Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="redrick" data-source="post: 7315106" data-attributes="member: 6777696">Absolutely. I've seen the same thing. Players &quot;outsmart&quot; the DM, but nobody can outsmart the DM, so the DM just moves the goalposts. It's boring.For these sorts of tradeoffs to work, the DM has to be reasonably consistent in how they apply ambient world danger. So, in the example discussed between Charlaquin, 5yeku and Von Ether, where the players choose to move at a slower pace in order to better keep an eye out for the ambush they know is coming, the players, roughly understand the tradeoffs. And, to be honest, for most wilderness travel systems, where random encounters are rolled once or twice a day, the trade-offs are pretty good. The players know the ambush is coming, somewhere. They know that every day on the road risks a random encounter, but, if you go by most traditional wilderness encounter systems, the odds are not great. Moving at a slow pace increases their travel time by 1.5, so they would take 3 days to travel ~50 miles instead of 2. But they also will be moving carefully and looking out for any signs of trouble, which not only gives them an advantage in spotting their ambush (which they know is coming), but also, potentially, gives them a better opportunity to avoid or ambush any other wandering monsters they might encounter. It feels like a pretty solidly Good outcome for the PCs. Of course, the difference between 2 and 3 days might be a big deal for other in-game reasons.(If the DM rolls wilderness encounters every hour and a 6 day trip is about to turn into a 9 day trip, hopefully the PCs are able to learn a little more about the ambush so that they can better pinpoint the area of travel in which they need to expect it.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="redrick, post: 7315106, member: 6777696"] Absolutely. I've seen the same thing. Players "outsmart" the DM, but nobody can outsmart the DM, so the DM just moves the goalposts. It's boring. For these sorts of tradeoffs to work, the DM has to be reasonably consistent in how they apply ambient world danger. So, in the example discussed between Charlaquin, 5yeku and Von Ether, where the players choose to move at a slower pace in order to better keep an eye out for the ambush they know is coming, the players, roughly understand the tradeoffs. And, to be honest, for most wilderness travel systems, where random encounters are rolled once or twice a day, the trade-offs are pretty good. The players know the ambush is coming, somewhere. They know that every day on the road risks a random encounter, but, if you go by most traditional wilderness encounter systems, the odds are not great. Moving at a slow pace increases their travel time by 1.5, so they would take 3 days to travel ~50 miles instead of 2. But they also will be moving carefully and looking out for any signs of trouble, which not only gives them an advantage in spotting their ambush (which they know is coming), but also, potentially, gives them a better opportunity to avoid or ambush any other wandering monsters they might encounter. It feels like a pretty solidly [B]Good[/B] outcome for the PCs. Of course, the difference between 2 and 3 days might be a big deal for other in-game reasons. (If the DM rolls wilderness encounters every hour and a 6 day trip is about to turn into a 9 day trip, hopefully the PCs are able to learn a little more about the ambush so that they can better pinpoint the area of travel in which they need to expect it.) [/QUOTE]

Verification