Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
last encounter was totally one-sided
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 6978181" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p>I agree with you. I think aligning the players' state as closely as possible with that of the characters is key. That creates immersion, which i think improves the game. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If showing a monster's stats is what works to achieve the desired result, then I'd say to do it. I don't know if that would work for my group...but I also don't know if Orcus is the best example. He immediately evokes some kind of response in players, most of the time at least. </p><p></p><p>But what about an unknown entity that is just being introduced? Sure, you could reveal his stats to make the players realize the threat he poses...but I also think that removes the mystery. I find it better to use the narrative element of the game to establish the threat level of an enemy. I want the players to be unsure in this case...so I keep them in the dark. </p><p></p><p>I think my main point about this is that I try to have enough variety in my encounters, and with my villains, that I don't want my players to ever assume that because it is an ogre they're facing, that it must be the one straight out of the MM and that they therefore know it's abilities. </p><p></p><p>Ultimately though, I think we agree on the goal...how it is best achieved is something that varies based on the situation, and of course on what works for the specific group in question. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well this mind shackles effect is a mechanical effect that the characters are experiencing, so I would not have a problem sharing the mechanical info. I seee this as quite different than sharing monster stats. </p><p></p><p>As for player choice, I don't want to take it away or have it be meaningless. Indeed, quite the opposite. When I put them in a situation where fighting will surely lead to their doom, I do my very best to make that clear to them. I provide at least two other options (at the very most basic, there is always "talk" or "run" at least) for them to choose in lieu of combat. </p><p></p><p>I have just found that because my games do tend to be combat heavy, the players sometimes just become conditioned to treat fighting as their first option. The knowledge that this is a game has seeped in, and this encounter is just another challenge to be defeated. So I put situations where they cannot win in a fight and have to deal with it another way. If they still choose to fight, then There are consequences of that choice...but I don't simply TPK them and move on. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Perhaps I should have made a distinction between game mechanics and stat blocks? I do think that the mechanics of the game should be considered. However, I feel like such mechanics should be applicable to the situation. Or should in some way be observable to the characters in order to justify the players' knowing of it. Like if the characters witness an orc sentry spot a fox from 100 yards away and nail it with an arrow, then my players can assume that he has a high perception score. That kind of thing. But it doesn't mean that I say "here's the orc sentey's stat block for your perusal."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 6978181, member: 6785785"] I agree with you. I think aligning the players' state as closely as possible with that of the characters is key. That creates immersion, which i think improves the game. If showing a monster's stats is what works to achieve the desired result, then I'd say to do it. I don't know if that would work for my group...but I also don't know if Orcus is the best example. He immediately evokes some kind of response in players, most of the time at least. But what about an unknown entity that is just being introduced? Sure, you could reveal his stats to make the players realize the threat he poses...but I also think that removes the mystery. I find it better to use the narrative element of the game to establish the threat level of an enemy. I want the players to be unsure in this case...so I keep them in the dark. I think my main point about this is that I try to have enough variety in my encounters, and with my villains, that I don't want my players to ever assume that because it is an ogre they're facing, that it must be the one straight out of the MM and that they therefore know it's abilities. Ultimately though, I think we agree on the goal...how it is best achieved is something that varies based on the situation, and of course on what works for the specific group in question. Well this mind shackles effect is a mechanical effect that the characters are experiencing, so I would not have a problem sharing the mechanical info. I seee this as quite different than sharing monster stats. As for player choice, I don't want to take it away or have it be meaningless. Indeed, quite the opposite. When I put them in a situation where fighting will surely lead to their doom, I do my very best to make that clear to them. I provide at least two other options (at the very most basic, there is always "talk" or "run" at least) for them to choose in lieu of combat. I have just found that because my games do tend to be combat heavy, the players sometimes just become conditioned to treat fighting as their first option. The knowledge that this is a game has seeped in, and this encounter is just another challenge to be defeated. So I put situations where they cannot win in a fight and have to deal with it another way. If they still choose to fight, then There are consequences of that choice...but I don't simply TPK them and move on. Perhaps I should have made a distinction between game mechanics and stat blocks? I do think that the mechanics of the game should be considered. However, I feel like such mechanics should be applicable to the situation. Or should in some way be observable to the characters in order to justify the players' knowing of it. Like if the characters witness an orc sentry spot a fox from 100 yards away and nail it with an arrow, then my players can assume that he has a high perception score. That kind of thing. But it doesn't mean that I say "here's the orc sentey's stat block for your perusal." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
last encounter was totally one-sided
Top