PDA

View Full Version : Creating a sense of huge open wilderness



Yora
2013-08-18, 02:14 PM
I am going to start a new campaign set in a homebrew world next month, and the one thing that troubles me most is how to create a sense that the world is a huge place with only a few relatively small centers of population. There's still fully developed societies with strong connections and dependencies between each other, but overall it's a world that hasn't really been widely explored and settled yet.

One method I'll be making use of is using hex-based overland travel in combination with random encounters set in interesting battlefields. But I don't feel convinced that telling the players they are traveling for eight days and having three random encounters on their way to the dungeon will really be doing the job sufficiently.

Another thing that comes to my mind is spending some time on describing the scene and having the players do a little bit of preparation any time there is a change in environment. When they enter an ancient forest, reach a trading post where they are going on a ship, and so on.

But does anyone else have pieces of advice to make the players feel that the party is traveling through complete wilderness for days and sometimes weeks?

Grinner
2013-08-18, 02:25 PM
Is this a low magic setting? If so, a few wilderness encounters might do the trick. Crossing a river, hunting, climbing, etc. Anything that comes to mind.

Also, draw out the descriptions a bit. Don't just say "You cross the desert in twelve days". Say "You stumble into a trading post after twelve hard days of marching across the desert. Your throats are parched; your canteens are empty; and Jacob has developed a strange rash."

LokiRagnarok
2013-08-18, 02:31 PM
Well, why is there so much wilderness? And what kind is it? Desert, forest, savannah, ...?

If it is a post-apocalyptic wasteland, you could mention a few remnants of forgotten civilizations, huge craters blown by arms beyond human grasp, areas that make you sick or insane when you go there unprotected et cetera.

You could have a caravan or a dead animal which look like they traveled far in search of food/drink, but were unsuccessful.

Have the inhabitants of your settlements look at the adventurers in awe, because they crossed the huge desert/forest/mountain range/.... Children staring at them in awe are always good. Make a point to mention that even the most travelled people in the settlement have never been further than the next village, which is days of travel away.

The villagers should be very eager for anything new the PCs bring, particularly items and foreign food, but also news and stories.

The locals will want to tell the PCs how to cross the desert/forest/... for a price or a favor.

An NPC might want to tag along with the party, because "nothing interesting ever happens here". Of course, escort missions in general are obvious quest candidates for the setting.

Yora
2013-08-18, 02:48 PM
Making a big deal about the PCs comming to a village more than a day or two from their homes is something I hadn't been considering. But that sounds really good.
There wouldn't be any big inns where there's constantly a dozen or so strangers from outside are haging around. Good idea.

TheStranger
2013-08-18, 04:16 PM
People, generally speaking, don't internalize scale very well. Even in the modern world, with pretty much everywhere mapped out, we don't really comprehend how big the world is. Having NPCs make a big deal out of traveling is a good idea, as is taking some time with your descriptions. The underlying problem, though, is that vast wilderness isn't about where you are, or how long it takes you to get somewhere. Essentially, the goal is to convey to the players that there are a near-infinite number of places that they're not. I'm not really sure how you do that. My first thought, which is kind of silly, is to get an enormous wall-sized piece of paper. Tell your players it is the map of the campaign setting, and you'll fill it in as they explore. In the appropriate place on the map, fill in about an index-card sized area. Tell them that's what the people of their village know about, and that it represents everything that's within several months of travel. Map it out on a poster-sized piece of paper, using 1-inch hexes to represent a day of travel.

It's sort of the paper version of the start of a 4X game, when the whole map is blacked out.

Chambers
2013-08-18, 07:37 PM
For hexcrawling without teleport magic I prefer to have the mindset of those traveling West in America before the first Transcontinental railroad connected East to West. Think Lewis & Clark looking for the Northwest Passage, the Donner Party crossing the Sierra Nevadas, or any other group heading out to claim their 40 acres and a mule.

The wilderness is not defined by a lack of cities or lack of NPC's to interact with. The wilderness itself is an enemy that will hurt and kill the PC's the moment they turn their back on it. Raw, untamed nature.

