Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Janx" data-source="post: 5727028" data-attributes="member: 8835">To which I might run that as the NPC took 20 to plan the route weeks in advance.  He's 3 levels higher than the PCs and has a high whatever attrb applies so he gets + 4.  And he max ranks it.  So he gets Level + 3  +4 +20 as his skill check.Truth be told, I won't even think of these details (well, now that this thread came up, maybe...).  But when the PCs say, "I know this city pretty well, chances are I know a shortcut to Point B".So, with that silly math in place, I can determine the answer when the PCs try.  Since the PCs are lower level, the best they can probably 3 points less than the NPC (because he is 3 levels higher).it should also be noted, in order to give my NPC the ability to know the city so well, I would have had to spend skill point on those skills, instead of other skills.  Technically, that's the trade-off price my NPC has to pay to get "best routing" ability.Going back to Imaro's other points, about the pit trap, and sandtraps, etc.Obviously, I think resolving the route determination is different than the GM deciding if there's a pit in the room.  Umbran had some good points about the difference.  The route is an event and idea.  The pit is a concrete attribute of the room.I think that the actuality of the route is always held in an abstract state in the GM's mind, whereas the pit trap is right there on the map.  It's a fuzzy thing.Now Imaro mentioned something about sandboxes and not changing the notes on what's written down.  That might shape thinking as one is reluctant to change what is written down.I actually consider writing certain things down to be a railroading risk.  The worse being, "The NPC captures the party at Location A and brings them to Location B"  This may cause the GM to reject any valid reasons the capture should fail, in order to force sticking to the notes.As such, I advise documenting places (the maps, etc) and NPCs (monsters, stat blocks, inventory, dispositions and goals).From there, as GM, I am free to move the NPCs around because they are mobile entities pursuing their own goals and intersecting with the PCs as it makes sense.If I was planning a murder mystery, I may have to plan some past events (the villain murdered the mayor) and some future events (the villain will try to murder a 2nd victim the next night).  But I try to not write anything as absolute, and if I do, I try to remember that I really meant "the NPC will TRY to do that."Because all sorts of things could happen before that event to change what's really going to happen.Take Shaman's map.  Going from the south side to the north side, has 3 bridges as valid routes.  If the PCs through some goofiness blow up 2 of the bridges, the NPCs planned route MAY be foiled.  All sorts of things would have to be reconsidered about what the NPC knows (did his route involve a blown up bridge, does he know, is his new route actually good and still beat the PCs).I don't know what an exploration sandbox GM does.  Since most of his notes may be locational (the dungeon map is this, and an Orc is in Room 1A), then he may not need to change anything.  Unless he rules that the monsters in rooms 2-3 hear the ruckus in Room 1A and prepare to defend the corridor form intruders.</blockquote>

Verification