which one to choose for an easier entry.

There are no divination spells? No familiar scouting? No knowledge checks? No forcing a captive monster to scout? No summoning spell scouting? No invisibility?

Maybe this is true. And there is no way to do it. But the concrete reality existing and not being a quantum ogre actually means that there can be ways for players to tease out information.

It is the old "we found the secret door by mapping" thing. You can play D&D where the rooms are only in the "theater of the mind" and don't connect to each other in any reasonable way. Or you can play it where architecture makes sense and people don't generally build huge strange-shaped gaps in their construction, and notice that when you explore the area that there is probably something there.

There was no way to find the secret room. But there was.

This doesn't remove the responsibility for a DM to provide further clues, but the solidity of the world itself both provides a way to ground those clues and provides additional clues themselves.

 

[FrogReaver]

Everytime they pick an inn to stay for the night (usually based on the coolest name) which you have no intention of having anything interesting happen in no matter which one they pick.

Not consequential. Nothing happens in response to them staying at the inn.

 

[FrogReaver]

Which is just another word for a meaningful choice where the meaning(s) don't become apparent until after the fact, that at the time might look to be random and-or meaningless.

No. A meaningful choice is a choice where the players have information on which to base a choice so that they are actively choosing how to impact the consequences.

 

[HarbingerX]

There are no divination spells? No familiar scouting? No knowledge checks? No forcing a captive monster to scout? No summoning spell scouting? No invisibility?

Well of course, but that's up to the players. In this particular scenario I doubt they would even be able to figure out there are multiple ways in.

And I agree that there should be a way for the players to find out about the Orc attack, but there is always the potential they will simply not take a particular path that even leads them to those clues. And that's ok with me.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well of course, but that's up to the players. In this particular scenario I doubt they would even be able to figure out there are multiple ways in.

And I agree that there should be a way for the players to find out about the Orc attack, but there is always the potential they will simply not take a particular path that even leads them to those clues. And that's ok with me.

There is no clue that the orcs are going to attack town A unless you give it to the players.

 

[HarbingerX]

No. A meaningful choice is a choice where the players have information on which to base a choice so that they are actively choosing how to impact the consequences.

Yeah, I get your definition of meaningful choice. Players will have plenty of those too. Choices they make will have consequence without their knowledge as well, then they will become aware of those consequences and have a 'meaningful choice'.