Quote from: Lord Mistborn;579846No, grinding on low end challenges is the logical way to go. PCs have little fear of death because the can get ressed/reroll but if you're not in a hurry grinding on low level stuff is ideal for NPCs. No risk of death and they're still gaining exp. Unless this is 3e we're talking about where stuff 8 levels below you nets you no xp.

Oh man, you're right. This is why all those CEOs have second jobs slinging burgers at McDonalds!

RPGPundit

Quote from: Sommerjon;580018The absurdity is your insistance that D&D sandbox isn't mechanical but organic.

D&D is a level based game.  Level is pure mechanical.

Oh I see, you decided to grotesquely misinterpret my statement!

Old School D&D treats its setting organically, that is, as a virtual world with internal consistency.  that doesn't mean that the D&D doesn't have mehanics; it means that those mechanics are bound to the world, and not that the world is just a pointless facade, a backdrop for a completely dissociated set of mechanics.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;579367Seriously, does someone want to try to defend this notion?

Sure, I'll play devil's advocate for a moment: If you subscribe to the theory that adventure design means preparing a plot that the players then experience, then it's absolutely a good idea to provide the GM with some guidance on how many (and what type) of encounters they can include in their plot without slaughtering the PCs.

IOW, if you assume that the GM is the one who controls what the PCs encounter, how they encounter it, and when they encounter it, then you've got to give the GM advice on how much the PCs can handle.

This doesn't necessarily mean that the GM should "ignore the game world" and include level 2 encounters in the Dragon Swamp: It just means that when the GM is running a guided tour, they shouldn't be taking level 2 characters through Dragon Swamp.

Obviously, speaking as the author of "Don't Prep Plots" I think that entire philosophy of GMing and adventure design is bollocks. (And, in large part, I think it's bollocks specifically because it puts all kinds of unnecessary responsibility on the GM's back.) But if you buy into the "railroads are awesome because I hate tot think for myself and/or players can't be trusted!" school of thought, then suggested encounters aren't just a good idea: They're required.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;580221Sure, I'll play devil's advocate for a moment: If you subscribe to the theory that adventure design means preparing a plot that the players then experience, then it's absolutely a good idea to provide the GM with some guidance on how many (and what type) of encounters they can include in their plot without slaughtering the PCs.

I had typed up a post about how the 'Encounters per Adventure' guidelines were pretty much tailor made for plot-driven adventures, but it had gotten too long-winded to come to a coherent point and scrapped it.

I don't think that all plot-driven adventures are necessarily railroads, and that 'sandboxes' are necessarily free of them though.  Any dangling plot hooks that don't get bites from the PCs aren't forever ruined, since they can still be used at a later date, or even in future campaigns with minimal modifications.  That is to say that just because you are playing plot-driven games that doesn't mean you have to force players hands into your 'story' or throw away all of your prep when it doesn't get used.

I suspect that the "Encounters per Adventure" has been used in-house by TSR and later WotC for their pre-made, heavily plot-driven, no downtime paperback adventures, and was drafted for the DMG since the publication of those adventures has promoted a style of game that is very similar to what is in those pre-mades, even in homebrew games.

Also a contributing factor is that the player v. monster balance is much less transparent and intuitive in 3e than it was in 2e and I'm sure 1e.  'Encounter' design in 2e was almost entirely contained within the monster's write up in the MM, and level v. HD comparisons of power were often 1:1 (until mid-level or so), which isn't the case in 3.x where HD and CR/EL are out of whack even at low levels.

Of course the CR system is kind of busted anyway, so it's a moot point since virtually no one uses these guidelines that don't really work out of the box and just eyeballs it all eventually.

Quote from: estar;580160While the punditry is awe inspiring the utter lack of details makes the above statement as well supported as a wet noodle.

Pure and simple, D&D Levels wrap up a set of abilities and skills.  Character take big leaps in capabilities when they level. This is little different than when a GURPS Game or Hero System Game where the referee awards 50 points at one time. You may not prefer it this type of system, but class & level doesn't restrict the referee in the range of worlds he can create or run.

