D&D General No Fixed Location -- dynamically rearranging items, monsters, and other game elements in the interests of storytelling

[Monayuris]

It's not the altering of reality that would bother me. It would only bother me if doing so invalidates player choice.

If you don't invalidate player choices or force meaningless choices on your players you can do whatever you think is fun.

So those pre-planned encounters? If I never had any knowledge of them and the DM decided to use one (that he/she meant for another area), I wouldn't consider that a problem. It doesn't invalidate any choice I have.

If on the other hand I'm offered three choices on where to go, but no matter which choice I take I'm going to end up encountering the same encounter... that is a problem. It means my choices were meaningless.

As a DM I have a list of pre-planned / pre-designed encounter areas and lairs that I will use as a result of a random encounter table. These encounters are set pieces that are meant to stock empty hexes or as possible locations that are discovered when the players tarry on, in an area.

Using them doesn't invalidate player choice because they are not integral to any plot nor are they forced. They can be avoided and once encountered they are set in stone in the world. They don't suddenly reappear somewhere else just because the players decided to avoid the encounter and I decided to reuse them.

 

[billd91]

So those pre-planned encounters? If I never had any knowledge of them and the DM decided to use one (that he/she meant for another area), I wouldn't consider that a problem. It doesn't invalidate any choice I have.

If on the other hand I'm offered three choices on where to go, but no matter which choice I take I'm going to end up encountering the same encounter... that is a problem. It means my choices were meaningless.

Is there really a difference?

 

[Fenris-77]

How's it strawmanning? I do the unavoidable encounter thing but I try to hide it or make it organic.

If the PCs go out if their way to avoid it I won't do it with maybe the exception of they're being hunted and whatever is hunting them can counter their counter.

Note the encounter may be non hostile. If they meet an old man with canaries they met the old man man with canaries.

If you were serious (which you werent) it would be a strawman, or perhaps an appeal to ridicule. Two versions of the same idea where you misrepresent my position, in this case through reducto ad absurdum treatment of the idea in question. Anyway, I added the emoji on purpose. We apparently handle the floating encounter thing the same way, which is always nice to see.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you were serious (which you werent) it would be a strawman, or perhaps an appeal to ridicule. Two versions of the same idea where you misrepresent my position, in this case through reducto ad absurdum treatment of the idea in question. Anyway, I added the emoji on purpose. We apparently handle the floating encounter thing the same way, which is always nice to see.

I wasn't aiming anything at you so I didn't get what you were meaning.

The not so "random encounter" also works.

 

[Don Durito]

I think you want to avoid this.

We head West. You encounter a red dragon
We head east. You encounter a red dragon
We head south. You encounter a ....
We head north you enc.......

Probably want to be a bit more subtle.

The thing about this is that it doesn't really get at the issue. Because while the players get a descion there's nothing meaningful about it (as presented).

You could just as easily do this by random rolling (which does sometimes seem to get treated as if it can stand in for player decisions - but it can't.)

It's more an issue if one direction has glowing red rocks that you can see, and long splayed clawmarks in the dirt the shape of a giant's lizards foot and you hear something huge breathing heavily...and you go the other way and walk into the red dragon's cave.

Player's can't meaningfully choose unless they're presented with something meaningful to choose from.

 

[Fenris-77]

I wasn't aiming anything at you so I didn't get what you were meaning.

My use of 'my' may have given you the impression that I thought something was aimed at me, but it was more an index to the two sides of the debate in this thread, and I have been very firmly one one of the two sides. Anyway, no harm done, we're on the same page.

 

[Monayuris]

Is there really a difference?

Yes.

What if I wanted to scout the three choices or wait for signs of monsters? What if I used a spell or ability to detect a certain threat. These are all things I can do to gain information and make a decision about the best choice.

If after doing these things, I end up encountering what the DM wanted me to encounter anyway, then all of these efforts were meaningless.

 

[Zardnaar]

The thing about this is that it doesn't really get at the issue. Because while the players get a descion there's nothing meaningful about it (as presented).

You could just as easily do this by random rolling (which does sometimes seem to get treated as if it can stand in for player decisions - but it can't.)

It's more an issue if one direction has glowing red rocks that you can see, and long splayed clawmarks in the dirt the shape of a giant's lizards foot and you hear something huge breathing heavily...and you go the other way and walk into the red dragon's cave.

Player's can't meaningfully choose unless they're presented with something to choose from.

That's why you hide what you're doing or making it subtle. I won't railroad the players but some things here and there may need to happen.

How you execute those events or better yet get the PCs to voluntarily go along with things is key.

Sometimes you need to be upfront though. "Hey guys I've prepped this adventure for tonight's session". Basically a nice way of saying play along with my plot hooks.

Sometimes players don't bite sometimes they don't want to do anything (half of them are pacifists or whatever).

 

[Fenris-77]

Yes.

What if I wanted to scout the three choices or wait for signs of monsters? What if I used a spell or ability to detect a certain threat. These are all things I can do to gain information and make a decision about the best choice.

If after doing these things, I end up encountering what the DM wanted me to encounter anyway, then all of these efforts were meaningless.

That's a very different set of circumstance than what you presented in your previous post. Initially, both of your examples amounted to the same thing. When you add the details above you change the example, and in this case you'd be correct to be upset.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

If altering reality based on the actions of your players is "cheating" then all tabletop gaming is cheating. Every single arbitration is biased by knowledge of the players and their choices. The only way to avoid that would be... to play a video game? Where third party programming means the module is literally incapable of being influenced by your players?

Even a video game is written under the assumption that players will play it and (hopefully) enjoy it, so it is biased towards presenting situations and options that are entertaining. You are a space marine! Fighting demons from Hell! Successfully! That would be statistically unlikely if the writing were, er, "fun-neutral".