The Sandbox And The Grind

[CapnZapp]

Forked from: [http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254630-stalker0s-guide-anti-grind.html] Stalker0's Guide to Anti-Grind [/url]

Higher level Monsters – The Source of Grind

In some ways, 4e combat works exactly the opposite way of 3rd edition. In 3rd edition, when you threw high level encounters at your party, you often risked the chance of quickly killing some or all of your party (offense scaled quicker than defense). Such combats were often the source of great drama and excitement coupled with poignant loss and sometimes outright anger when a character was defeated.

In 4e, it works the opposite way (defense scales faster than offense). In 4e, fighting high level monsters usually doesn’t kill your party quickly as their damage doesn’t scale that fast. But the monsters have very high defenses and hit points making them hard to hit and very hard to kill…which leads to the concept of grind.

So my first piece of advice….focus your combat designs at the same level as your party. Use monsters of the party’s level (and scale other monsters into that range to accomplish the same). Your goal is to generate as much challenge to your party as you can with a standard monster group, and the rest of the guide is designed to help you do that.

Also, you may find some other pleasant side effects to sticking with standard monster encounters. My group has been steadily changing their opinion on maximizing their attack stats and damage, because the reality is 4e combats are decently quick when they are put at the party’s level, and you don’t have to be optimized to fight such encounters.

I've been thinking about this. Assuming Stalker's right (and everything suggests he is), how do I do a satisfying sandbox game using 4th edition?

The concept of a sandbox game is having a living dynamic world in which the heroes enter. What they do and where they go is very much up to them.

If they choose to ignore the warnings and venture out in Dangerous Terrain™, they will encounter high level opponents. Not because I the GM is out to spite them, but because this is the very definition of a sandbox game: that there are other things than level-appropriate fights out there, so be careful...

Now, given what Stalker0 is saying so eloquently, it seems 4th Edition is not a game system suitable to sandboxing: the thrill of exploring "high-level territory" is replaced by boredom and a lot of misses.

Or, in Stalker0's immortal words: "the source of great drama and excitement coupled with poignant loss and sometimes outright anger" is replaced by "the concept of grind".

Now, is this solvable, or is the sandbox game antithetical to D&D 4th Edition?

 

[CapnZapp]

Possible suggestions (I'm shooting from the hip here, so consider these half-baked at best):

*** Redefining "a high-level encounter" as "an encounter with foes in dangerous numbers". The other way to increase the encounter level (besides having a higher-levelled foe) is having more foes.

If your map tells you the area is controlled by Orcs, this might work well - the sheer number of foes makes a head-on assault fool-hardy (just what a good sandbox game should do). However, if the map indicates a Dragon, this is less satisfying - you can't very well add more Dragons, that'd be silly.

*** Dynamically retooling monster damage output. (Yes, I know I'm sounding like a World of Warcraft engineer now). Have a Dragon on the sandbox map? Okay, so you always pitch a level-appropriate Dragon at the adventurers. BUT, you scale its damage output to match its real level. If the Dragon is supposed to be a few levels higher than the party, you perhaps increase its Damage by 50%. If the Dragon is eight levels higher, you perhaps increase its damage by 250%. I don't know what numbers work best (and probably this number needs to increase as the party level increases!); but enough that just a few rounds of combat gets the message across: time to flee or become shish kebab. Only if the adventurers meet it when they are of an appropriate level for the area will it retain its stats as given by Monstrous Manual. (I guess there's no reason to modify it further if the party is over-levelled for the area)

This has the potential to be a real universal solution. Of course, it also has the potential to be a real PITA, adding a bucketload of math to an already math-intensive game. It might also break immersion, in that the Orcs deal less and less damage as you go up in level.

--------------------------------------------------

Okay so that was just two possible solutions that might not even work. Bringing them up mostly to exemplify what I believe is the problem. Your take on this would be highly appreciated!

Remember, our goal isn't to generate a hard but ultimately fair and winnable encounter. Sandboxing means shedding that DMG mindset! Our goal here is to generate grind-less encounters that are out of the adventurer's reach - without resorting to what many 4E defendants always propose here, namely not staging the fight at all. The purpose of a sandbox game, remember, is in some ways related to simulationism, and this is a core concept which is non-negotiable. The point is that by having to flee (or having to roll up new characters ) you learn more about the sandbox environment and that not all warnings are to be ignored.

The reason for my point also relates to this: can you stage a fight which the characters could have won - but didn't - without this being a massive grind (as it does have to burn through all the defenses, surges, and powers of the adventuring party)...? In other words, we're back to my original question - perhaps 4E isn't suitable for the sandbox game?

 

[darjr]

I'm not sure I buy all of it...

But...

I assume that the problem will only be for a range of level disparities. If the PC's potential antagonists are sufficiently high enough you won't have grind but dead PC's. In a sandbox, that's OK, I'd just give the PC's a chance to realize it before it's to late.

But what to do in that range?

The level of an encounter could be built out of several groups. Dynamically group the individuals so you have a level appropriate set for the PC's, then have the rest as a single group to be an obvious and immediate over run after that initial contact. Maybe with a chance that the PC's could notice and escape their doom.