And if the setup of classes and what they gain at each level match the setting the referee is using, the campaign is much more approachable to novices and straightforward to learn than skill based games. Something I have direct experience with when running the Majestic Wilderlands using Swords & Wizardry and when I run it using GURPS.

What you been arguing boils down to "I don't prefer Class & Level". Fine you don't like it, so move on. Unless you don't understand how to use a class & level system for a setting. In which I would be happy to answer your questions as I have some small measure of experience in this area.

No it isn't about "I don't prefer Class & Level"  it's the wankery that sandbox is organic in a level based game.

It isn't.

Quote from: RPGPundit;580214Oh I see, you decided to grotesquely misinterpret my statement!

Old School D&D treats its setting organically, that is, as a virtual world with internal consistency.  that doesn't mean that the D&D doesn't have mehanics; it means that those mechanics are bound to the world, and not that the world is just a pointless facade, a backdrop for a completely dissociated set of mechanics.

RPGPundit

Sandbox + level based game =  Contrived bullshit on an order of magnitude far greater than your insistent whining about encounters per day.

 "sandboxes and other old-school games aren't about 'making no reference to the PC power/level', but they don't do this in a mechanistic way, rather in an organic fashion in accordance with the setting; ie. starting the PCs out in a relatively safe area of the world, having less dangerous dungeons more closeby;"

How the hell is it 'organic' to start the PCs out in a relatively safe area of the world, having less dangerous dungeons more close by?

You 'populate' the sandbox with level based areas then give hints/hooks on which areas are which allowing the PCs to make meta game decisions based upon that knowledge.
- the old abandoned mine to the West. Word is that the goblins that have been stealing goats & sheep are hold up there.
- The ruined keep to the South. People say that those who get too close are never seen again. JoBob the grain merchant says that he saw a bunch of ogres near that place once. He ran for his life!
- The mountains to the North are said to be home to a tribe of hill giants. The folks up that way give them a lot of livestock to get left alone.

Isn't that how the real world works?
- the corner shop. Not much to see, and they've got a camera, but there is cash in the till and a few more valuables.
- the Apple store in the local mall. Lots of magic items, has better alarms and mall security.
- Main Street bank. These guys are armed, there are timed alarms, and the cops will be there in a bit. An obvious mid-level area.
- the Federal reserve bank. Acererak the Lich built this, and there are also beholders and mind flayers.

Quote from: mcbobbo;580008Ask your local jaguars, grizzly bears, wolves, Aztecs, and Apaches if this is or is not the case ITRW.

So you're making my case that there'll be some areas in the world where the threats available are diminished. Just like how some areas will be so currently dominated by a civilization as to be safe for lower level PCs of the same.

... why you metagaming, non-realist GM, you.



Either that, or you're suggesting America is the totality of the world (or the modern age is the totality of time). But that's just silly.

Quote from: Melan;580276Isn't that how the real world works?
- the corner shop. Not much to see, and they've got a camera, but there is cash in the till and a few more valuables.
- the Apple store in the local mall. Lots of magic items, has better alarms and mall security.
- Main Street bank. These guys are armed, there are timed alarms, and the cops will be there in a bit. An obvious mid-level area.
- the Federal reserve bank. Acererak the Lich built this, and there are also beholders and mind flayers.

Shhh! Setting logic is contrived bullshit, remember? You're obviously metagaming!

Besides, everyone knows that every level-based game has to start out in a safe rustic village, with a nearby goblin lair, and the party meets in a tavern. It's in the DMG appendices! It can't happen any other way.

Quote from: Melan;580276Isn't that how the real world works?
- the corner shop. Not much to see, and they've got a camera, but there is cash in the till and a few more valuables.
- the Apple store in the local mall. Lots of magic items, has better alarms and mall security.
- Main Street bank. These guys are armed, there are timed alarms, and the cops will be there in a bit. An obvious mid-level area.
- the Federal reserve bank. Acererak the Lich built this, and there are also beholders and mind flayers.

