D&D General Kobayashi Maru: Should the fate of the character always be in the player's hands? POLL

[Charlaquin]

I really don't want to derail the thread into trap talk, but that's not a plus seeing as engaging with traps in D&D is 'are you a rogue? Y/N' if N, get the rogue; this encounter isn't for you.

That’s not true at all. In 5e anyone can gain thieves tool proficiency through their background, and more importantly, anyone can engage with traps with or without thieves tools, simply by describing what their character does to try and avoid, disable, or otherwise interact with the trap. A relevant proficiency is a good insurance policy when actions with a risk of failure can’t be avoided though.

 

[Lanefan]

Am I the only one who isn't a fan of the whole 'pick your fights', 'run away a lot' stuff?

Possibly.

I like... actually engaging with the actual focus of the game rules and genre. I want to take part in action, not survival horror.

Survival horror is the action.

 

[Reynard]

Generally, the further into the dungeon/adventure, the less direct the telegraphing needs to be to feel fair. I’m usually very overt the first time I telegraph something, and then get subtler and subtler with repeat instances of that thing.

If the players ignore it, that’s on them. That’s kind of the point, ideally you want it to feel like they could have avoided it, if they had been paying closer attention. That’s how you create that classic Dark Souls feeling of “hard but fair.”

I think that’s a great way to start a dungeon, as it tells the players exactly what they can expect to find - dart traps, leg-cutting traps, and kobolds. But I wouldn’t consider that sufficient to telegraph any individual trap. To do that, I would first of all want to add some detail that indicates the presence of each kind of trap, that the players might be able to pick up on if they pay close attention. For example, maybe the leg scythe traps are triggered when you step through a doorway, but only doors with brass handles. Maybe there are frescoes throughout the dungeon, and there are only dart traps in rooms where the frescoes depict someone with a missile weapon. That’s good dungeon design.

The way I see it, after that initial warning it is up to the players to be looking out for bear traps, poison darts and signs of kobolds. That's not to say I would intentionally obfuscate details they should have but if the traps are hidden, it's incumbent on the players to look for them.

 

[Eric V]

Well, yeah, that would be what I consider unfair. I don’t do that.

I don't either, and yet, upon reading this...is it that bad? So it turns out the game's main plot is the retrieval of the artifact from the BBEG, a twist from the "uncover the lost artifact." Sets up a long-term bad guy that will be more satisfying to take down...I dunno. I might have stuck it out a bit longer.

Anyone play the first Assassin's Creed? Kinda reminds me of that.

 

[CleverNickName]

Am I the only one who isn't a fan of the whole 'pick your fights', 'run away a lot' stuff?

I like... actually engaging with the actual focus of the game rules and genre. I want to take part in action, not survival horror.

Probably? I've never seen a D&D game where success is guaranteed (or even expected), and where victory is a foregone conclusion. Not every battle needs to be a duel to the death, after all.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Probably? I've never seen a D&D game where success is guaranteed (or even expected), and where victory is a foregone conclusion. Not every battle needs to be a duel to the death, after all.

Not really what I'm talking about.

I mean when the monster is just there for your to run away from, not where the fight goes south and you have to retreat.

Think 'open' worlds where you get jumped by great wyrm red dragons and beholders at level 2 so the DM can laugh at your sadness.

 

[CleverNickName]

I mean when the monster is just there for your to run away from, not where the fight goes south and you have to retreat.

Think 'open' worlds where you get jumped by great wyrm red dragons and beholders at level 2 so the DM can laugh at your sadness.

I do the first one sometimes, whenever the story needs excitement: the monster isn't really an encounter, it never quite makes it into range and its attacks always seem to barely miss, etc. Unbeknownst to the players, it's just a piece of frightening scenery designed to move the party to a different area. I like to use it sparingly, like when the party is low on resources and need to rest, but they haven't made satisfying progress for the evening and haven't found a safe spot to camp. Scary monster appears, exciting chase scene, narrow escape, tense moment hiding in a cave while the "monster" tries to "find them" before moving on, and then the party rests in their hidey-hole for the night and we have a memorable place to end the gaming session/pick up next time.

Doesn't have to be a monster, either. I've used lava floes from an erupting volcano, an avalanche, and a raging hailstorm to move the party out of the Empty Field of Rocks That They Think Is Important For Some Reason, and on to the Actually Important Place.

But I don't think I've ever seen that second example in a D&D game, though. If you have, you should really have a talk with your DM. Because yuck.

 

[Reynard]

Not really what I'm talking about.

I mean when the monster is just there for your to run away from, not where the fight goes south and you have to retreat.

Think 'open' worlds where you get jumped by great wyrm red dragons and beholders at level 2 so the DM can laugh at your sadness.

Here's the thing: if a low level party is traveling and the random encounter roll indicates an ancient red dragon, all that means is that the party sees a red dragon and the red dragon sees the party. How does the red dragon feel about that? Well, we have a procedure for that. Can the party avoid the encounter? We have a procedure for that too. What happens? We have a DM for that.

The problem appears when folks assume "random encounter" automatically means a fight.sure, that's a random TPK waiting to happen. But that's not what the game presumes. Earlier editions had more specific procedures for it, but even 5e doesn't assume every random encounter means a battle.

I think many people view game elements through simplified, extreme viewpoints because they actually learned about those things by way of other media, video/computer RPGs in particular. A "random encounter" in Baldur's Gate or Fallout almost always meant a fight, but that's because that's all the algorithm could handle. D&D at the table was always aiming for more complex outcomes.

 

[Charlaquin]

Also, re: random encounters and open worlds... Use zoning! Have areas with generally lower-level monsters and areas with generally higher-level monsters and clearly telegraph which is which. That way players who want to avoid the high-level stuff can, and those who want to seek it out can. If you plan it well, you can even make higher level areas more difficult to reach for lower level characters through exploration obstacles. To get to the tomb of deadly fights and wondrous treasure you need to be able to get through the desert of resource attrition, which gets easier to do as you accumulate experience and treasure in the tutorial forest and learn spells that can make such mundane concerns more easily manageable.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Had to vote "Other" on this one (and I hate to do that).

I have pretty eclectic RPG tastes and can enjoy most styles if I know what it is ahead of time. Give me a game where the DM says your characters will probably all die; I'll take it as an enjoyable challenge to see if I can manage to survive (and if I fail, it's just the expected result). Give me a game where there is a metacurrency that can be spent to keep me alive, or a choice to suffer another negative fate instead, and I'll play like my character doesn't know that. The one thing I don't like that relates goes way beyond character fate to an overall style of play that would be too off-topic to discuss for this post.

In the case of D&D, I straight up assume resurrection magic is on the table. That changes everything. It is easy in a campaign intended to be long with players invested in their particular character for the DM to say that your character might die, but you will never lose them unless you choose. You might have to play a substitute while the party comes up with the means for getting them back, but you can get them back.