Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7168328" data-attributes="member: 6785785">Yeah, I expect that there will be large parts of our games that aren't as different as we might assume. That's why I figured maybe discussing a specific module we had both DMed might help. We agree that the DM is taking things in hand here, butI think we disagree on how big a deal that is. I'm not a huge wandering monster kind of DM anymore. I throw one in every now and again to keep the PCs on their toes, but generally I find those encounters to be among the most dull that I've run. There's usually not a lot to them. I prefer the combats on my game to serve some purpose, whether it's as a challenge to the PCs, or it's important to the story, or if it's a dynamic encounter that will be fun to play...whatever the reason, there just has to be one. In the case of Barovia, I wanted the environment to seem dangerous outside the towns, but I really didn't want to run encounter after encounter with wolves....so I just decided it would be beat to simply say that the wolves constantly harass them. This gave them reason to always try to get to a aettlement in order to recover. I don't think this had too much impact on their agency. Or at least, not a negative impact.Yeah, mine was equal parts challenge and story. I wanted the players to have to plan their travel and their effective rests wisely. They had to spend a couple of nights out in the wilds and that left them unrested the next day, which meant whatever location they were headed to just became more difficult. But I also wanted to do it that way to reinforce the idea that the environment was dangerous....that they were constantly being watched and hunted. The book includes the possibility of an encounter with the hag, but it's not meant to be a combat. So I went with that because the PCs were seeking the witch Baba Lysaga for ongoing campaign reasons. So I figured good idea to plant that seed early, even though it was kind of a red herring since the witches at Bonegrinder don't have anything to do with Baba Lysaga.I'm not entirely sure. It's in the book, and I thought it was a pretty cool idea, so I threw that hook out there to see if the players would bite. Essentially, I threw out about 5 or 6 different subplots in Vallaki, all based on content from the book, with some minor tweaks to fit personal taste. I was aware of the material, and what possible avenues the players might go, so I introduced the plots that I thought they would dig, or that would be the most enjoyable and make for the best story. So I have a list of hooks that I plan, and then I put maybe 50-75% of them into play. When I decide to do that is hard to say. I have plans, but I am ready and willing to change those plans depending on the vibe at the table.Then we see what the PCs decide to pursue. If they had decided not to investigate the missing bones, then things would have continued largely the same....they would have investigated another lead and followed that trail. Yeah, we played it pretty traditional. The PCs interacted with different NPCs and learned information, and the rogue also did some gather information type checks to see what else could be found out. They stayed in town for a couple of days learning things and deciding what to do.I left how they handled the situation entirely up to them. I did not set any encounters with the Baron or his men, or with Lady Wachter or her sons, other than the festival encounter described in the book. Everything else consisted of interactions initiated by the PCs, and I would have the NPCs respond accordingly. I have a loose idea of that kind of thing. But, I ultimately decide at the table exactly how to handle it. I usually go with what will make for the most fun at the table, and basing the difficulty on how foolish or clever the PCs have been. So if they're being foolhardy and careless, then they'll find themselves in freater danger. We probably spend more time in combat, ultimately. Probably like 65%. Combat is probably equally important to the PCs success as the other game elements. So if we went with the whole combat/interaction/exploration, then it would be an equal 33%.As for how careful I am in balancing and structuring encounters, that's hard to say. I do try to pace things, and I try to challenge the PCs. But I don't ever use XP budgets and CR and all the related encounter design mechanics. I just design encounters, or modify existing ones from a module. In the case of Curse of Strahd, we played the entire module with the PCs starting at level 6 amd ending at level 8. So I had to beef up some of the earlier encounters since they were higher level to start.</blockquote>

Verification