Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 3195504" data-attributes="member: 8835">Here's an idea I've been pondering for some time. The recent "should DM's use Disjunction" kinda reinforces it. The "busywork" thread also ties into this.The thought is this, is it possible to devise a system of adventure building that limited the DM from building an adventure that was too powerful for the party.  I think there are a good number of "adventure" elements that could be codified into a system for creating fair adventures,  BOCTAOE.For instance, what if the DM was allowed 7 times party level worth of monster CRs.  And, further, no single encounter could have an EL greater than  party level + 3.Note: I made the numbers up, I'm not certain what a fair encounter should have (and some would argue, poorly rated monsters skew this idea).Perhaps there'd  be a series of plot elements that could be used, as well.Oddly enough, IF a codified adventure building scheme could be built, the value is that a program could be written to write fairly balanced adventures.  Maybe not as good as ones a skilled DM could craft, but one that most folks would find valuable (at least to use as starting points for writing their own).From a software perspective, tools exist (or can be written) to do the following:create a dungeon mappopulate a dungeon with monsters, traps, and treasuresdetail specific monsters (HP, treasure)roll up random treasurecreate NPCsequip NPCs (appropriate to level)create a town or city mapcreate NPCs for the entire townequipe all NPCs in the entire townroll traits for all NPCs in the entire townMost of the above is solveable when you write map generators, monster databases, treasure rollers, NPC generators, and equipment generators (randomly buy equipment for NPC).  It's just a matter of running those tools en masse, for an entire city or dungeon.  For a dungeon, that level of information is what the DM needed anyway, but on a city, it tends to be too much.  The DM doesn't need to know all that until the PCs actually go to specific places or events.That's where having a mechanics for building adventures come in.  Defining the limits on who shows up in an adventure, the kinds of encounters to have, and how they interact with the PCs could be a way to keep DM's in check.The negatives to this idea are sort of obvious.  Lack of freedom for GM's (DM Fiat arguments abound), encounters are always level appropriate (some DM's like the occasional "you're supposed to run away" encounter), Limited creativity for plots (if that were an aspect of this).Oddly enough, there's already precedent for this.  The CR and EL system exists as an implied "how to keep encounters scaled to the PCs" and the RPGA adventure writing guidelines detail tips on the types of encounters that should show up in an adventure.  I'm suggesting solidifying this into a process that a GM (or program) could go through to write a decent adventure.One other interesting side-effect of an idea like this, is IF the system were relatively stable, a DM who followed it, could play the game in a more "antagonistic" fashion.  Assuming his encounters were designed properly, he could go into the encounter with the intent to win, and let the dice fall where they may, without guilt.  I suspect most players or DM's who like to hide dice rolls partly do so for when encounters are miscalculated and are too strong.  A TPK because the DM screwed up sucks more than a TPK because the players did.  This idea might help prevent that.</blockquote>

Verification