Think about what the Sierra Nevadas (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1c/Sierra_Nevada_aerial.jpg) would seem like to an adventuring party trying to cross them. It's not simply a few weeks of off-screen time and a dice roll or two. Crossing those mountains is the adventure and it's life or death.

_Zoot_
2013-08-18, 09:49 PM
My first thought, which is kind of silly, is to get an enormous wall-sized piece of paper. Tell your players it is the map of the campaign setting, and you'll fill it in as they explore. In the appropriate place on the map, fill in about an index-card sized area. Tell them that's what the people of their village know about, and that it represents everything that's within several months of travel. Map it out on a poster-sized piece of paper, using 1-inch hexes to represent a day of travel.

It's sort of the paper version of the start of a 4X game, when the whole map is blacked out.

Oh wow. That is an awesome idea! I'd love to be part of a game where the GM did that. As a GM, I'd also love to do it, but I have no idea how :smalltongue: That would give a fantastic sense of the scale of the world!

TheThan
2013-08-18, 10:23 PM
Also don’t forget to get them to prepare for a long overland journey, think back to the Oregon Trail games. If they don’t prepare, they’ll eventually run out of resources and die.

Remember the environment is as much of an encounter as monsters. Crossing a river should be dangerous and difficult; same with blazing a trail through an unknown forest. Don’t forget about the weather, every two days, roll on a random chart for that day, and the next day, so that you can predict to them that it looks like there’s a storm being blown down from the mountains. also keep in mind the seasons, and when, how they change.

Lord Torath
2013-08-19, 12:53 PM
Make 'roads' very rare and very poor. And bridges should be much rarer than roads. You may want to enforce the "getting lost" rules (do they still have those?).

When rolling for random encounters, remember to make the animals behave realistically: predators generally just want a meal, and generally flee if injured (an injured animal has a hard time hunting); herbivores will generally flee, unless they are the aggressive type, but even then, they generally need to be provoked. (A moose bit my sister once. No really...)

If your random encounter check comes up negative, throw one in anyway, but make it take place near the edge of their vision. They see the bear or herd of deer, but it's too far away for them to do anything about it, and they're too far away for it to care about. Or they find evidence of the creature. Maybe stumble across the remains of an old meal.

Make ordinary people paranoid about the wilderness, and in awe of those who have braved it (as has previously been mentioned). Villages more than a day's journey from the next one always have at least a palisade and a spike-filled trench?

Flickerdart
2013-08-19, 01:00 PM
The world is only as big as the speed of information and goods that are carried across it. If every town the PCs enter has its own things going on and has maybe heard rumours of what happened at the previous town (or better yet, the next), and craves the PCs' goods in exchange for their own exotic and unfamiliar products, that goes a long way towards making the size believable.

Erasmas
2013-08-19, 01:16 PM
For a while in my group, we actually played through every single day of travel. It did get very old (hence we do not do it anymore), but it most certainly got the idea of scale across very, very well. Many times, the party would decide to not travel to a remote location once they found out how many weeks worth of travel-time it was going to entail.

A more logistically feasible way to do this would be to make the party meticulously equip/track their gear (rations, water, feed for horses, etc.) for such a long journey. Make them calculate out how many days, or weeks, of travel they have ahead, research maps of the areas in which they will be journeying, and plan accordingly.

Frozen_Feet
2013-08-19, 01:33 PM
The way I did it, I first drew a map of the island my players started on, on A4 grid paper. It took some 14 days to go around by foot. They lived in a mansion near the centre. It was a day's journey to nearest port.

When they, after several sessions and dozens of playhours later, left the place, I whipped out a A3 gridpaper map of the nearest continent. I said "oh yeah, that single square near the top left corner? It includes your whole home island."

Later, because the dimwits kept getting lost at the sea, I added three more A3 sheets to the maps. One was 95% ocean.

The campaign was held between July 2010 and 2012 December. Almost three years passed within the game. Most of that time the PCs were at the sea, with me rolling for random encounters, winds and storms. Weeks passed with nothing happening. They got shipwrecked three or four times. Sometimes, they bought enough food to feed them and their crew for months, and still almost ran out before reaching next port. Once they spend weeks roaming in a jungle. Even with teleport, journeys still took days, because they had way too much stuff to move in one casting and even with 300 mile radius it still took many 'ports to get from one place of interest to another.

