Quote from: mcbobbo;681270Like I said, 'more fun' is the goal.  If I thought you were enjoying unlocking them, I would lock more of them.  I try hard to read my table and adapt things to fit.

I bet some of you already do this with other things, too.  Like number of opponents,  maybe? Say you get a sense that people are tired of combat tonight, so you trim the number of kobolds?

If players get tired of combat there are options. Chief among them is doing something other than fighting. The situation you describe would only happen if the DM had already decided that the PC's WILL fight these kobolds.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;681272If players get tired of combat there are options. Chief among them is doing something other than fighting. The situation you describe would only happen if the DM had already decided that the PC's WILL fight these kobolds.

Picture a scenario where the party is seeking a McGuffin in a dungeon.  They have a habit of exploring every room.  In the scenario design (whether your own notes or a module) you put ten kobolds in a room.  Players being players they didn't happen to go into that room until after they took out the BBEG and retrieved the McGuffin.   Now they happen across that same room, obviously hoping it doesn't result in another thirty minute combat.

In that situation, I change the content of that room. I will deliberately use different styles to do so, because it seems more realistic to me.  So fewer is a choice.  Or maybe they all fled and the room is now empty.  That sort of thing.

Quote from: mcbobbo;681274Picture a scenario where the party is seeking a McGuffin in a dungeon.  They have a habit of exploring every room.  In the scenario design (whether your own notes or a module) you put ten kobolds in a room.  Players being players they didn't happen to go into that room until after they took out the BBEG and retrieved the McGuffin.   Now they happen across that same room, obviously hoping it doesn't result in another thirty minute combat.

In that situation, I change the content of that room. I will deliberately use different styles to do so, because it seems more realistic to me.  So fewer is a choice.  Or maybe they all fled and the room is now empty.  That sort of thing.

As presented, why would that have to result in a 30 minute combat?

Does the adventure state that the kobolds will attack anything on sight like rabid dogs? Do these kobolds not have a language?

Perhaps announcing " clear out, your boss is dead" while tossing the BBEG's head into the room might cause them to flee?

I think treating the kobolds as automatic combat challenge of CR X is the issue here.

Sure that's an issue.  Maybe 'the' issue, maybe not.  In Savage Worlds,  for example, ten mobs is no big deal.  In 3e, you get your thirty minutes.  Conversely, 3e would require/expect the XP from that room be earned, with SW not caring one way or the other.

And yeah, sometimes every problem looks like a nail.  Roger that.

Still, flexible is good.  IME anyway.

Quote from: The Traveller;681179The kind of thinking that has overtaken modern games is apparently 'lets play rapists'. Thankfully 'modern' games are and will forever remain a pimple on the flank of actual RPGs since nobody outside of a very few will actually buy them.

Please.  It was clear what I meant by "modern" games - the style of play that begin in the freakin' 80s where the assumption is you have the same small group of players, and they'll each have one character, and they'll go through the adventure that's set up.

Quote from: mcbobbo;681274Picture a scenario where the party is seeking a McGuffin in a dungeon.  They have a habit of exploring every room.  In the scenario design (whether your own notes or a module) you put ten kobolds in a room.  Players being players they didn't happen to go into that room until after they took out the BBEG and retrieved the McGuffin.   Now they happen across that same room, obviously hoping it doesn't result in another thirty minute combat.

Well, the question is what the game is about, ain't it?  Early D&D was really survival horror - it wasn't just about "can I beat up the bad guys" as much as "can I get in, quickly grab what I can, and get out before I get eaten or run out of supplies?"

Getting out, in that style of play, is just as relevant as getting in.

While it can be just as relevant, it doesn't HAVE to be.

I probably would never be able to even count the number of handwaives I have done for this sort of thing.  "Your journey back is uneventful,  but as soon as you arrive in town..."

Me, if I was a player?  I'd clearly show the kobolds that their boss is dead, and welcome the new boss (me).  Their new job, in the interim, is to clean up the lair and keep it occupied until I can get back with a proper re-habitation and takeover of it.  And I'd sweeten the deal by proving I wasn't as bad as the old boss because I'd actually give them freedom and power as long as they followed certain rules.  For example, no murdering or waylaying of travellers, or they'd end up worse than their boss.  Even an evil creature like a kobold can stop acting evil if under enough of a threat or if bribed well enough.

So I guess what I'm getting at is that I'd prefer a game world where everything in it reacts to the actions in the game world, and individuals or groups of people just don't disappear because the PCs want to get to the next murder hobo dungeon.  IMO, there is a lot of role-playing opportunities to be lost there by doing that.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;681312So I guess what I'm getting at is that I'd prefer a game world where everything in it reacts to the actions in the game world, and individuals or groups of people just don't disappear because the PCs want to get to the next murder hobo dungeon.  IMO, there is a lot of role-playing opportunities to be lost there by doing that.

I find the duality where things can spring into existence but cannot likewise cease to exist hard to understand. As far as the PCs know, the room always was as they find it.

Quote from: mcbobbo;681311While it can be just as relevant, it doesn't HAVE to be.

I probably would never be able to even count the number of handwaives I have done for this sort of thing.  "Your journey back is uneventful,  but as soon as you arrive in town..."

Again, "for that style of play".  If it's less survival-horror, and more adventure, and the real point is going and beating up the bad guy, then hand-waving makes total sense, and *not* hand-waving the return trip is probably an error.

For more hardcore old-school, "survival horror" type play?  I think the return trip is pretty much always relevant.

A good indicator is probably "are you using random wandering encounters?"  If the answer is "no", and especially if it's "no, because they're not really important to what's happening", then hand-waving the return trip is the right call.

Quote from: mcbobbo;681313I find the duality where things can spring into existence but cannot likewise cease to exist hard to understand. As far as the PCs know, the room always was as they find it.

Why does this sound a lot like I'm being told to " endeavor to persevere"? :rotfl:

Quote from: Exploderwizard;681321Why does this sound a lot like I'm being told to " endeavor to persevere"? :rotfl:

That's from a clint eastwood movie, isn't it?

Quote from: Bill;681661That's from a clint eastwood movie, isn't it?

Yes. It was a quote by Chief Dan George in The Outlaw Josey Wales.

Guess I need to add that to my "watch as an adult" list.

Obviously some level of basic balance is required in a game, so you can't just say "ignore balance completely", but there's the "balance" of being able to create broadly-playable groups, and the "balance" of insisting that every class be exactly equally weighted in every possible respect.  Those are two very different things.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;682249Obviously some level of basic balance is required in a game, so you can't just say "ignore balance completely", but there's the "balance" of being able to create broadly-playable groups, and the "balance" of insisting that every class be exactly equally weighted in every possible respect.  Those are two very different things.

RPGPundit

Essentially the difference between what the majority want from D&D and what 4vengers want.