Random Wilderness Encounters - How do you use them?

[klofft]

Not a poll, but a poll-like question: In your campaign, do you use random encounters in the wilderness? Regularly or only sometimes? In what circumstances do you choose to use or not use them? Do you find that, given the time, danger, and lack of treasure implied by them, that they increase the fun-quotient of your game, or are they generally more of a hassle?

One of my story-oriented players suggested to me that our more combat-oriented players may be more patient during the "talk-y" parts of the game by having more random combat opportunities when they travel. I'm trying to ascertain the value of the idea from people with more established games than my own.

C

 

[Chimera]

My advice is to design such encounters up front so that they are NOT "random" insomuch as you have to roll them up on the fly or that they come out of nowhere, but rather only seem 'random' from the point of view of the PCs.

Whenever my PCs travel, I have a list of likely encounters already drawn up. Things that live in the area, things that might pass through. It is a small list, never more than 4-6 encounters long, of which I am unlikely to use more than two, depending on the session and the speed of combat.

What you want to avoid is creating a situation where your players start to ignore the plot and feel that if they just wander around long enough, monsters will attack them, then they can track down the lair and get wads of loot. Once they start down that road, they might as well be playing Diablo and you can forget about plots and game development.

I can also safely say, from having been on both sides of the screen often enough, that it sometimes helps to break up the monotony. There have been sessions where I get sick to death of talking and just want to KILL SOMETHING. At the same time, there have been sessions where I get sick to death of combat, combat, combat and just want to talk to something for a change. Keep your fingers on the pulse of the session and know when it's time to shift gears.

 

[EricNoah]

I like to have a menu of choices, sure. I don't generate them randomly, though, usually.

I also have to say that, in published adventures, I like the style of encounter table that has some detail to it. "1d4 manticores" isn't as interesting or stimulating to me as "a manticore named JimminyBillyBob, who is out hunting and especially likes halfling to eat; his lair is located near Mount KoboldFist." Each encounter is like a mini adventure in a way.

Also, there are different purposes for "random" encounters. I think the best reason to have one is to establish the nature of the region. If a forest is supposed to be crawling with giant spiders, PCs should have at least one significant encounter with giant spiders. If a road is supposed to be plagued by banditry, they need to encounter some bandits. Etc.

 

[Glyfair]

I like to have a menu of choices, sure. I don't generate them randomly, though, usually.

I also have to say that, in published adventures, I like the style of encounter table that has some detail to it. "1d4 manticores" isn't as interesting or stimulating to me as "a manticore named JimminyBillyBob, who is out hunting and especially likes halfling to eat; his lair is located near Mount KoboldFist." Each encounter is like a mini adventure in a way.

Exactly. I do like random encounter tables as a reference for making these up. It's nice to be reminded that certain common things aren't encountered enough. "Why are the badlands notorious for bandits, but we never see any? We keep encountering the demons disguised as farmers, really odd monsters like displacers beasts, but never any of these supposed bandits. They can't all be afraid of us (based on their reputation)."

 

[ThirdWizard]

I never use random encounters. When PCs travel, I have a list of pre-determined encounters that I pick from. If I know the PCs are going to be going somewhere, I choose when and how the encounters will take place before the session begins. The frequency of encounters will vary greatly depending on the region, but generally if there are going to be other fights later on, I'll tone down the "random" encounters and if there are goning to be few fights later on, I'll increase the number of "random" encounters.

 

[EricNoah]

I could see doing it randomly depending on the type of campaign. It might be a nice way to keep the DM on his toes -- he kind of has to roll with the situation the way the PCs sometimes do.

Thinking back, I mostly used the d8+d12 style encounter charts from 2E. Gave you a result from 2-20, and would make a nice curve where you could put rare/very rare at the ends, and common in the middle. Even if not randomly rolled it gave you an immediate sense of what was common and what was unusual.

 

[klofft]

The player who actually suggested this was in favor of specifically random encounters because he thought that a random encounter could potentially generate a little story hook on its own.

 

[Mr. Draco]

I'm going to be taking a new attitude towards "random" encounters for the next campaing I'm running, starting this fall. For preparation, I've made a list of 21 plots (seven that began a while ago, in game, seven that are just beginning, and seven that have barely gotten started). Now, before the sessions, I'll make up a list of 'random encounters' that I think are appropriate the area the PCs are traveling through. Then I find a way to link each encounter to one of the plots, even if only in a small, tangential way (unless it's something like the PCs wandering through the forest and they come upon a bear). Hopefully, this'll give a much deeper feeling and lend more realism to the world (and likewise hopefully, I'll be able to keep all of the plot lines straight in my head--heck, I'll settle for just not letting them form a giant gordian knot).

 

[Crothian]

I use random encounters in that they are modular and planned out.

 

[Mark]

I use them when the adventuring party is dithering around or when I feel the group could use a little more experience (both in in-game terms and as players, perhaps just with one another) before getting to the next section of planned or status quo encounters.

For instance, in a game a few sessions ago the group was being stingy with their magic and it was costing them time that they really didn't have. However, they seemed to have gotten it into their heads that I would fudge the time issue if they dragged their feet and hoarded their magic. I did the opposite and made it quite obvious that if they wanted to do things the hard way I was quite happy to make things even harder.

In another campaign I ran a few years ago a group took to the notion that some legendary, evil wizard needed to be removed from the planet, even though the group was easily several levels shy of being up to the task. It took them about a half a year to even get to the region where they could gain some knowledge of him due to sidetreks, false leads, and plenty of obstacles in the form of random encounters. By the time they were on the scent, they were leveled up enough and equipped in such a way that their goal could be achieved.