I use random encounters on occasion. Sometimes it makes sense that a group might 'bump into' something during the course of an adventure. I also use percentage chances of planned encounters. Say guards. The guards are there, that is a given. But the players might only have a small chance to encounter them if there aren't many of them. Variables can change that. Do the guards have a warning of an incursion? Have the characters been noisy or flashy? Not quite the same as a 'random' encounter.

All very interesting stuff. This will teach me to start a thread when I have house guest for the weekend and can't get back to it.

As for
Can you expand on what you mean by "part of the players ongoing plot?"

Meaning the players plot is they want to go speak to a wizard about getting some information on X.That is their ongoing plot. If a tiger, completely unrelated to the wizard, attacked them would be a random encounter.

I think my main question is if I write up the tiger as a possible encounter versus rolling on a chart to determine it is that a "Random" encounter by posters on the this board.

I have some issues with random tables for encounters

1) if you roll and don't like the encounter, then choose again why have the chart?
2) charts take time to make, depending on the system a lot of time to prepare fully. And some people do like cruncher systems so saying use a light easy system does not help.
3) sometimes even a good encounter coming up doesn't mean at that moment my creative juices are flowing enough to shoehorn it into what is going on.
4) non combat stuff on a list is the sort of thing I do anyway. I usually don't need a random chart to remind me to throw out creepy random stuff in the dungeons or graveyards, Or to have an encounter on the roadway with a broken wagon or pilgrims.  I try to do that as a course of habit.



Maybe I suck as A gm  
Which I am sure some people would say but I like to mull over things in my mind before laying them out at the table but when I do this it does not mean I have some predetermined plan usually the opposite I have lots of plans on the way things can go.




I do appreciate at the discussion it is very interesting.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;806902All very interesting stuff. This will teach me to start a thread when I have house guest for the weekend and can't get back to it.

As for
Can you expand on what you mean by "part of the players ongoing plot?"

Meaning the players plot is they want to go speak to a wizard about getting some information on X.That is their ongoing plot. If a tiger, completely unrelated to the wizard, attacked them would be a random encounter.

Ah. Thanks for that. I would consider that "incidental", but not necessarily random.

QuoteI think my main question is if I write up the tiger as a possible encounter versus rolling on a chart to determine it is that a "Random" encounter by posters on the this board.

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. I will design set piece encounters and then put them into a random encounter table. But to answer the question, if the method you use to determine when the encounter happens isn't random, then I would generally not consider it a random encounter.

QuoteI have some issues with random tables for encounters

1) if you roll and don't like the encounter, then choose again why have the chart?
2) charts take time to make, depending on the system a lot of time to prepare fully. And some people do like cruncher systems so saying use a light easy system does not help.
3) sometimes even a good encounter coming up doesn't mean at that moment my creative juices are flowing enough to shoehorn it into what is going on.
4) non combat stuff on a list is the sort of thing I do anyway. I usually don't need a random chart to remind me to throw out creepy random stuff in the dungeons or graveyards, Or to have an encounter on the roadway with a broken wagon or pilgrims.  I try to do that as a course of habit.

Some quick thoughts/responses from my point of view.

1) the chart is there to serve you, not the other way around. If the chart happens to generate something that you realize makes much less sense than another option that maybe just occurred to you after you rolled, then go with what you prefer. That's why human GM's are the best, after all.

2) there's going to be a tipping point in efficiency where putting more effort into something that is reusable is a net positive. I typically find it worthwhile, factoring in the likelihood that I can reuse them. YMMV.

3) my question here would be, if you have to shoehorn it in, then why were you rolling for a random encounter? Also, perhaps the world doesn't hold off the random band of orcs who come across you while you are chasing that damned doppelgänger cross country. This latter point is obviously very much GM preference.

