D&D General Tucker's Kobolds: worth using in 5e?

[TiQuinn]

Sure, but that's just a balance issue. I think the concept is great fun; you just have to balance it so that the players can adapt and overcome unless they insist on being stupid. I've also used a similar concept when the point is for the party to get through the area as quickly as possible, not clear it out and loot it.

Yes, but the balance is very rarely addressed when Tucker's kobolds comes up. It's always positioned as a gotcha. It's one thing for a party of tier 1 characters to face a difficult or deadly kobold encounter versus tier 2 or 3 characters who face a similar encounter. Starting from the point of view of how deadly do you want to make the encounter creates a ceiling on how dangerous do you want to make an encounter with any monster is.

 

[Clint_L]

... And they probably won't have everything that they want to have, especially if they are just kobolds. You will have to make do with limited resources and have to watch the PC's screw up their plans and slaughter them in mass more often than not because the PCs have more resources. And if you are thinking, "Well, that's not what I want.", then you are adversarial GMing or else it's something like Duegar or Drow who canonically have those sort of resources (because Drow were Gygax's DM PC's).

What if I don't care about what kobolds are "supposed" to have or be able to do according to anyone else's canon and I create the scenario that will be fun in my game? Does that make me an "adversarial DM"? I am very confident that my players do not see me as an adversarial DM. I put a lot of work into creating challenges that are real but fun and beatable, with a lot of unique flavour.

For example, see my "pirate lair actions" chart from a few pages back. I didn't spend any time worrying about what pirates can do according to their stat block in the MM. I just asked myself "what would be fun and make sense in the story, while keeping combat moving along?"

Similarly, if I'm making kobold lair actions, I'm going to ask myself what would be fun and make sense with how I see this particular group of kobolds. In fact, I'm working on just such a chart for a goblin warren right now!

 

[Charlaquin]

The other thing about the Tucker's Kobolds story - why was it better to fight the big fire demons on level 10 who presumably are more intelligent than the kobolds on level 1? Was he underplaying the level 10 demons while overtuning the level 1 kobolds?

Well, prefacing this by reiterating that the story is very much an inkblot test that people are going to take away whatever they want to take away from it…

My interpretation was that this was a specific choice Tucker made to try to make his game stand out. Level 10 fire demons being difficult isn’t particularly memorable because it’s expected. But the campaign where the lowly Kobold is far scarier than any demon is something your players will tell stories about years after the fact. And it worked, that one aspect of his campaign is now literally world-famous, and people go on Internet forums to discuss the viability of doing something similar in their own games.

This is why I don’t agree with people who talk about Tucker’s Kobolds as an example of adversarial DMing or trying to “punish the players.” To me, I read the story and I see a GM doing an incredibly successful job at creating a fun and memorable story through gameplay, which the 5e PHB tells us is the primary objective of the game.

 

[TiQuinn]

Well, prefacing this by reiterating that the story is very much an inkblot test that people are going to take away whatever they want to take away from it…

My interpretation was that this was a specific choice Tucker made to try to make his game stand out. Level 10 fire demons being difficult isn’t particularly memorable because it’s expected. But the campaign where the lowly Kobold is far scarier than any demon is something your players will tell stories about years after the fact. And it worked, that one aspect of his campaign is now literally world-famous, and people go on Internet forums to discuss the viability of doing something similar in their own games.

This is why I don’t agree with people who talk about Tucker’s Kobolds as an example of adversarial DMing or trying to “punish the players.” To me, I read the story and I see a GM doing an incredibly successful job at creating a fun and memorable story through gameplay, which the 5e PHB tells us is the primary objective of the game.

So I think the problem is that it worked great for Tucker, but in all the retellings and embellishments and then the r/rpghorrorstories that spin off of it, it ended up playing into a common theme at the time - the DM as adversary who was gonna beat the players. The joy of shocked players against an unexpected challenge was replaced by the insurmountability of the challenge, as well as the sometimes mocking tone those retellings often took.

The lesson of how to make that work well was never imparted, IMO.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, prefacing this by reiterating that the story is very much an inkblot test that people are going to take away whatever they want to take away from it…

My interpretation was that this was a specific choice Tucker made to try to make his game stand out. Level 10 fire demons being difficult isn’t particularly memorable because it’s expected. But the campaign where the lowly Kobold is far scarier than any demon is something your players will tell stories about years after the fact. And it worked, that one aspect of his campaign is now literally world-famous, and people go on Internet forums to discuss the viability of doing something similar in their own games.

