HJRP 19-13
Jul 14, 2017 18:46:19 GMT -8
Post by Myddrin on Jul 14, 2017 18:46:19 GMT -8
Finally someone new to fight about fairness/killing characters/fudging dice rolls/cheating with. ;-)
I think that unbalanced encounters are a good thing since it's more realistic - the real world doesn't balance encounters.
Well, I can see from what I said myself why you would say this, let me first quote myself to then expand:
It very well also could be a pack of wolves attacking you while you travel, but if that was stated/balanced ahead of time, then at least the encounter should be fair (or as easy or as tough as the GM wants it to be)
So I don't use randomly generated encounters. Or to word it another way, I don't use dice to do my prep. I will stat my encounters as easy, even, tough, or nigh impossible depending on what I think is appropriate for the story and the setting. Maybe I'll roll randomly whether the encounter occurs, but odds are much more like I will decide on how I feel the pacing of the table is going. Especially since the tables I have run of late are episodic "the goal of the table needs to be resolved one way or another by the end of the session/evening"
The big reason I do this is because, when the dice hit the table, I don't fudge. I roll dice in the open where all can see them and accept the results. This does mean that potentially, someone could die in one of my 'easy fights' but it's extremely unlikely, especially in the system I'm running in. I do this because I find this keeps me honest, as I can't go easy on them if the dice are right there. Also I think it makes the tension of the fight that much higher when I make the call for a powerful attack/spell and they know that their ain't no fudging going on
The other thing, referring back to "realistic", there is the factor of what kind of game you want to play. Whether it's realistic and gritty, where a stray bandit attack/mugging could easily kill someone, or more heroic, where the PC's are the heroes who are better than your average mooks. Hopefully you as GM have chatted with the players of the kind of game you intend to run, so they know what they are getting into.
The setting I'm running in is more of the fantasy heroic types, so it doesn't really fit the setting that while they're just travelling they're going to encounter foes that are more dangerous than they themselves are. Heck if it's a group of my more seasoned PC, actual bandits would probably choose easier targets. They're not going to engage the group that has a couple of heavy plate mail wearing soldiers, one with patches of dragon scales on their skin.
If things are tough enough to be a real threat to them, then most likely it is the enemies they are looking for, or who are looking for them specifically. Alternately, if I want there to be tough scary monster(s) in those woods, locals are going to know something is up. "Don't travel into the Forest of Pain, no one comes out of there." Then if they do (if I've put a forest of pain, likely they have to go inside) they know that is a dangerous place and should proceed carefully. In there will be the tough encounters, where they could die if they're not careful/smart.
If I'm stating a nigh impossible one, that's because I'm hoping they choose a different tactic than a simple assault. I will make sure in the course of the game they get hints that this would be a very tough fight, and clever solutions and strategies are the way to go. If they don't heed the warnings, well yes I play the dice as they fall. This is my version of letting "the players know that sometimes an encounter isn't possible to win in a normal fight.
"
I find this means I don't have 'pointless' deaths, not because I meta or fudge, but because the fights where PC could die are not 'pointless' fights but are in pursuit of whatever the goal is.
that was probably longer than it needs to be.. I do tend to ramble.