4) this an entirely valid approach, and Panjumanju seems to feel similarly in that his brain is random enough to the task of triggering encounters.  If I have a traveling tradesman that the PCs might encounter from time to time on the roads, I'll typically prefer to have that in a table. And if it so happened that they encounter him within a few days of the full moon, they might have a combat encounter with his lycanthropic alter ego. If this is an incidental encounter (not in the players current plot, as you put it), then that's another check mark for me to include it in a random encounter table. This may be showing my tendency toward sandboxy play a bit.

That's my 0.02 drachmas, anyway.

QuoteMaybe I suck as A gm  
Which I am sure some people would say but I like to mull over things in my mind before laying them out at the table but when I do this it does not mean I have some predetermined plan usually the opposite I have lots of plans on the way things can go.

Well, I think the evidence of the thought you've given to it points in the other direction!

QuoteI do appreciate at the discussion it is very interesting.

Indeed. Talking about how others play gives me opportunities to improve myself.

Quote from: Bren;806743Random Encounters have been around since the beginning of the hobby. Which makes this entire thread bewildering to me.

The players are bored (or more aptly the GM is bored) so suddenly Ninjas burst into the room may be random in the sense of odd and unexpected, but it is not a random encounter in the sense used in RPGs where "random" is short for a random number generated by die roll and then applied to a specific table based on location or other factors.

This above is a very important point. The accepted jargon of Random Encounters has already been established for over a generation. It is essentially an automated content generator with a random determiner.

How you seed the generator (what you put in), be it hostile critters, weird environmental anomalies, or what have you, is less a RAW function as a GM aid recommendation. Similarly so is the actual method of random determination, as you are free to use a dice table, pile of cards, spin-wheel, etc. The jargon term is already occupied and been quite well defined since the earliest of this hobby.

That this content generation aid has been out of vogue may lead to some modern confusion, but for the most part there is strong continuity as to "defining what 'is' is."

Quote from: jibbajibba;806745Like I have said a billion times I am incredibly lazy so now for D&D I just flick through some suitable magic cards and pull a set that look good. I have 6 decks for my current game.

CCG Cards are a great method for populating a table and randomly determining it. They are ready-mades for Random Encounter generation. I cannot recommend this tool enough, especially since there is so much cross pollination between CCGs and RPGs. Vampire, Rage, Spellfire, Star Wars, Star Trek, 7th Sea, L5R, LBS, Shadowrun, Netrunner, etc. all material being literally tossed into the dumpster to make way for new material.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;806902As for
Can you expand on what you mean by "part of the players ongoing plot?"[...]

I think my main question is if I write up the tiger as a possible encounter versus rolling on a chart to determine it is that a "Random" encounter by posters on the this board.

Creating the tiger is merely creating content — hopefully contextualized (i.e. no inexplicable deep sea Bengal Tigers) — to populate setting. That's it. It is the answering of the basic question: What is here?

Random Encounters answers a wholly different question: Of what is here, what do I come across right now?

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;806902I have some issues with random tables for encounters

1) if you roll and don't like the encounter, then choose again why have the chart?

Well, since it is merely a content generator to aid the GM, you tell me. If you obviously had something in mind why did you leave it up to chance on that specific table? Further, you can always have more, or edit, tables.

You can also use general probability without previously prepared fields. Basically you can make a random content generator on the fly (many GMs do this already, especially with systems where Degree of Success is prominent). Create a percentile probability for several outcomes and then roll upon the newly fashioned table in your mind.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;8069022) charts take time to make, depending on the system a lot of time to prepare fully. And some people do like cruncher systems so saying use a light easy system does not help.

No, no they don't. Random Encounter content generators are not a formally systematized method (there is no licensed, approved version) — nor are they regularly integrated into a system's hard mechanics (they are discrete). You probably already fashioned ad hoc tables in your mind routinely during play sessions and are needlessly complicating this GM aid in your mind.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;8069023) sometimes even a good encounter coming up doesn't mean at that moment my creative juices are flowing enough to shoehorn it into what is going on.

That is why all the other 'forgotten' Random Encounter tables were made. Ideas such as: Time of Day, Likelihood, Distance, Weather, Visibility, Quantity Appearing, Disposition, and so on flesh out the experience. These other tools were part and parcel of the Random Encounter GM aid package. They are there for the GM to lean on when they are either fresh out of ideas or ambivalent on the results.

