Handling what the players DONT touch

[Choco]

The DM of the group I am a player in uses the dice to handle everything in the vicinity of our characters. Recently we just got done with this huge 60 vs 200 fight that our characters participated in, and he rolled not only for the mooks we were fighting, but the other combats as well (not individually thank God, he had them in groups). I think he even rolls dice to see how successful various NPC's that (currently) have nothing to do with the PC's are in their endeavors.

I on the other hand know and have pre-planned everything that happens in the game outside of the PC's intervention well ahead of time. Last time I DM'd a big combat encounter, I already determined ahead of time how it was going to go and unless the PC's got involved that is exactly how it went. I have everyone and everything the PC's could logically interact with during that encounter statted in case the PC's do confront them. I prefer this method mostly because I like to keep the game moving and for story purposes.

Anyway, I was wondering how all of y'all handle events that happen outside of PC control and/or knowledge. Do you guys roll everything like my DM does? Just pre-determine it like I do? Or perhaps somewhere in between?

[woodenbandman]

Well usually there is a clear winner, but if there's no clear winner, I'd probably roll for it if I had the time and will.

[Fastmover]

I remember a time my DM made me roll a % dice in order to see if my in game girl friend lived or died. He loves messing with me. Normally though the game is already predetermind, unless I totally screw up or do something he really didn't think about.

[Choco]

I remember a time my DM made me roll a % dice in order to see if my in game girl friend lived or died. He loves messing with me. Normally though the game is already predetermind, unless I totally screw up or do something he really didn't think about.

Thank you SO much for posting!

My players will all hate you now, for you have given me an awesome idea...

Next time <insert villain here> is doing something against <insert someone/something the PC's care about here> and the PC's know about it, but are powerless to stop it, and I am feeling evil and have not yet decided how it should go, I do think I will put the fate of those in question directly into the PC's hands the same way you just described :smallbiggrin:

[Cedrass]

Somewhere in between. Right now I'M DM a campaign where a Lich has found some kind of uber ritual to pretty much destroy a country. The PCs know about it and if they do nothing about it, well... I'll see what happens.

In fact I'm co-DMing with a friend and we decided that the Lich won't succeed since the PCs aren't the only ones running for the Lich, but some other BBEG is having plans of his own, and by looking for the Lich and stuff they should learn about it. Anyways, thing is, there is going to be a country-wide attack against the Lich (I made him pretty strong... :smallredface:) and whether the PCs are in or not, I won't roll to see what happens. It's what happens and that's it.

To keep the game going, I only roll for something the PCs interact with. Anything else is "programed".

Edit: Fastmover that's awesome!! Will have to use that from now on!

[Choco]

I handle those "PC's know about BBEG's plot but chose not to act" situations slightly different...

If the BBEG's success would mean the end of the campaign (world blows up, etc.) then I have some other previously unknown group of heroes take him/her/it down and get the fame, glory, and riches that goes along with the deed. The players then gotta go town to town and hear nothing but how awesome X hero is, and get asked why they didn't stop the BBEG. Were they too weak? :smallamused:

On the other hand, if the BBEG's success would not end the campaign, but would only create some "slightly" unfavorable circumstances for everyone (open permanent gate to the Abyss, demons our out and attack material plane by the billions) then I let it happen and have it add to the campaign :smallbiggrin:

[Sallera]

Well, I've only run one large battle, about 40 NPCs vs. the PCs and an NPC dragon. I had most of the NPCs in 6-8 man units, and combat still took the whole night. *shrug* I was afraid it was too tedious, but the players didn't seem to mind much. If I did another one, I'd probably just give the players more allies to control, balance the rolling out some. The tactics gamer in me won't let all that potential just go to waste with predetermined endings. :smallamused:

However, with stuff happening 'off-screen', I don't generally roll for much of anything. The various NPCs and factions have their opposing plans, and if there's no PC interference, they just continue on to their logical conclusions.

[Britter]

When I am handling a big battle, I don't want to bog down the game with a lot of needless dice rolling.

Instead, I figure out what the both sides of the battle want, and figure out what the victory would look like for each side.

After that, I use a flow chart (just a hand drawn thing on a legal pad) to try to construct the flow of the fight. At each major juncture, I think of an interesting encounter that the PCs could be invovled with.

example: The PC's encounter the War Trolls that are guarding the infantry commnder.
The PC's rush to the flanks to defeat the marauding wolf riders who are trying to break through.
A rampagin Minotaur barbarian busts thruogh the advancing lines nad has to be stopped by the PCs.

etc.