For those singular antagonist encounters, you could have several tangential encounters or 'wandering monsters' to amend the set encounter and do the above grouping modification already mentioned.

Have opportunities for the PC's to encounter the big dangers without combat. Skill challenges of different sorts so one would be level appropriate, or close enough to modify at need.

Finally, absenteeism. The residents might not be home. This could be modified by having some of the residents of appropriate level at home or by having the tangential 'wandering monsters' be present in their stead.

 

[FireLance]

Personally, I think that there are two significant contributors to the perception of "grind" that should not occur in a sandbox campaign:

1. The players have a pre-concieved notion of how long a fight should take.

2. The players get bored of using the same attacks round after round.

In a sandbox campaign, the players ought to realize that these are the natural consequences of fighting creatures with high defences and high hit points. In a way, "grind" is a gamist concept that shouldn't have a place in a sandbox campaign.

 

[ppaladin123]

If your map tells you the area is controlled by Orcs, this might work well - the sheer number of foes makes a head-on assault fool-hardy (just what a good sandbox game should do). However, if the map indicates a Dragon, this is less satisfying - you can't very well add more Dragons, that'd be silly.

But the dragon could be surrounded by numerous servants (kobolds, dragonborn knights, cultists, etc.) She could also be found along with several children at various stages of development. Try getting between a mother dragon and her children!

Anyway, shouldn't players in a sandbox game run away from much more powerful beings? Nothing says that every encounter must be winnable. Encounters probably shouldn't be auto-TPKs but after a round or two the players might realize that retreat is the soundest tactical option. I've always hated worlds that scale perfectly along with the players as they level (this is different from the players traveling to new, more dangerous locations. I am thinking about what occurs in Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for example).

 

[CapnZapp]

Well, issues I want addressed in this thread include things like Wandering Monsters tables.

If the party stumbles into a high level area, they might be clued into this by all random encounters being several levels above their own. Any single such encounter is still winnable, but the players should realize their resources will be taxed to a dangerous limit if they persist.

Now, the problem arises because, apparently, you can't have those initial high-level encounters in 4th Ed without a dangerous risk of grind - the game isn't designed for it (even less so than 3E). In other words, you can't put the message ("Here be high-level dragons!") across without involving grind. Or can you?

In essence, the question is this:

What advice do you have when circumstances dictate that high-level monsters do in fact be the order of the day?

Stalker0 gives the sound advice to avoid high-level monsters - but what happens when you can't (or won't) follow this advice. How do you avoid grind then? Or, perhaps more to the point, can you avoid the grind then?

In other words;

Is it possible to have higher-than-appropriate encounters in 4E without being punished by grind, and if so, how?

 

[CapnZapp]

Anyway, shouldn't players in a sandbox game run away from much more powerful beings? Nothing says that every encounter must be winnable. Encounters probably shouldn't be auto-TPKs but after a round or two the players might realize that retreat is the soundest tactical option.

Yes, but 4E characters are amazingly resilient. Even an encounter 5-6 levels higher can be won by a persistent party (though at a heavy cost).

However, it will be a long and grindy fight.

As the DM you might want the PCs to run away, but its difficult to get this message across to the players without being obvious about it - especially if the players do have a chance of beating the encounter (provided they can stand the grind).

The problem thus is: how do I increase the difficulty without increasing the grind, the whiff, the slogging? In 4E, a monster five levels higher won't be THAT much scarier (in that it will still take dozens of rounds before the PC's run out of resources).

This is the reason for my suggestion #2: if defense usually scales better than offense in 4E; it reasonably follows this is precisely what needs to be changed...!



Or what do you guys have to say about this...?

 

[monboesen]

IMO the grind is a perk in a Sandbox style game.

Encountering a vastly level-inappropriate dragon in 3ed would likely result in a TPK in 1-2 rounds. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it leaves the players little time to realise their predicament and react to it.

The same type of encounter in 4ed will also end in a TPK. But it will take more than 1-2 rounds. Unless the players have a quite bad grasp of the rules, they will quickly know that they cannot win the encounter through combat. That leaves the players with time for other options. Like running, grovelling, bargaining etc.

 

[Byronic]

The solution for both higher-then-level encounters and Solo's would be to increase the damage and reduce the health points of the monster(s).

We should make somekind of solid guidelines for this. For example we should realize that damage needs to go up x% for every y% HP goes down. It would be even nicer if we could have a table that showed that x more damage means that the damage dice also go up so much. For example that a 25% increase in damage would be a change from a d6 to a d8 in damage.

This would recreate the danger present in a sandbox environment and still decrease the grind.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Stalker0's suggestion to stick with level-appropriate encounters [and monsters, specifically], is good advice. But that's not quite the whole solution, IMO, because monster stats scale faster than PC stats. So even using level-appropriate monsters and encounters, grind will increase as the PCs gain levels. To complete the solution, you have to boost the PCs or nerf the monsters.

Anyway, no, I don't think 4e precludes sandbox games. As long as the DM hints/tells the players which areas are level-appropriate, it'll be cool. If the PCs get bored in higher level areas because of grind, well, they can always follow the DM's hinting/verbal hammer.