You are missing out on a terribly useful tool to ease your GM experience. They help alleviate workload for more processing power later. Go back to the old DMGs, check out the tools, see how you can repurpose these generic tools to your needs.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;8069024) non combat stuff on a list is the sort of thing I do anyway. I usually don't need a random chart to remind me to throw out creepy random stuff in the dungeons or graveyards, Or to have an encounter on the roadway with a broken wagon or pilgrims.  I try to do that as a course of habit.

As do I, but it helps to reflect on the definition of Encounter versus Environment. Encounters are experiences where one can derive meaning, where one can learn. Creepy random stuff in dungeons and graveyards can easily lapse into atmosphere and mood. PCs have to be able to make meaningful decisions in response to encountering such things.

And again, it is merely a tool to seed content, hopefully with context, into a setting milieu. It is there to take the work off of you when you are processing something else. If you find yourself so creatively profuse then, yes, maybe such adaptions of the tool does not suit your needs. No harm, no foul.

I like a lot of the advice here. But I think when talking about Random Encounter mechanics, in the context of D&D specifically, they actually ARE integrated into the system's hard mechanics (on the GM side). And while they can definitely be abstracted out and made distinct for use elsewhere, I'm actually really interested in how they were used during the classic dungeoncrawls. I'll re-iterate my thesis, I guess.... I find this really help understand what GM-facing mechanical effects these RE rolls had on either the dungeon map in play, or the overland map being explored.

Quote from: Telarus;806568
Today, I tent to think of Random Encounters (from classic D&D play) as two related-but-distinct mechanics.

Overland Random Encounters (wilderness scale) were meant to fill details into the hex-map, and definitely have a good non-combat to combat split. The combat-style encounters of 'monsters' are meant to seed conflict and pressure to the map exploration game, and either generate an 'encounter group' or an 'adventure location/lairs' - based on the "% in Lair" roll. the encounter groups wuold probably wander until dealt with by the players. The Lairs would generate more monsters and serve as adventure locations.

Look to the "Plains/Forests/Mountains" style Random Encounter tables for this RE version. The items/actors generated here should begin to influence the game world, orcs taking territory, giant Rocs messing with the kingdom's cattle and horses, etc. Rolling at the end of the day for Overland RE checks means the GM has a night of narration to figure out how to work this new story item into the game-world.

Underworld Random Encounters (dungeon scale) were meant to add a time-sensitive pressure to dungeon exploration. The RE charts for this style of mechanics is usually found with dungeons and location supplements. The DMG advice is to roll once per player-turn (10 minute of exploration..) sometimes it's once per 2 turns, and less or more often if the group is taking precautions or making a lot of noise. From they way I read the early modules, the monsters generated from these charts are added to the total dungeon roster when their roll comes up ("These random encounters do not deplete the numbers of others in the dungeon."). In this way, if a party lingers they may have to deal with a Gnoll warband of much larger numbers than if they had not. Just hand-wave the discontinuity, there were always 20 Gnolls there

As I mentioned in the previous post, for the Moathouse Dungeon, I actually had 2 pre-rolled lists of Random Encounter Results, one generated from the upper floor chart, one from the dungeon chart.

I then rolled the 1-in-d6 check each 10 minute turn (1-in-12 for the upper floor actually), and used the result at the top of the list if the RE check was positive. Didn't have to check another chart, any monsters generated had stat-cards ready, no slowdown of play in any way. The really interesting thing was I was never sure where the players were going to be when those extra d6 Bandits, or pair of Bugbear, would show up. I knew it was "the 5th positive RE check" (or whatever), but when that happened was taken out of my hands. Seeing the procedural content generation in action like that was really cool.

I do shit tons of partial-random.  Too damn lazy to make actual charts or the like, though.  Roll randomly to see if anything unusual, pull somethng out of my ass if it is.  Higher the roll, the more significant.  If using a premade module and it has a chart already made, I often use it.  Or not as whim takes the session.  