I assign each situation a set of different results on the flow chart. so, if the pcs are sucsessful here, it moves the battle to a certain point. If they fail here, it moves it the other way.

Essentially you play "encounter connect the dots", moving from interesting situation to interesting situation, using the narrative to let the players know how their side is faring vs. the opposing army. If the players defeat there challenges, the side they are fighting for does better. If they fail, their side does worse.

The advantage that I find in this style of encounter design is that it keeps me off the railroad. I know what will happen in a fairly general set of circumstances, and so I can let the pc's act with a lot of freedom, and set up a system by which thier actions will influence the batte without me having to roll a ton of dice and slow thins down.

[lsfreak]

I generally plan out what's going to happen, and it happens if the PC's don't interfere. If the PC's aren't in a position to know about it, I'd just say "x happens." If it doesn't matter whether one thing or another happens, a die roll (goblins raided Sidequestville, did the guards or the goblins win?).

If I was really concerned and/or interested about how it would effect the plot, I might play it out myself and then inform them of what happened, or have an off-night where whoever could show up does, give them some sheets and some background, and say "What do you do?" A one-shot adventure where the players aren't concerned about their characters dying, what items they're going to buy, or what the BBEG is up to.

I might do the same on an off-night if I want the players, but not the characters, to witness something that I've pre-determined. Some things can't be described in the detail they warrant when the PC's run across a traveling merchant who witnessed some atrocity. The players just aren't as enthralled in the world as the characters would be. But give the players each the character sheets of one of the king's guard and actually play out what happens when the cultists take over the castle, and witness their temporary characters literally torn limb from limb for no reason than to hear them scream, and they get a lasting description that I could never give through the mouth of nameless-npc-#9.

[valadil]

My games are more narrative than simulation, so I always choose the outcome that makes for the best story. The caveat to that is that sometimes I choose to advance a plot in such a way that it doesn't resolve until the players are present. Stuff happens when the players aren't there, but they'll show up just in time for the grand finale.

[shadzar]

I have a tendency to like to randomiz anything in the game. Since the players can corrupt something planned long before it may be scheduled, I make loose plans of what could be happening anywhere and randomly choose how it goes.

I won't roll every attack for a battle prior to or without the inclusion of the PCs.

It may just be what is needed to happen to spur the PCs to get involved, or a single roll to see which side wins. And the PCs will have to deal with whatever occurs due to their inaction.

[Quietus]

The way I'm planning my next campaign is that I'm writing it from the perspective of : The PCs don't exist. This is what's going to happen, the insane guy who wants to scour the world with fire will win, and everything will be beautiful, clean, and dead. Then I drop in the PCs, and provide them with hooks to lead to said plot, and let them change the world.

[Dagren]

I might do the same on an off-night if I want the players, but not the characters, to witness something that I've pre-determined. Some things can't be described in the detail they warrant when the PC's run across a traveling merchant who witnessed some atrocity. The players just aren't as enthralled in the world as the characters would be. But give the players each the character sheets of one of the king's guard and actually play out what happens when the cultists take over the castle, and witness their temporary characters literally torn limb from limb for no reason than to hear them scream, and they get a lasting description that I could never give through the mouth of nameless-npc-#9.Sounds good, but that's letting the players touch it. At that point, you have to be careful, since most players break whatever they touch. I can't imagine anything sucking for a DM more than the players thwarting the villain's kidnapping scheme, say, if it was supposed to be the hook for a long adventure.

[Olo Demonsbane]

I am currently planing out a long campaign, and I have an extremely large flowchart that entirely depends on the PCs actions. From some points there are more than three branches that they can take, and I plan to just roll with it if they go off the beaten trail (literally :smalltongue:)

I have done it otherwise, but it gets tedious to have to roll for everything...though I fun idea I had was to have two groups, one playing an evil campaign and one playing a good one. They do not know of the other's existance. The evil group gets ahold of some giant plot device whatchamacalit, and the good hears of some evil people doing something...evil. Tell the evil group they have to do a defensive mission, and arrange a meeting with both groups :smallbiggrin:

[Maerok]

I've been thinking about working in Tarot cards; put out a row of five and that could help determine a possible course of events the DM could set up.