Seasons and sovereigns changed as they traveled. Taxes had to be paid. Random NPCs were met again after months or years of separation. Once, all servants of the PCs' mansion quit while they were away. Sometimes they were all assumed KIA by people, and it was a huge surprise when they resurfaced.

hamlet
2013-08-19, 01:55 PM
People, generally speaking, don't internalize scale very well. Even in the modern world, with pretty much everywhere mapped out, we don't really comprehend how big the world is. Having NPCs make a big deal out of traveling is a good idea, as is taking some time with your descriptions. The underlying problem, though, is that vast wilderness isn't about where you are, or how long it takes you to get somewhere. Essentially, the goal is to convey to the players that there are a near-infinite number of places that they're not. I'm not really sure how you do that. My first thought, which is kind of silly, is to get an enormous wall-sized piece of paper. Tell your players it is the map of the campaign setting, and you'll fill it in as they explore. In the appropriate place on the map, fill in about an index-card sized area. Tell them that's what the people of their village know about, and that it represents everything that's within several months of travel. Map it out on a poster-sized piece of paper, using 1-inch hexes to represent a day of travel.

It's sort of the paper version of the start of a 4X game, when the whole map is blacked out.

I so very much want to do this now.

Wouldn't even have to create anything beyond the first index card's worth of stuff except in the very broadest sense until the players start moving in that direction.

Hmmm . . .

Perhaps a trip to the local Staples is in order . . .

TheStranger
2013-08-19, 03:06 PM
I'm glad people like my idea; I wasn't sure about it.

Anyway, another thought is to make the process of getting anywhere a little bit uncertain. For instance, I live about 4 hours north of Boston (the nearest large city) by car. If I was walking, it would be closer to two weeks, assuming I had a relatively direct route to follow and knew how to get there. But if the intervening area was all wilderness, and I didn't have a good map, I would probably have to follow the river in my town down to the coast, then follow the coastline south to Boston. Which, without a map, would put me in the position of following a lot of the bends in the shoreline instead of just cutting across, which would put the trip on the order of a month or more, and I wouldn't know how close I was until I was there.

Of course, that would introduce the possibility of taking a canoe - which is really what people in that situation would do. And there's really no reason people wouldn't have maps, or at least be able to give directions of some sort. But it's something to think about.

Hmm... any interest in a quick(ish) PbP journey from Point A to Point B through unexplored terrain with only vague directions? I'm kind of curious how this would play out.

hamlet
2013-08-19, 03:14 PM
Open up the 1ed DMG and read the "Getting Lost" rules. They're there for precisely this sort of thing. During a hex crawl and in the absence of a decent map, there's just a flat percent chance that you end up going in a direction that you didn't intend to and wind up some place you don't know. Getting back on track can be a real adventure.

This is why the Louis and Clark Expedition was such a big deal then.

Heck, that reminds me, get yourself a copy of the journal from that expedition and read some of it. It's quite enlightening.

Amridell
2013-08-19, 05:19 PM
Hmm... any interest in a quick(ish) PbP journey from Point A to Point B through unexplored terrain with only vague directions? I'm kind of curious how this would play out.

If I can make time, I'd be more than willing. I quite like your idea, especially because I'm writing a large campaign in the stone age, where this kind of thing is going to happen a lot.

Bulhakov
2013-08-19, 06:05 PM
Why wasn't the wilderness explored/settled? Any large settlement if successful should quickly expand with little satellite settlements popping up around it. Is it a new continent that's just being settled? Or is the population just so scarce?

How well traveled are the PCs? If they grew up in this world, then everything outside their own villages/cities will be new and unexpected for them. The first time they see a new humanoid race, hear a new language, see a new fashion, weapon, armor, technology, magic, etc. Almost everything should be unfamiliar and explained through the prism of their limited experience.