Usually up to the players whether it is a combat encounter or not.  You see some giants tossing a halfling back and forth in the distance.

And lots of random rolls to determine what NPCs are doing.  Randomly roll to see if they are alert, asleep, or whatever.  This very often determines whether and if an encounter happens, but really isn't a random encounter.

Quote from: jibbajibba;806421No that is not a random encounter.
A random encounter is just that what you have is a number of set encounters the PCs may randomly encounter based on other variables.

I like random encounters but I don't like GMs that are too lazy to sort out encounters that make sense for that region in their setting. Too may Dms will roll on a generic encounter table and then try to retrofit whatever comes up into their setting.
Use an encounter method that suits your setting. I am currently using a deck of magic cards which i have set up in advance. Working very well. All tyeh encounters it chucks out are random and unplanned but some of them relate to a local treat,, ie. Goblin patrols.

Yep, pretty much. On Monday I was running my 4E game with some 1st level PCs as they were traveling through Cormyr (a kingdom in Forgotten Realms) and they had to rest of the night. I had the players roll to determine if there would be a random encounter. In my head I have them a 75% chance that there wouldn't be one and the player rolled a low (%16) with the intent of wanting high (26% to 100% being no encounter). Luckily I had this 3e Book that came with the FR Dungeon Master Screen with all these areas of terrain and I just matched the terrain they were in and had them roll to see what would come up. It didn't matter if the creature weren't of the appropriate level or whatever because the world doesn't assume the PCs will be any level.

As it  turns out he rolled for Wraiths (a level 5 monster) and there was 2 of them. In the end they defeated the Wraiths though it was difficult because the PCs were only 1st level. All in all it was good and interesting.

The long accepted meaning is clear: What random means here is that the particular event (and usually also when the event occurs) is a selection made by a device such as a die roll or a draw from a deck of cards.

Wherther it is random in any other sense is not a definitive criterion. A random-encounter domain could exclude all phenomena in San Francisco that have no bearing on the affair of the Maltese Falcon; whether that is desireable is a separate question from the question of definition.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;806916Ah. Thanks for that. I would consider that "incidental", but not necessarily random.

Me too.

QuoteThose two things aren't mutually exclusive. I will design set piece encounters and then put them into a random encounter table. But to answer the question, if the method you use to determine when the encounter happens isn't random, then I would generally not consider it a random encounter.

One example is the old Chaosium Griffon Mountain for Runequest 2. Griffon Mouuntain is one of the best (if not the best) supplements ever written for sandbox style play.  It includes sets of unique NPCs, a set of generic NPCs (Average Hunter or Guardsman, Good Hunter or Guardsman, Master Hunter, etc.) predesigned encounters (e.g. Joh Mith's Merchant Caravan, a Zorak Zoran Troll War Party, Lunar Empire patrol, group of Elves, group of Dwarves, etc.), and a set of very odd events and locations (e.g. a strange cloud formation that acts out a mythological battle, a bound godling wanting to be freed, an ancient undead troll tomb, a dryad's grove, etc.) . All of these were included in the various random encounter tables. So their occurrence was randomly generated, but they included the level of depth and detail for individual creatures (stats, skills, weapons, and spells along with individual histories) that would take time to generate on the fly.

I agree with Natty Bodak's comments on 1), 2), 3), and 4).

I would also add that as a GM I like being surprised and I can't really be very surprised by anything I think of at the time even if it is tangential or unrelated to what is currently going on in the game. But I can be surprised by what shows up on a random table and by the serendipity of some of those random encounters with what is already going on the game world.

I've GMed both with and without random tables. I hardly ever used random tables in Call of Cthulhu or for Star Wars, but I've started introducing more random tables to my Honor+Intrigue game just to add the possibility of my being surprised.

I recently created a set of random tables for the underworld of Paris for my Honor+Intrigue game. Using random tables made sense to me for several reasons.