I could definitely believe a Lich had something to do with the Federal Reserve.

JG

Quote from: Melan;580276Isn't that how the real world works?
- the corner shop. Not much to see, and they've got a camera, but there is cash in the till and a few more valuables.
- the Apple store in the local mall. Lots of magic items, has better alarms and mall security.
- Main Street bank. These guys are armed, there are timed alarms, and the cops will be there in a bit. An obvious mid-level area.
- the Federal reserve bank. Acererak the Lich built this, and there are also beholders and mind flayers.

Except that the examples you give are all talking about humans at levels 1-3.

The security guard at the Mall apple store is a 0level guy. The security guards at the federal reserve are maybe 2nd level at best.

If you introduce the level paradigm into a game you are almost exactly saying that the PCs can expect to find level equivalent challenges. That might be becuase you run them through Bone Hill (and adventure for characters of levels 1-3) or because you give them meta game hints in game - there are goblins in the old mine.
The game rules determine the type of game you get.

In a game of traveller where there are no levels and PCs can start with widely varied skill levels you don't get the goblin planet, the ogre planet and the Giant planet. Things are more generically mixed. There is a space port and there are criminal gangs there aren't 1HD criminal gangs and 4 HD criminal gangs.

This is a good way to ensure that the game is fun becuase you are fighting level appropriate foes, another way to do that would be to design an adventure based on a certain number of things the party could deal with. I don;t do the later for several reasons, mainly its too much prep and I am lazy and I can better ad lib a sandbox

Nevertheless, just because those Federeal Reserve guys are "only" 3rd level, there haven't seen so many attempts at cracking the place. It has a reputation among adventurers.

Of course, threat levels in a sandbox game are not necessarily clear-cut. There isn't always an optimal amount of information. A dragon, sure, but when you happen upon a set of ruins high in the mountains, there are fewer clues, except that the mountains themselves are a dangerous area. That's where taking chances, reconnaissance and being prepared to improvise/run come into the picture.

[edit]Technically, there is an average threat level in traditional D&D, which mainly comes from the wilderness encounter tables (which form the backbone of the implied setting). These typically mean encounters which are reasonably challenging for mid-level parties, with some outliers (dragons, high-level undead). There is also some differentiation by terrain type - plains are mostly safe, mountains, swamps and ruins can contain much nastier stuff. So there is a baseline, and there are deviations from that - safer areas (in civilised lands, a certain percentage of encounters occur with patrols, which makes travel safer) and concentrations of danger.

Quote from: Melan;580276Isn't that how the real world works?
- the corner shop. Not much to see, and they've got a camera, but there is cash in the till and a few more valuables.
- the Apple store in the local mall. Lots of magic items, has better alarms and mall security.
- Main Street bank. These guys are armed, there are timed alarms, and the cops will be there in a bit. An obvious mid-level area.
- the Federal reserve bank. Acererak the Lich built this, and there are also beholders and mind flayers.

Excellent!

Quote from: Sommerjon;580263No it isn't about "I don't prefer Class & Level"  it's the wankery that sandbox is organic in a level based game.

So what is the exact difference between a 250 pt GURPS character focusing on combat and a 10th D&D Fighter on there relative impact on the setting?

Quote from: Sommerjon;580263You 'populate' the sandbox with level based areas then give hints/hooks on which areas are which allowing the PCs to make meta game decisions based upon that knowledge.

You are assuming that areas are level based. That is not a valid assumption for all settings run with a class & level system.

Nor it a valid assumption that settings designed for skill based system are not level based. With level being whatever the system measure progression by.

Quote from: estar;580324You are assuming that areas are level based. That is not a valid assumption for all settings run with a class & level system.

Not always but mostly

QuoteNor it a valid assumption that settings designed for skill based system are not level based. With level being whatever the system measure progression by.

Look at my traveller example.... the only genuine differentiator in  traveller game is Tech level and Seriousness and they are very much real in game considerations and not MetaGame considerations.