As for enhancing that alone-in-the-wilderness feeling - I'd suggest frequently creating problems that people usually rely on other people to solve, e.g. wounds/diseases/poisons that can't be treated without a medic/shaman, broken equipment that can't be fixed without a forge or specialist tools, super loot that's difficult to transport or fence (e.g. a chunk of valuable ore or a beautiful statue).

Last random thought - animals that never saw a human. This can actually be beneficial - it can make hunting easier with prey that doesn't know it should run away or it can save the PCs when a predator can act curious instead of attacking right away.

Qwertystop
2013-08-19, 10:07 PM
If I can make time, I'd be more than willing. I quite like your idea, especially because I'm writing a large campaign in the stone age, where this kind of thing is going to happen a lot.

Interested, if it happens. Post a link here?

Deophaun
2013-08-19, 10:39 PM
In the appropriate place on the map, fill in about an index-card sized area. Tell them that's what the people of their village know about, and that it represents everything that's within several months of travel.
That's about 2,000 miles. Assuming "several" means 3 (and not 4 or 5) and that we're talking traveling on foot, and not on horseback. Mountain ranges can drastically curtail that, but still: that would be one massive world that puts our little 'ol Earth to shame. Probably have one heck of a gravitational field, too.

hamlet
2013-08-20, 10:27 AM
Why wasn't the wilderness explored/settled? Any large settlement if successful should quickly expand with little satellite settlements popping up around it. Is it a new continent that's just being settled? Or is the population just so scarce?


Also, it's possible that there are areas outside of where the campaign starts that are more heavily settled and explored, perhaps carved out by the blood and steel of a warlord's army, or a powerful cheiftan who's united several power groups into a kingdom or such, but the outsides of their borders might be more howling empty wilderness.

Frozen_Feet
2013-08-20, 11:53 AM
Why wasn't the wilderness explored/settled?

At least in my game, much of it was. Just not by player characters (in case of "explored") or by friendly, civilized creatures (in case of "settled"). But even at the heart of the Empire, there were always small nooks and crannies no-one had looked into in ages...

TheStranger
2013-08-20, 11:58 AM
Interested, if it happens. Post a link here?
I'm working on the details of how to do it. I'm not sure I can figure out a good way to run it, especially with PbP. I'm concerned about the feedback loop; I want navigation decisions to be a part of it, but I don't want to take 3 real-life days to decide something as simple as how to cross/circle a swamp. What I'm running into is, when you're in the wilderness you make several small-scale decisions like that every day, and it's very easy to get lost or end up backtracking if you guess wrong. I'll post a link if I can figure out a way to do it, though.


That's about 2,000 miles. Assuming "several" means 3 (and not 4 or 5) and that we're talking traveling on foot, and not on horseback. Mountain ranges can drastically curtail that, but still: that would be one massive world that puts our little 'ol Earth to shame. Probably have one heck of a gravitational field, too.
Meddling kids and your math. :smallbiggrin:

Qwertystop
2013-08-20, 12:37 PM
I'm working on the details of how to do it. I'm not sure I can figure out a good way to run it, especially with PbP. I'm concerned about the feedback loop; I want navigation decisions to be a part of it, but I don't want to take 3 real-life days to decide something as simple as how to cross/circle a swamp. What I'm running into is, when you're in the wilderness you make several small-scale decisions like that every day, and it's very easy to get lost or end up backtracking if you guess wrong. I'll post a link if I can figure out a way to do it, though.


You could handle the map with a google-doc or something. Do one spreadsheet per scale-level.

Timing is trickier, though...

TheStranger
2013-08-20, 12:54 PM
You could handle the map with a google-doc or something. Do one spreadsheet per scale-level.

Timing is trickier, though...

Yeah, I'm not tremendously worried about the mapping. It really is the feedback loop on the navigation that I'm having trouble with. That and the difficulty of navigating in the first place.

Palanan
2013-08-20, 01:22 PM
Originally Posted by Yora
I am going to start a new campaign set in a homebrew world next month, and the one thing that troubles me most is how to create a sense that the world is a huge place with only a few relatively small centers of population...does anyone else have pieces of advice to make the players feel that the party is traveling through complete wilderness for days and sometimes weeks?