• I expect the underworld will be used in multiple adventures and sessions so the tables have the potential for repeated use.
• The underground area is large enough that mapping and stocking every tunnel, crypt, and room would be more time consuming than generating some tables.
• Since the game is 17th century swashbuckling adventure not a traditional fantasy dungeon crawl, the time spent to draw, stock, and key a traditional dungeon hardly seems likely to be a good use of my GM time. For all I know the players may find the idea of grubbing about underground or slogging through sewers totally uninteresting or their PCs may actively hate the idea and avoid it whenever they can.
• The exercise of generating tables made me think about what could reasonably be in this underworld. The research on what actually is under Paris was interesting and useful to better understand the city ancient as well as modern so it was useful as GM prep.
• And as I already said, the tables allow me the opportunity to be surprised by they encounter.

The Underworld of Paris in the Seventeenth Century: Much of the underworld I've created is historical. Although the period (1624 AD) predates the Paris catacombs and sewers seen in the works of Victor Hugo and others, there is a historical 14th century sewer, an underground aqueduct c. 1622, buried Roman Baths, and on the outskirts of Paris there are abandoned limestone and gypsum mines which will later become the Catacombs. Some things may be fictional or enhanced, e.g. the ancient sewers of Roman Lutetia are inferred my what the Romans did in other cities; the temple to the Horned God inspired by the bas relief column found beneath Notre Dame does not have a real world analog (or perhaps we just haven't dug in the right place yet), the old Roman Arena that was turned into a Roman Necropolis owes more to the imagination of Neil Gaiman and Mike Mignola than to actual history; and the warren of earthen tunnels beneath the ancient cemeteries is inspired by some of the writings of H.P. Lovecraft not by actual history.

Quote from: Telarus;806568Today, I tent to think of Random Encounters as two related-but-distinct mechanics.

Overland Random Encounters (wilderness scale) were meant to fill details into the hex-map...

Underworld Random Encounters (dungeon scale) were meant to add a time-sensitive pressure to dungeon exploration. ..

While you can make that differentiation. I never did. Nor do I think that the rules encouraged such a differentiation. Both sets of tables are designed for dangerous areas outside of the control of civilized society (human or otherwise). The dungeon wandering monster tables work perfectly well for general stocking of dungeon areas in the exact same way that wilderness monster tables work for "stocking" wilderness hexes. Typically one would add a few specially crafted elements to a particular dungeon level (e.g. Level 1 West has the Temple of the Cult of the Serpent, a rotating room, a fountain of random spell effects, and a slide that goes down to a level 4) then fill out the rest of the rooms randomly. Similarly one might include in the wilderness – a forest of weird black trees, a teleporting tower, the cave complex lair of the large and aggressive tribe of the Orcs of the Bloody Hand, and several fortified villages of free commoners whose free holds elect their own rulers (unlike the neighboring areas where rule by hereditary monarch or despotic adventurer baron is the norm).

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;806902I think my main question is if I write up the tiger as a possible encounter versus rolling on a chart to determine it is that a "Random" encounter by posters on the this board.

I have some issues with random tables for encounters

1) if you roll and don't like the encounter, then choose again why have the chart?
2) charts take time to make, depending on the system a lot of time to prepare fully. And some people do like cruncher systems so saying use a light easy system does not help.
3) sometimes even a good encounter coming up doesn't mean at that moment my creative juices are flowing enough to shoehorn it into what is going on.
4) non combat stuff on a list is the sort of thing I do anyway. I usually don't need a random chart to remind me to throw out creepy random stuff in the dungeons or graveyards, Or to have an encounter on the roadway with a broken wagon or pilgrims.  I try to do that as a course of habit.

A: As in just write up "Tiger attack at jungle area A"? That is a bog standard wilderness encounter. Sou would be "25% chance of Tiger attack at jungle area A" These are things the PCs may or may not bump into through exploration. Exactly the same as "4 orcs in room #4" in a dungeon.

