Static vs. Tailored Encounters

[shilsen]

I'm also a bit surprised that more people haven't taken off from Piratecat's viewpoint.

...

Random thugs should not be a challenge any more, but you won't actually feel that unless you actually encounter random thugs who do not provide a challenge every now and then.

I hadn't posted anything on the subject, but I'm in complete agreement with Piratecat (and you) here. I don't do it often, but I will sometimes throw in an encounter that the PCs can completely dominate and win without even breaking a sweat, just so they can appreciate how much they've grown and advanced. The PCs in my main campaign are now a very buff 15th level and capable of going toe-to-toe with gargantuan dragons and taking on armies single-handed, and doing so is always fun, but some of the most enjoyable and memorable encounters for the players have been when they ran into some poor mooks and did horrible things to them.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I use both. I design an adventure with tailored encounters, though it's possible that deep in the orc warrens lies an ancient evil that either the pcs or the orcs may awaken and lay waste to them both. But mostly, the encounters are within range of the party's ability; however, I do make notes on the campaign map. Keep on the borderlands is HERE, the slavelords are operating in THIS area, a huge red dragon is rumored to be over HERE, etc. I do not ask them to go to those areas, but they are welcome to if they wish. I also allow for an "impossible" encounter on the wandering monster charts. If a couple of manticores show up where a first level party is camping, they can attack and most likely die, quietly creep away, hide and watch the mating ritual, etc. Every encounter need not end in combat. I remember one campaign where a red dragon kept accosting low level pcs. He started out as a random encounter. He let them live in exchange for their horses. A few weeks later, he showed up again, ate more horses. Eventually the pcs gained a few levels and managed to drive him off nursing his wounds. LAter on, they even defeated the dragon in his lair. It was one of the most memorable adventures I ever ran and it started out as just a random encounter. Something like 99-00 on the encounter chart because his lair was nearby. Tailoring every encounter to the pcs level ruins my suspension of disbelief as both a dm and as a player.

 

[JahellTheBard]

Static encounters ... i use them sometimes, they are part of the ambient, BUT i make sure that my players will know in advance ... maybe a story, maybe they find tracks of the dragon, maybe a fleeing peasant tell them ... i would NEVER get my players in a situation they cannot survive, UNLESS they know in advance and decide to go on anyhow ... there MUST be somewhere a few opponent that they cannot win, at least at the present time ... otherwise game will start to be boring ...

 

[Klaus]

Tailored. If the group has no rogue, I refrain from using traps. If it has no cleric, I go light on the undead thing.

 

[Grazzt]

I use both. I design an adventure with tailored encounters, though it's possible that deep in the orc warrens lies an ancient evil that either the pcs or the orcs may awaken and lay waste to them both. But mostly, the encounters are within range of the party's ability; however, I do make notes on the campaign map. Keep on the borderlands is HERE, the slavelords are operating in THIS area, a huge red dragon is rumored to be over HERE, etc. I do not ask them to go to those areas, but they are welcome to if they wish. I also allow for an "impossible" encounter on the wandering monster charts. If a couple of manticores show up where a first level party is camping, they can attack and most likely die, quietly creep away, hide and watch the mating ritual, etc. Every encounter need not end in combat. I remember one campaign where a red dragon kept accosting low level pcs. He started out as a random encounter. He let them live in exchange for their horses. A few weeks later, he showed up again, ate more horses. Eventually the pcs gained a few levels and managed to drive him off nursing his wounds. LAter on, they even defeated the dragon in his lair. It was one of the most memorable adventures I ever ran and it started out as just a random encounter. Something like 99-00 on the encounter chart because his lair was nearby. Tailoring every encounter to the pcs level ruins my suspension of disbelief as both a dm and as a player.

Same here. Pretty much the same way I do it and for the same reasons ya mentioned...

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I don't have the time to spend writing up "static" encounters that aren't at least close to level appropriate. I realize it takes away some of the versimilitude of the game world, but I'm OK with that.

In order to build a growing threat for the players, I let them hear about things such as the Red Dragon in the mountains to the north, but if they aren't anywhere near the level to take it on, I don't have a location for it or the encounter worked out. As a result there is no way they can stumble upon it accidently. If they insist on seeking it out, I will tailor some really tough encounters to hopefully make the players realize they just aren't ready. If they insist, I will oblige them.

 

[Imban]

It's a spectrum, and I'm not really satisfied with either end.

On the "too static" end, you roll a 00 on the random monster table and get a balrog and it eats the party. The game is over. That sucks.

On the "too tailored" end, you fall into either overly videogamey (for my taste) world design - "Oh, yeah, everything on this island is weak, and the bridge to the next island is out." or that one tribe of kobolds who are CR 19 in the d20 EverQuest RPG - or you trivialize advancement because you're fighting random brigands at level 2 and random brigands at level 16, just with bigger numbers. Both of those suck.

Personally, I prefer the world to be static enough that I can point to areas on my map and say "here be dragons" and maybe plan on tackling them later, and that I don't feel my advancement is trivialized. The former, at least, is a given in pretty much any published campaign setting. Likewise, I expect the actual "plot" we're doing at the moment to be more or less tailored, because it's unambiguously what we should be doing and it's just plain more fun if it is.

 

[takasi]

On the "too static" end, you roll a 00 on the random monster table and get a balrog and it eats the party. The game is over. That sucks.

The game isn't over, you just have some dead characters eaten by a rare appearance of a Balrog. If the characters had any depth then they would have relatives or friends who would investigate what happened to them. New character can come in and hear rumors of this balrog, and find out what it's doing in this world.

Status quo does not mean pointless encounters. Just because you rolled up a balrog doesn't mean the balrog shouldn't have any motivation or backstory. (And yes, these things can be rolled up too.)

On the "too tailored" end, you fall into either overly videogamey (for my taste) world design - "Oh, yeah, everything on this island is weak, and the bridge to the next island is out." or that one tribe of kobolds who are CR 19 in the d20 EverQuest RPG - or you trivialize advancement because you're fighting random brigands at level 2 and random brigands at level 16, just with bigger numbers. Both of those suck.

Video games do both. World of Warcraft (along with most MMOs actually) is good example of status quo, whereas Oblivion is a good example of tailored.

 

[Imban]

The game isn't over, you just have some dead characters eaten by a rare appearance of a Balrog. If the characters had any depth then they would have relatives or friends who would investigate what happened to them. New character can come in and hear rumors of this balrog, and find out what it's doing in this world.

Status quo does not mean pointless encounters. Just because you rolled up a balrog doesn't mean the balrog shouldn't have any motivation or backstory. (And yes, these things can be rolled up too.)

Well, "holy crap, random Balrog, everyone dies" is seriously a valid random encounter in MERP. While I suppose there are styles of game that are compatible with a balrog eating everyone and this being a story seed for the next wave of characters, there are a lot of players who would gladly say this sucks.

Video games do both. World of Warcraft (along with most MMOs actually) is good example of status quo, whereas Oblivion is a good example of tailored.

Well, okay - "videogamey" is a bit overgeneralized when videogames are so broad, much like "too anime" is, but you're not going to see the "oh noes, the bridges are out! Every single one, at every island, and there's only one path between islands with no deviation possible!" setup of the first half of Lufia 2 anywhere outside of a video game. I gave examples to illustrate my point, anyway.