There's a saying in India: "Travel twenty miles and the language changes."

With small, isolated settlements separated by immense reaches of wilderness, given poor roads and a reluctance to venture far, regional differences in speech will be obvious across just a couple days' travel. Distinct dialects will be apparent very quickly, and depending on a number of factors--local culture, history, geography--a traveler may pass through the territories of a variety of languages, perhaps tribal languages which maintain their cohesion in a wilderness setting.

The local people may speak a common trade language, and probably have a general familiarity with each other's native tongues; in fact, most people might speak several languages, their own and their immediate neighbors', which can happen in tribal situations. Or, there may be longstanding hostilities between different language groups, which the characters will have to navigate as they travel through the wilderness.

Any way you approach it, changing dialects and languages frequently can help provide some of that sense of scale you're looking for.

Thinker
2013-08-20, 11:28 PM
You mention random encounters as kind of a throw-in, but that's a great way to make the journey more important. Encounters shouldn't just be "kill X wargs" followed by "kill y orcs". They should be miniature adventures unto themselves. They should include the weather, people, events, monsters, and more. They also require a bit of improv to pull off.

Create a few tables that covers a region that is a collection of a few hexes. Roll on that table to see the first type of encounter.
{table=head]Type|Description|d4
People|People encountered along the way such as bandits, merchants, or woodsmen.|1
Events|Things that can happen or appear suddenly like quicksand, a wagon wheel breaking, or finding some fresh berries.|2
Monsters|Creatures seeking to harm the travelers.|3
Weather|Flash floods, thunderstorms, heat waves, blizzards, etc.|4
[/table]

Once you know the type of event, come up with some more information.

{table=head]People|Description|d10
Noble|A lost or fleeing noble person who could use some help.|1
Bounty Hunter|A person searching for a quarry|2
Outlaw|A person exiled from society.|3
Slavers|People searching for targets to kidnap and enslave.|4
Traders|Merchants who has goods to sell or needs help to recover lost goods..|5
Hunters|People tracking and killing animals for food, pelts, or fun. May be legitimate or criminal.|6
Bandits|A group of brigands who charge a toll to cross their turf.|7
Soldiers|An expedition by a local noble into the area. May be friendly company or hazardous competitors.|8
Druids|Hippies who are more interested in keeping their favorite puddle around than helping others.|9
Inquisitors|Priests and their allies seeking to purge heresy.|10
[/table]


You should have some stock stats appropriate for the region when using the people. Something like basic brutes, basic rogues, basic magic users (for mooks), advanced versions of those (for lieutenants), and then boss versions (for the leaders). You will have to improvise a background (or come up with a random generator) for each group.

For example, you know that the group is going to have 3 encounters per hex. You roll all three at the start of the hex and come up with Noble, Inquisitor, and Bandits. Make it so that the bandits had kidnapped the noble, who later escaped her bonds. There is not just one encounter with the bandits, but several as they cross the bandit territory from patrols to search parties to possibly the entire encampment. The PCs can choose to protect the noble in exchange for a reward, can leave her to fend for herself (though she might try to steal supplies from them later), or return her to the bandits. In all of this, the inquisitors might be unrelated searching for some relic of their god or trying to find a crone who lives in the woods who had reportedly turned a local man into a newt (though he got better). The crone could be an ally of the bandits or an unrelated other danger (that they might encounter).

Every time you give the players a decision point that they have to deal with and discuss, you enrich the game. Do we fight the patrol and hide the bodies? Do we try to sneak the noble past them, claiming she's a member of your band? Is the inquisition willing to sell out the noble in exchange for information about the crone? Can the players trust any of the three? Randomly generating the content makes it so that it is more of a surprise and allows you to reuse stats and tables for multiple sessions.

TheStranger
2013-08-21, 11:27 AM
Ok, I think I've sorted out enough to try playtesting my exploration ideas. The recruitment thread is here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15865556#post15865556). Those who posted interest in this thread have first refusal.

kyoryu
2013-08-21, 02:51 PM
I generally think that most people view distance in terms of number "transitions" - places where what they see/encounter changes significantly. A giant plain a thousand miles across sounds epic, but going from plains to a forest to going down a river to back in the forest to a swamp and then mountains will usually *feel* more like a long distance than the giant plain, even if it's the same distance covered.

