Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 9183387" data-attributes="member: 6877472">Infinite in &quot;as much as is required&quot;, generally.&nbsp; I'm not advocating &quot;keep adding monsters until the party is deceased&quot; lol.In the case of Undermountain, as presented, the place isn't going to run out of monsters.&nbsp; You can certainly clear out large areas of the dungeon for a little while, but it's not going to stay that way, nor can you expect it to.Some years ago, I was running a hexcrawl.&nbsp; The players were exploring parts of the map, clearing out monsters as they went.&nbsp; After a few weeks of this, they went back to an area that they had previously explored and had an encounter.&nbsp; One of my players cried foul &quot;but we killed everything there!&quot;.&quot;No, you killed the thing you encountered there at that time.&nbsp; Do you honestly think there's only one dangerous creature in this area?&nbsp; Or that everything that's dangerous here is going to be present when you happen by?&nbsp; Or that new predators can't move in after awhile?&quot;&quot;But that means killing all these monsters is pointless if they can just come back!&quot;&quot;If your goal is to keep an area monster free, then you're going to have to do more work.&nbsp; You can't just enter a hex and kill everything you find, you need to consider what's in the surrounding hexes as well.&nbsp; Simply put, it's going to take a lot more work to keep an area threat free forever.&quot;&quot;So you'll just keep restocking these areas with infinitely respawning monsters any time we come back.&quot;&quot;It depends on how long you've been away.&nbsp; Come back here tomorrow, chances are good nothing is going to attack you.&nbsp; Come back here in a week or two?&nbsp; Chances aren't as good.&quot;What I knew, and they didn't know, was that some hexes had alternate encounters, and there was a general &quot;wandering predator&quot; check I made any time the players would enter an empty hex.&nbsp; Was I going to endlessly populate the forest?&nbsp; Of course not.&nbsp; But I thought, at the time, that the risk of a potential threat anywhere they went made more sense than not.That player didn't think so.&nbsp; They felt that if they killed a few stirges, they should never encounter another stirge.&nbsp; Whereas I had a much higher necessary kill count in my head, as well as finding things like where the stirges nested, destroying their eggs, and so on.But upon reflection, I considered that I hadn't made this clear to the players, I'd simply assumed that what was logical to me would have naturally occurred to them as well.&nbsp; This became more apparent as they encountered threats they weren't able to handle just yet- my intent had been to make them realize the threat, prepare for it, and go back later.&nbsp; They instead opted to explore new areas rather than ever return, lol.&nbsp; Realizing that this was frustrating them, I made some changes and brought the adventure more in line with their expectations.&nbsp; Because that's what a good DM does, as far as I'm concerned.&nbsp; It's not that my initial plan was a bad idea, it just wasn't a good fit for my play group.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James Gasik, post: 9183387, member: 6877472"] Infinite in "as much as is required", generally. I'm not advocating "keep adding monsters until the party is deceased" lol. In the case of Undermountain, as presented, the place isn't going to run out of monsters. You can certainly clear out large areas of the dungeon for a little while, but it's not going to stay that way, nor can you expect it to. Some years ago, I was running a hexcrawl. The players were exploring parts of the map, clearing out monsters as they went. After a few weeks of this, they went back to an area that they had previously explored and had an encounter. One of my players cried foul "but we killed everything there!". "No, you killed the thing you encountered there at that time. Do you honestly think there's only one dangerous creature in this area? Or that everything that's dangerous here is going to be present when you happen by? Or that new predators can't move in after awhile?" "But that means killing all these monsters is pointless if they can just come back!" "If your goal is to keep an area monster free, then you're going to have to do more work. You can't just enter a hex and kill everything you find, you need to consider what's in the surrounding hexes as well. Simply put, it's going to take a lot more work to keep an area threat free forever." "So you'll just keep restocking these areas with infinitely respawning monsters any time we come back." "It depends on how long you've been away. Come back here tomorrow, chances are good nothing is going to attack you. Come back here in a week or two? Chances aren't as good." What I knew, and they didn't know, was that some hexes had alternate encounters, and there was a general "wandering predator" check I made any time the players would enter an empty hex. Was I going to endlessly populate the forest? Of course not. But I thought, at the time, that the risk of a potential threat anywhere they went made more sense than not. That player didn't think so. They felt that if they killed a few stirges, they should never encounter another stirge. Whereas I had a much higher necessary kill count in my head, as well as finding things like where the stirges nested, destroying their eggs, and so on. But upon reflection, I considered that I hadn't made this clear to the players, I'd simply assumed that what was logical to me would have naturally occurred to them as well. This became more apparent as they encountered threats they weren't able to handle just yet- my intent had been to make them realize the threat, prepare for it, and go back later. They instead opted to explore new areas rather than ever return, lol. Realizing that this was frustrating them, I made some changes and brought the adventure more in line with their expectations. Because that's what a good DM does, as far as I'm concerned. It's not that my initial plan was a bad idea, it just wasn't a good fit for my play group. [/QUOTE]

Verification