Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 195001" data-attributes="member: 172">Okay. A simple fact is that most encounters in D&amp;D are intended to be cakewalks, at least when considered alone. But naturally, DMs and adventure writers will want to create challenges (be they combat, puzzles, negotiations, or what have you.) But if you really try to make these events challenging, there will be some chance that the players will fail to overcome the obstacle.Let's say you have three encounters you want to put into your game: a puzzle, a combat, and a negotiation. Let's say there is a real chance that the players won't overcome all of these challenges. Say 10%.Now, if you require that the PCs overcome all three challenges to beat the adventure, the chance of them outright failing to meet their goals in the story are pretty significant, close to thrity percent. (27.1% to be exact). You should brace yourself for the very real possibility that the players will fail to meet the objective of the adventure. (Now that isn't a fate worse than death if you plan for the possibility of failure, another thing that many adventures fail to do. BID.)On the other hand, if you set up the situation where succeeding in any one of those three is sufficient, and the players having failed at one my try another, you aren't so likely to trounce the players. The chance of failing the adventure goes down (drastically, like .1%) despite the fact that each encounter contained a modicum of challenge. In fact, you can safely play with more challenging single encounters if you arrange them in parallel.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Psion, post: 195001, member: 172"] Okay. A simple fact is that most encounters in D&D are intended to be cakewalks, at least when considered alone. But naturally, DMs and adventure writers will want to create challenges (be they combat, puzzles, negotiations, or what have you.) But if you really try to make these events challenging, there will be some chance that the players will fail to overcome the obstacle. Let's say you have three encounters you want to put into your game: a puzzle, a combat, and a negotiation. Let's say there is a real chance that the players won't overcome all of these challenges. Say 10%. Now, if you require that the PCs overcome all three challenges to beat the adventure, the chance of them outright failing to meet their goals in the story are pretty significant, close to thrity percent. (27.1% to be exact). You should brace yourself for the very real possibility that the players will fail to meet the objective of the adventure. (Now that isn't a fate worse than death if you plan for the possibility of failure, another thing that many adventures fail to do. BID.) On the other hand, if you set up the situation where succeeding in any one of those three is sufficient, and the players having failed at one my try another, you aren't so likely to trounce the players. The chance of failing the adventure goes down (drastically, like .1%) despite the fact that each encounter contained a modicum of challenge. In fact, you can safely play with more challenging single encounters if you arrange them in parallel. [/QUOTE]

Verification