D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[pemerton]

But it is based on PC skill. The more skilled the PC in the fiction, the less likely to encounter the cook behind that door. To the point that it would become apparent to the PCs that bad things happen a lot more often when unskilled members try stuff.

So it would be more realistic if bad things happened whether competent or incompetent people took the lead? That doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[pemerton]

Agree with Micah that these read identically to me. The GM decides, based on what the roll says and how they interpret it, suggests that the cook could be there or could be somewhere else...hence, both there and not there.

I could be here (and am) or could be elsewhere (but am not), so am both here and not there? That doesn't make sense to me.

I also don't see how this is different from a wandering monster roll.

 

[Enrahim]

Sure. But it doesn't make a large difference to whether or not it is "quantum". That doesn't depend upon why the roll is made.

"Quantum" again! I thought we had settled this long time ago now. The issue isn't if it is "quantum" or not it is all about what kind of "quantum". The kind depends on why the roll was made.

It turns out that there are a lot of different types of “quantum” at play in RPGs. I think it might be good for conversation to have a taxonomy of them. So here goes.

Our situation is that last session it became clear that in the next session the group is planning to move through a forest using one of the two well known paths (A and B), but they have not yet decided which. This forest is known for having a particularly ferocious Ogre roaming it. What are possible approaches to decide if the group encounters it as they move through the forest?

1: The classic locally deterministic quantum: Once the players commit to a path, the Ogre appears on that path.
2: The local evenly random quantum: Once the players commit to the path, the GM flip a coin to see if the Ogre is on that path.
3: The global evenly random quantum: Once the players commit to the path, the GM flip a coin to see which path the Ogre is currently guarding.
4: The local uneven random quantum: Once the players commit to the path, the GM rolls D20. If the players chose path A the Ogre is there on a 5 or lower, if they chose path B the ogre is there on a 15 or lower.
5: The global uneven random quantum: Once the players commit to the path, the GM rolls D20. If the result is 5 or lower, the ogre is on path A, otherwise it is on path B.
6: The oversaturated local random quantum: Once the players commit to the path, the GM rolls D20. If they chose path A the Ogre is on the path on a 15 or lower. If they chose path B the ogre is on the path on a 10 or lower.
7: The weirdly entangled local quantum: If a character is declared to “be alert” while moving through the forest, the player rolls a D20. On a 6 or higher the Ogre is on the path. If no one makes such a declaration it is not on the path.
8: The ultra local random quantum: While the party is traveling through the forest, roll D6 every hour. On a 1 they encounter the ogre.
9: The even random stocking: Before the session the GM flip a coin to determine which path the Ogre is on.
10: The uneven random stocking: Before the session the GM roll D20. On a 5 or less the Ogre is on path A, otherwise it is on path B.
11: The deterministic stocking: Before the session the GM decides where the ogre is.
and as a bonus
12: The anticlimax: There is no Ogre to encounter, as the last party passing through already has slain it, and its remains have been consumed by forest beings.

Which of these do you find acceptable? Which are unacceptable? Why?
I have quite a few thoughts about this myself, but I guess this post is long enough as is.

 

[AlViking]

For him. You can't apply that to any of the rest of us who haven't said we do it like that. I don't.

I should also clarify (in addition to the fact that I don't really use random encounters) that I was thinking specifically of how an ambush would come about. So if a pride of lions is going to be laying in wait for lunch to be delivered, they're going to do it where there is the best chance to ambush and where prey is going to be more plentiful. An area with a bit of water the other animals rely on which also has tall grass makes sense. When it comes to the gnolls, in my world they are intelligent and can be tactical. Unless you're on a salt flat with the ground as hard a concrete you can dig down far enough or find terrain where you can lie prone and camouflage yourself, it's not like you're going to be standing in a pit.

Another example is if my random list included a wing of wyverns and I have a note that they would not attack if the characters are in dense forest. They wouldn't be on my list if the characters were only going through dense forest so I'll describe the terrain as a mix of forest and clearings. I would then have no issue describing the attack happening in one of those clearings. The wyverns may have noticed them earlier but waited until they weren't hampered by the trees to attack.

The terrain and environment is going to work for the creature encountered. If the terrain and environment does not include a match that creature won't be used as a random encounter.

 

[The Firebird]

I also don't see how this is different from a wandering monster roll.

Do you mean you still don't understand the difference between independent and non independent? Or that you don't see why we consider it important?

 

[Hussar]

For him. You can't apply that to any of the rest of us who haven't said we do it like that. I don't.

But, you do. This is exactly the same process that you use. You choose to have an event occur (or rather the dice choose for you) and you then backfill the scene and the narrative to make that event fit into whatever is going on in the game.

There is no difference here. You keep trying to claim some sort of unique process, but, it is exactly the same. Your grass is long because you need it to be long to have an ambush. Otherwise, the length of the grass would be unnoted or irrelevant. Your event will magically teleport to whererever the players happen to be at that point in time, and then the scene will be retroactively constructed to make the event fit.

 

[pemerton]

your assertions that they are 'equally quantum' are untrue when for one roll the chances of the location of the cook has modifiers derived from the skill of the person performing the check.

it matters that it is an independent roll.

This makes no difference as to whether it is "quantum". Unless "quantum" now just means what some posters don't like.

 

[pemerton]

Do you mean you still don't understand the difference between independent and non independent? Or that you don't see why we consider it important?

I understand "independent of the player". That's why I call the RPGing "GM-driven" or "GM-centred".

I assert that, if the trigger for introducing some content into the shared fiction is a die roll, it doesn't become less "quantum" because the GM rather than the player rolled the die.

 

[FrogReaver]

"Quantum" again! I thought we had settled this long time ago now. The issue isn't if it is "quantum" or not it is all about what kind of "quantum". The kind depends on why the roll was made.

Right. But that does mean I agree it is a mistake to describe the issue as just ‘quantum’. I think ‘quantum’ is mostly a misguided attempt to explain an actual difference that doesn’t get readily acknowledged. We’ve since teased apart that difference much better so dropping quantum as a criticism would be ideal.

 

[pemerton]

Your grass is long because you need it to be long to have an ambush. Otherwise, the length of the grass would be unnoted or irrelevant.

This is especially important, if we're actually looking at how play works. It's obvious that many elements of the fiction, which must "exist" in the fiction (eg grass must have some or other length; the sky must have some or other colour; if there are clouds, they must have some or other shape) but they don't get narrated. They can't be.

The choice to actually narrate these things, and to make them part of the shared fiction rather than implicit elements of the fiction but not actually established and shared, is a choice.

And quite often it is done in response to action declarations or other dice rolls or just the players asking questions, with retroactive effect. Eg the player asks, "Was there a shrine in my home when I was growing up?" or "What was the name of my fencing master?" or whatever, and the GM makes something up and tells the player.

And of course there are the examples you are pointing to, where details are narrated in in order to make sense of some decision the GM has made (the GM decides to have an ambush, and so narrates the clouds covering the moon) or a roll that has been made (as in the randomly rolled ambush case).