This is why I don’t agree with people who talk about Tucker’s Kobolds as an example of adversarial DMing or trying to “punish the players.” To me, I read the story and I see a GM doing an incredibly successful job at creating a fun and memorable story through gameplay, which the 5e PHB tells us is the primary objective of the game.

Adding to this interpretation, if I were to assume the Tucker’s Kobolds story is both true and a mostly-accurate recounting of the events, and try to guess at Tucker’s rationale for choosing to make Kobolds the most dangerous thing in his dungeon, beyond it just being a memorable thing about his game, it may also been for pacing.

If, as was often the case at the time, the dungeon was organized into levels, with each level having its own biome and factions, and with deeper levels being occupied by higher-difficulty monsters, then making Kobolds - traditionally one of the lowest-difficulty monsters - the most dangerous things in the dungeon, would insure that every session starts and ends with a bang. You have to go in through kobold territory in order to get to the deeper levels where the better treasure is found, and you have to leave through kobold territory, now worn down from fighting stronger monsters and weighed down by all the loot you salvaged. So, you start off with a ton of high-intensity action, then things calm down a bit once you make it down to a lower level, gradually ramping back up the deeper you go, until you decide to turn back around, at which point it kind of ramps back down. but, knowing that you’ll have to try to escape the kobolds again, that break is more of a tension-building device. The weaker the enemies get as you make your way back up, the closer you know you’re getting to those damn Kobolds again! It makes what would otherwise be the denouement into the deep breath before the plunge. And then you end on another high-intensity, high-action note.

It would also make shortcuts and secret entrances that might bypass kobold territory in the dungeon into a highly valuable reward.

 

[LordBP]

So I think the problem is that it worked great for Tucker, but in all the retellings and embellishments and then the r/rpghorrorstories that spin off of it, it ended up playing into a common theme at the time - the DM as adversary who was gonna beat the players. The joy of shocked players against an unexpected challenge was replaced by the insurmountability of the challenge, as well as the sometimes mocking tone those retellings often took.

The lesson of how to make that work well was never imparted, IMO.

It all depends on the players too. Tucker was running a game at Ft Bragg or next to it.

Bragg had Rangers, Special Forces, Delta, Airborne, and other units there during the 80s.

If Tucker's players were from the above named units, they would probably enjoy the challenge, but others may not have.

 

[Charlaquin]

So I think the problem is that it worked great for Tucker, but in all the retellings and embellishments and then the r/rpghorrorstories that spin off of it, it ended up playing into a common theme at the time - the DM as adversary who was gonna beat the players. The joy of shocked players against an unexpected challenge was replaced by the insurmountability of the challenge, as well as the sometimes mocking tone those retellings often took.

The lesson of how to make that work well was never imparted, IMO.

Very true! The story wasn’t really about how to make a fun and memorable challenge using ostensibly weak monsters, it was about reminiscing about a fun and memorable challenge the teller once had against ostensibly weak monsters. I also think Tucker’s success would be hard to imitate, not only because of lack of detail on how he pulled it off, but also because the story occurred in a different context. It reads to me like an expert case of playing with gameplay conventions of the time (a hack-and-slash, dungeon-delving campaign with dungeon levels that increase in difficulty and reward with depth) and subverting those conventions in a particularly novel and memorable way. But those conventions are not nearly as common today, and that particular subversion of them is no longer novel. So, trying to recreate Tucker’s Kobolds, even with technically excellent execution, probably wouldn’t have the same impact now that it had then.

That isn’t to say trying to make Kobolds fun and dangerous to play using custom stats and clever tactics is a bad idea or shouldn’t be done. Just that it probably won’t blow anyone’s mind any more.

 

[TiQuinn]

It all depends on the players too. Tucker was running a game at Ft Bragg or next to it.

Bragg had Rangers, Special Forces, Delta, Airborne, and other units there during the 80s.

If Tucker's players were from the above named units, they would probably enjoy the challenge, but others may not have.

That’s a great point!

 

[CreamCloud0]

then I’m just engaging in an exercise in making this monster punch way above its weight.

wasn't half the original point of tucker's kobolds to make the low CR, outclassed monster punch above their weight?

 

[TiQuinn]

wasn't half the original point of tucker's kobolds to make the low CR, outclassed monster punch above their weight?

Yes, but my point is, as a DM, when do you stop overtuning the encounter?