1: Because the results will not allways be inappropriate to the occasion. Or the result itself might land near something more viable.
Quick BX example: Group is in the swamps, check for encounter is a yes, and result is swimmer. But they are on dry land currently? I check it anyhow and get a catfish. Now I could be creative and say they found a big fish skeleton on the ground. Or I could check whats directly above and below. Giant crocodile seems more appropriate for where they are.

2: Not if you use the ones in the books if such are provided. 5e though requires the DM to make their own. Keep it simple and appropriate to the area as in the example given in the book.

3: Then dont. If you arent in the mood for a random encounter popping up. Then dont even roll for one.

4: That is how alot of DMs seem to go. The random encounter tables are for exactly that. Encounters. The environment mood stuff is part of describing the place. That could include the wagon with the broken wheel.

For me a random encounter is determined by a random chance of encounter and referred to on a random table.

Quote from: jibbajibba;806731Again the base rules of D&D actually aren't great at setting up wandering encounters as they should put a lot more emphasis on preparing your own tables for sections of your setting. In fact if I recall AD&D and Basic don't actually tell you how often to roll for wandering monsters (Blue Book D&D says roll every 3 turns and give then an encounter on a 6 if I recall) and rely on the adventure module telling you when and what to roll on. D&D would be a lot clearer if this was spelled out for trainee DMs with a section that gave examples of high risk, low risk, medium risk areas and how to modify random encounters in relation to the game setting and how to construct table based on the rarity and ecology of the monsters in your setting.
Some advice and some formulas you could use, modify or ignore would have been very useful to my younger self.

In the 1E DMG?  I always thought it was loaded with information like this.  The example dungeon narrative talks about rolling random encounters in the dungeon as you describe above (1d6 every 3 turns).  This frequency was also given for city encounters (where it was described using the term "as normal").  Outdoor encounters were give a table based on the terrain and frequency depended upon population.  Other information in Appendix C showed that in inhabited areas, there was a flat 25% chance of an encounter being a patrol before even using a random table to determine a random monster type (with "Monster" meaning 1e's much looser application of the term), and in the wilderness  a similar 5% chance of encounters being with a fortress, etc.

The DMG's need for better organization is well-known, but I don't think there are many holes in the advice there, as far as things to keep in mind when putting random encounter tables together.

Quote from: 1E DMG Pg. 47Starting from the point of origin, your players will move over not only varying types of terrain but through areas of varying human/demi-human population as well. Just as terrain will affect the frequency and type of monsters encountered, so will population dictate likelihood and type of encounter. You must, therefore, show population density on your large scale map - or at least have some idea of it in mind as adventurers move across the land. The chance of encounter is set with the following bases:

Chance Of Encounter:

Population Density      Base Chance of Encounter

relatively dense                       1 in 20
moderate to sparse/patrolled     1 in 12
uninhabited/wilderness             1 in 10


FREQUENCY OF ENCOUNTER CHANCE TIME CHECKS:

Type of             Check For Encounter At
Terrain  Morning  Noon  Evening  Night  Midnight  PreDawn

Plain                       x          -         x         -          x           -
Scrub                      x          -         x         x         x           x
Forest                     x         x          x         x         x           x
Desert                    x          -          -         x          -           x
Hills                       -          x          -         x          -           x
Mountains                x         -           -         x         -            -
Marsh                     x         x          x         x          x           x


x = check for encounter
- = do not check unless party numbers over 100 creatures

Procedure: Daylight hours consist of morning, noon, and evening; night consists of night, midnight, and pre-dawn. These times equate to periods of about an hour after the party sets forth for the day, the mid-point of the journey, and near the end when camp is being made with respect to daylight hours. During hours of darkness, equate the periods to first, middle and end sleep periods. Where only 1 or 2 chances for encounter exist you may vary the time as you see fit in order to avoid player reliance on information which they should not be privy to. When an encounter check is indicated, roll the appropriate die, and if a 1 results, an encounter takes place. In this event, go to the appropriate table for the terrain, and determine randomly what sort of monster is being encountered. Note: In areas where you have detailed the monster population, a random determination should not be necessary, as this information should be recorded by you.