Has the Wandering Monster concept died?

[Richards]

Maybe the Wandering Monster concept hasn't died so much as...simply wandered away.

Johnathan

 

[Ourph]

I use Wandering Monsters in my 4e games, but I also 1) give XP for treasure rather than for killing monsters; and 2) run a sandbox megadungeon-style campaign. Wandering Monsters are still very useful if you're running the kind of game that they were designed to complement.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Lan-"skip the monsters and just go straight to wandering damage"-efan

I gotta spread some around.

Thanks for reminding me of the old random damage tables from Dragon.

"Something invisible chews on your character for 6-36 points of damage."

 

[WanderingMonster]

The work hasn't exactly been steady. I pick up about 15 hours/week at the local Arby's to make ends meet.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The work hasn't exactly been steady. I pick up about 15 hours/week at the local Arby's to make ends meet.

Hey, it's a wandering monster- GET 'IM!!!

 

[FireLance]

The work hasn't exactly been steady.

Look, I'm positive that we explained the whole "1 in 6 chance of appearing" clause when you signed up for this gig.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The reason I am asking is I am running SHADOWDALE, and my party is currently camped on a ledge (they completed the first third of a dungeon and found a way down further). The next session leads to a temple of Shar, so I was considering whether or not some priests would bump into them during their rest on the way towards or from the temple.

They will have lots of priests to fight so I am deciding from the following:

1) no event
2) group of worshippers not included in the module going to the temple
3) group of worshipers FROM the temple (and hence included in the module) leaving.

Such an encounter would be a great "footprint" for the area about to be explored, and could give intelligent players the means to glean some information about the area before entering it, allowing them to plan better. It might be equally possible for the PCs to avoid the encounter, in which case there is good foreshadowing (and remember to quarter the worshippers somewhere within).

I would say, "Go for it!"


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

I gotta spread some around.

Thanks for reminding me of the old random damage tables from Dragon.

"Something invisible chews on your character for 6-36 points of damage."

"Cut yourself shaving; roll on the Limbs Severed chart."

Way back in the early 80's, when I was in high school, one of my players asked me "Why don't you ever use wandering monsters?"

I had to ask, "What do you think you were just fighting?" (It was a giant toad.)

The player evinced surprise; I never made it easy to tell. Wandering monsters were given as much "treatment" when they appeared as placed encounters were. As far as they could tell, the six bugbears wandering down the hall were supposed to be there.

It gave me a kind of warm, glowy feeling to hear.


RC

 

[Stoat]

In my current 4E game, I use wandering monsters and random "events."

"Events" are deliberately vague, things like "Make a DC: X endurance check or lose a healing surge." "Attack +X v. Fort or take a -2 to hit until you complete an extended rest." The idea is that when these events come up, I improvise something appropriate to the situation (the PC steps on a poisonous snake, or upsets a wasp nest or whatever).

 

[NewJeffCT]

I pretty much only use em to spice up a session especially after extended non-combat stuff.

And even then they aren't random. I keep a monster or two of the appropriate level/climate handy in case.

Wandering to me means "a monster with no real connection to any plot."

That is generally how I've used them as well - I try to keep a few monsters handy that are appropriate for the players' level and the region in the game (i.e., aquatic if they're going on a river, swampy if they're going through a swamp, and, of course, the omnipresent brigands/bandits/raiders/pirates/highwaymen)

and, I agree 100% - wandering means it is not connected to the overall plot