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

[JConstantine]

So I'm curious about what a bypassed encounter is. Because, at its most literal, an encounter is an event that occurs in the play of the game - and so what does it mean to have a bypassed event? There are indefinitely many events that don't occur in everyone's RPGing - what makes some handful of those events that don't occur "bypassed encounter"?

It's potential fiction, but it's potential fiction that the players are aware of occurring in some capacity, and due to that awareness, take steps to ensure it is not fully actualised. @Lanefan already gave an example

 

[Enrahim]

I would not expect an answer, no. Even from a GM who was playing above board. I will note that "this module" wouldn't apply because, as others have been quite clear, this form of play isn't supposed to be module-like.

Wow! I think we might be onto something here! The module word was by the way purely based on this quote further up in the reply chain.

Externally, such a scenario would appear to be identical to what has been described, but rather than "getting on with the module" there would potentially be motivation to investigate the circumstances and chase down this new threat.

I hope you see that this unfortunate use of that word is as inconsequential to the main point as a bit flawed example So back to the interesting stuff:

We have here identified a fundamental difference in our expectations. I really tried, and I could not see any rational reason a GM could want to withold an honest answer to that question. I would think many would have the same problem as me. If you can explain the basis for your expectation to not get an (honest?) answer, maybe that might help at least me better understand where you are coming from, and what you are getting at.

 

[JConstantine]

I would not expect an answer, no. Even from a GM who was playing above board.

You expect a GM to withhold an answer from you? Why is that? Several of the trad-leaning GMs here have already stated that they would answer such questions from a player, because it would go toward building trust.

 

[Faolyn]

You’ve mistaken me for @pemerton .

Yes. I edited my post re: that. Apologies.

I’m simply offering a slightly different take to perhaps bridge the gap.

I don’t think “encounters” is a universal term in RPGs. I know what it is for some games, but I’d also say there are games for which the term doesn’t really make as much sense.

It’s (a) a very common term used in many, many games that (b) someone who regularly posts to a forum that caters to all RPGs and especially D&D, and who has (c) actually played D&D themselves, like pemerton, should be aware of. Thus, all of this “what is this ‘encounter’ of which you speak?” rings very false. Especially since I had explained it at great length earlier in this thread, when I mentioned a player who said “I wave goodbye to the nice plot hook.” It’s not like he’s a brand-new baby gamer. And it doesn’t help that this newest tangent started when he was trying to prove his games were better (“more empowering”) than someone else’s.

Encounters are, in my experience, something planned (as would be the case for a map & key type dungeon) or something determined randomly (as would be the case on a regional random encounter table).
These are generally things that I’ve crafted ahead of time, or may procedurally generate with tables, depending on the game. Given the way I run even trad games, they also may be something I make up on the fly, as needed in play.

But I don’t tend to think of encounters as like a unit of play for many of the other games I run. It just doesn’t make much sense given how those games work. So in those cases, I don’t think the idea of bypassing an encounter makes sense.

I would disagree, because even when I’m improvising in an improv-heavy game, I may not think of them as encounters at that point in time, but in retrospect, I can point to events and say that X, Y, and Z were all encounters.

 

[pemerton]

Thus, all of this “what is this ‘encounter’ of which you speak?” rings very false.

I haven't asked what an encounter is. I've asked what a bypassed encounter is.

 

[AlViking]

I haven't asked what an encounter is. I've asked what a bypassed encounter is.

An anticipated planned encounter that was avoided. As many people have told you repeatedly.

 

[TwoSix]

An anticipated planned encounter that was avoided. As many people have told you repeatedly.

Notice how important "planned" is in that definition being viable, and how much it assumes a norm of pre-planned, module or dungeon-crawl style play.

 

[Campbell]

Given @Campbell has mentioned L5R a few times, I'd be curious for their view on it. I only got into it with 4th ed and it seemed to have a metaplot almost on par with WoD, but the latest edition (FFG/Edge's 5e) apparently has basically reset things back to 1e's status quo. Contrary to some views, V:TMV5 is actually a continuation of the metaplot, but it seems both V:TM and L5R have a strong subset of fans who consider their respective latest edition to be an entirely different game because of the mechanics. Similar to what happened with WFRP 3e.

Legend of the Five Rings, Fifth Edition is one of my favorite roleplaying games ever made (right up there with my group's Vampire hack, Apocalypse Keys and Dune 2d20). From my perspective, much like how Vampire - The Requiem, Second Edition finally makes good on promise of a game of personal horror, the 5th Edition of L5R finally makes good on being a game where you play samurai and must deal with internal strife while struggling maintain face. Add to that the focus on your duty to your lord compared to your personal desires led to games that finally feel like they were living up to what I wanted from the game from the start.

Plus, you actually get broken katanas and armor that needs to be repaired and all sorts of events you see in samurai movies all the time but would never see in L5R before. Stances are so much fun and a really cool strategic layer as well.

As a Scorpion enjoyer I also really appreciate setting the clock back on some very dumb metaplot that kind of messed with their conceptual space in the setting.

I am that dude.
My favorite iteration of L5R is 5e
My favorite iteration of Vampire is Requiem, Second Edition
My favorite iterations of D&D are 4e and B/X.
My favorite iteration of Pathfinder is Second Edition.

 

[AlViking]

Notice how important "planned" is in that definition being viable, and how much it assumes a norm of pre-planned, module or dungeon-crawl style play.

And? I was relating something that happened in a D&D game, that because I run a sandbox campaign a fight was avoided. I didn't force the fight I didn't make the encounter happen later on in a way that could not be avoided. Of course I'm using D&D assumptions and terminology. I make no claims that it applies to a narrative or any other style of game, not all concepts are going to apply.

Y'all keep insisting that we accept and understand how BitD or DW works but suddenly on a D&D sub-forum on a thread specifically labeled D&D general why on god's green earth is it an issue that I'm talking about how things can happen in a freakin' D&D game?

 

[Faolyn]

So is an encounter an event at the table - as in, the GM narrates to the player that they meet a NPC or something like that? Or is an encounter an element of a fiction - eg something in the woods that the players never have their PCs investigate? And if the latter, what makes that fiction what it is? Are you assuming the GM has made notes about it?

I would say an encounter is something that causes the players to stop and take some sort of action, or multiple actions, in order to deal with it in some way. Those actions often, probably usually, take the form of die rolls. Combat encounters, social encounters, exploration encounters, etc.

Since you have played D&D4e, you know this already.

And no, it doesn’t require that something was written down. As I wrote elsewhere, you can completely improvise an encounter. Whatshisname’s encounter with the assassin.

Let's suppose that, at that very moment in Hardby, a pickpocket robbed a person in the bazaar. Until now, of course, neither GM nor player turned their mind to that particular event that occurred in the fiction. Is that a bypassed encounter too?

Or does it only count as a bypassed encounter if the GM was thinking about it, but it didn't happen?

Did the pickpocket affect the PCs in any way? Were they aware of them? @Lanefan said that he would consider it a bypassed encounter if the PCs are both aware and take pains to avoid dealing with it, and that sounds like a decent caveat to me. So if the pickpocket’s target shout out “Stop that thief! He stole my purse!” and the PCs just shrug and move on, deliberately not chasing the thief or helping the target in any way, I’d call that bypassed.