NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5471255" data-attributes="member: 42582">Hussar, I think random encounter tables are the place to try and make your case!As well as your argument, I tried an argument in reverse direction upthread - namely, that some games (like Traveller or Rolemaster) have "specials" results on their encounter tables, which basically require the GM - assuming that s/he wasn't expecting it and has nothing ready-to-hand - to make something up when that result comes up. Of course a good GM will make something up that is consistent with the rest of the narrative, but this is essentially (as far as I can see) mechanices shaping narrative - the GM introduces a new and unexpected complication because prompted to by the dice.<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5467205-post316.html" target="_blank">BryonD's response</a> distinguishes between "pop quizzes" that are forced by the narrative and those that are forced by the mechanics. The "on the fly" special is meant to be an example of the former. (Whereas having to encounter for the presence of a low level monster on a deep dungeon level, due to the vagaries of the 1st ed DMG Appendix C tables, is an unhappy instance of the latter.) I don't fully follow the distinction, and so don't know whether and how it might be applied to deal with your example.I don't know if you remember the "players roll all the dice option" (from 3E's Unearthed Arcana?). Maybe skill challenges should have been presented as "the players roll the random encounter dice - fail your skill check and the GM thinks up something bad that happens to you". I don't know - would that would have made the pitch any easier?</blockquote>

Verification