D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Thomas Shey]

Even in D&D terms, I don’t think I’ve come across anyone who has said they « encountered » a town.

I've seen people who would have been perfectly capable of describing finding a set of ruins as "an encounter" though.

 

[hawkeyefan]

And the same goes for you. You refuse to accept I view it differently than you, yet you’re insisting I change. Why can’t you agree to disagree?

No, I said I accept and understand your usage. All I have asked is that you accept it doesn't apply to all games or all RPGers.

Nothing more needs to be said at this point.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, I said I accept and understand your usage. All I have asked is that you accept it doesn't apply to all games or all RPGers.

Nothing more needs to be said at this point.

Since you're talking about completely different types of games, doesn't that mean there's no point in your POV to discuss encounters (or anything that doesn't equally apply to all RPGs) at all?

 

[Umbran]

What milestone levelling really devalues is individual character bravery and risk-taking. It doesn't matter what you do or how many risks you take (or conversely, what you don't do or how many risks you stand back and let others take), you're all gonna level up at the same time.

Which means there's no incentive whatsoever to stick your neck out and (try to) be The Hero, and every incentive to sit back and let others take the risks....which really sucks if those risks carry serious potential consequences e.g. PC death.

Incentives are subjective.

If you enter into a game with the notion that the only incentive is individual power achievement, then yeah, I guess what you say follows*.

That notion would not apply to most of the groups I have run games for or played with recently. Most of them have been suitably incentivized to engage with the content for sake of doing cool stuff in a fiction, with advancement being a distant factor not on our minds in most sessions of play.

Heck, the campaign I've had the most fun with in the past few years has been a Fate Accelerated game with no character advancement to speak of! In that game, we stick our necks out because it is fun to do so, and often earns us Fate points, which we can spend to survive sticking out necks out.




*if XP directly comes from taking risks - if you are doing XP for gold, or similar, you may actually incentivize being crafty over taking risks.

 

[Maxperson]

Even in D&D terms, I don’t think I’ve come across anyone who has said they « encountered » a town.

You misunderstand me. It's what d&d would term an encounter, not how d&d players would describe it in normal speech

Since 3e encounter in d&d has widened quite a bit with its meaning.

 

[Umbran]

Since 3e encounter in d&d has widened quite a bit with its meaning.

It has, but even since 3, an entire town would likely contain several (at least possible) encounters. It'd need to be a pretty sleepy town, with not a whole lot going on, to be only one encounter in game terms.

 

[clearstream]

Unlike some other systems in D&D for most DMs potential combat encounters are not made up on the fly. Whether they happen may be random or based on some trigger which means they may not be established in the shared fiction of the game. But they are established in my notes as DM. If it's not a random encounter but triggered by location or a specific event or series of events the group can avoid that encounter, they can bypass it. The players don't have to know there may have been a combat even if there is some interaction, it doesn't have to be signaled in any way.

The only controversy here is that some people have an issue with common English or that encounter has a more detailed definition in the DMG than in the dictionary. It's one of the more pointless arguments I've seen.

To me some posters are raising a reasonable concern about an acute category of GM or game designer prep being given standing in the fiction prior to becoming known to players, which is when the prepared element seems like one that couldn't be needed unless players are to act in a certain way. Which seems to make assumptions about or override their agency.

Redundantly preparing a wide range of such elements could feel dissatisfying as surely it's impossible to anticipate every unfolding line of play. Although techniques such as signalling possible encounters in response to player actions, and finalising game details of prepared encounters based on actual play, can mitigate that. (And likely only encounters engaging detailed minigames benefit much from being prepared: others may be extrapolated from divers prepared setting elements that themselves are not encounters.)

The semantic debate seems as @Umbran points out, somewhat constructed. But I think there are interesting questions aside from that.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Since you're talking about completely different types of games, doesn't that mean there's no point in your POV to discuss encounters (or anything that doesn't equally apply to all RPGs) at all?

I'd appreciate it more if you just came right out and told me to shut up, Micah.

 

[zakael19]

Plus, one thing that leaps out at me when reading the accounts of mountaineers and cavers is not just the technical elements of their craft, but the stories of the people they interact with. Many mock this as unnecessary drama, but to me, it makes everything they write about more human and relatable. For a tabletop roleplaying campaign, it is an invaluable resource for elevating something that would otherwise come across as a dry and technical series of procedures into a deeply engaging experience

Are you drawing a comparison in your head here between your play and like old school dungeon crawling or something? Every single game of D&D 5e I’ve played and run has rotated around interactions in character with NPCs, with that being most of the player’s favorite moments apart from high beats like an “epic combat” or unexpected problem solving.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Incentives are subjective.

If you enter into a game with the notion that the only incentive is individual power achievement, then yeah, I guess what you say follows*.

That notion would not apply to most of the groups I have run games for or played with recently. Most of them have been suitably incentivized to engage with the content for sake of doing cool stuff in a fiction, with advancement being a distant factor not on our minds in most sessions of play.

Heck, the campaign I've had the most fun with in the past few years has been a Fate Accelerated game with no character advancement to speak of! In that game, we stick our necks out because it is fun to do so, and often earns us Fate points, which we can spend to survive sticking out necks out.




*if XP directly comes from taking risks - if you are doing XP for gold, or similar, you may actually incentivize being crafty over taking risks.

I would instead argue that if you enter into a game believing that individual achievement is meaningless, the group advancement dynamic taken by WotC D&D and other games probably won't bother you, but if you instead think what you personally accomplish should contribute to your advancement, then it might. Your phrasing not only presents an unwarranted extreme, it demonstrates a negative judgement on those who think individual PC action should matter.

Also, I'm sure you know that FATE is not going to be an enjoyable game for everyone, so conclusions peculiar to its style and mechanics won't always apply.