Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 3758780" data-attributes="member: 32740">Without having read other responses in the thread yet...If you read the DMG again (for the first time? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />) you'll find that encounters really ARE supposed to work that way.  To an extent it's accurate in that the party's level is used as a gauge for what to throw at them, but the encounters themselves are supposed to vary between very easy, and NEAR TPK's.  Encounters are supposed to be DESIGNED to fit the DM's needs at a given point.  Some easy, some deadly.  On top of which I think there is also the suggestion that there SHOULD be things in the campaign world that the party might be aware of and encounter in some way, but that they CANNOT defeat.  This gives the campaign setting a feeling of NOT being tailored specifically to the PC's but that the world they move through has content that is independant of the PC's - even though the encounters DO use the party level as a design centerpoint.No, but you DID miss a fairly important little nuance.  You designed the ADVENTURE, but not the individual encounters in such a way as to avoid what happened - the party charging in and then being in way above their heads but unable to realize or understand their danger in a timely manner.In an ADVENTURE that is being designed to be completed by sneaking and stealth you MUST design initial encounters that will ensure that the PC's understand the dangers of open confrontation and that stealth is the preferred option.  Just because the druid HAPPENS to grab a rabbit to use as a scout doesn't count.  What would have happened if he HADN'T?  YOU need to communicate the necesary information to the party rather than the party being so tediously thorough as to eliminate possible disasters FOR you, if you see what I mean.You establish for the party the problem - BBEG making bigger evil guys out of lesser evil guys - with friends and family as unwilling victims as well.  You lead them to the location where this will take place.  Good so far.  If, however, the rest of the adventure is to require them to be sneaky you MUST design the next encounter/set of encounters to communicate clearly to the party that they MUST be sneaky.  You can't just leave it to them to MAYBE figure that out for themselves.Any DM can kill the PC's without thinking (often that IS the reason - they weren't thinking) so you have to arrange events to make it their choice between direct assault/certain death, or stealth/likely success.  That means that they have to become aware that those ARE the choices in the first place.For example, the PC's come upon a cave in the wilderness.  They enter and are all killed in 2 rounds by the Great Dragon Carexhaust.  You can't then tell them, "Well you should have known better that Carexhaust lived here," if you haven't ever given them reason to know that, let them TRY to know that, or just provided that bit of trivia anyway.  You have to have made the PC's aware of the legendary dragon and where his lair was, or given clues as they approached the cave that what was inside or in the area was DANGEROUS.  PC's should NEVER, EVER walk into certain death unless it is by their own stupid choices - generally a choice to IGNORE all the danger signs and warnings that you give them.The DM always wins by default.  For the PC's to succeed he has to CONSTANTLY provide them the knowledge and the opportunities they will need to do so.  PC's survive and succeed because you let them.  They have to work for it, but you make it much more difficult for them when they work in the dark.You're funny looking.  Monkees can be trained to be better DM's than you.  Don't ever do this again or I'll burn your DM screen.</blockquote>

Verification