Kalirren
2013-08-21, 05:00 PM
Another thing that comes to my mind is spending some time on describing the scene and having the players do a little bit of preparation any time there is a change in environment. When they enter an ancient forest, reach a trading post where they are going on a ship, and so on.

Definitely spend time describing scene, and weather. Especially emphasize changes of scene as the group progresses through the landscape. For instance, 8 hexes of grassland is boring. But even if a complete urbanite goes out into the vast wilderness for more than a couple of days, they start noticing little changes in wetness, color, rockiness. And those differences turn each of those 8 hexes into a different place. If the PCs feel like they're moving from place to place they'll respect the distances between them, even if there's nothing of interest there.

Also, if the group becomes accustomed to your descriptions of change, then if suddenly everything -is- the same for hours, and hours, and days, and days, the horror of the vastness will really hit. That's when the PCs will ask, "Are we lost?"

Yora
2013-08-21, 05:18 PM
I generally think that most people view distance in terms of number "transitions" - places where what they see/encounter changes significantly.
I think that might actually be the most important piece of information in this thread. Kind of nails down what I had very vaguely in mind with my earlier post. And that's also kinda where the random encounters come into play. It's probably not even so much important how many encounters the PCs have, but how often the players see you roll for them.

kyoryu
2013-08-21, 06:44 PM
I think that might actually be the most important piece of information in this thread. Kind of nails down what I had very vaguely in mind with my earlier post. And that's also kinda where the random encounters come into play. It's probably not even so much important how many encounters the PCs have, but how often the players see you roll for them.

I think the rolls are one factor (and I agree, they're probably more important than the number of encounters). I think rolling on different tables and getting different results is another factor.

Even within a single terrain type, if they go through kobold territory, then Red Eye Orc territory, then White Knuckle Orc territory, followed by Lizardman territory there's a sense of progression and space. 10 rolls in each, with an average of 3 encounters per, will feel like more distance than 40 rolls in kobold territory and the same 12 encounters.

I actually think that it's important, to a certain extent, to have more than one encounter in each area, otherwise it just feels random and not like a changing pattern. The fewer events, the stronger the pattern must be to establish it.

So if you think you'll really only have 2-3 encounters in orc territory, they'd better all be orcs. But if you're going to be hanging there for a while, and are going to have 30 encounters, some of them can be kobolds or lizardmen.

Yora
2013-08-24, 03:51 AM
I've been doing some more reading, and I feel like I quite agree with what I often saw, that random encounters and wandering monsters are actually quite essential to the game. Otherwise you are indeed very likely to fall into 15 minute adventuring days, which directly leads to spellcasters outperforming warriors every single time, and a mindset in which a dungeon simply has to be cleared room by room.

Did either WotC or Paizo ever really use wandering monsters or random encounters in any of their Adventures? I believe to vaguely remember the occasional random encounter on overland trips between dungeons, but I don't recall ever seeing anything that would be an incentive to not just rest before leaving every single room.

hamlet
2013-08-24, 05:16 AM
I've been doing some more reading, and I feel like I quite agree with what I often saw, that random encounters and wandering monsters are actually quite essential to the game. Otherwise you are indeed very likely to fall into 15 minute adventuring days, which directly leads to spellcasters outperforming warriors every single time, and a mindset in which a dungeon simply has to be cleared room by room.

Did either WotC or Paizo ever really use wandering monsters or random encounters in any of their Adventures? I believe to vaguely remember the occasional random encounter on overland trips between dungeons, but I don't recall ever seeing anything that would be an incentive to not just rest before leaving every single room.

I think both Paizo and WOTC (even back in the AD&D 2.5ed days) felt that random encounters distracted from the purpose/plot of the adventure and did not add anything and so, more often than not, left them out until they were virtually eliminated in any case. If that's the case, then I think that both companies, for lack of a better description, simply missed part of the point of AD&D, that "plot" was not something that the players fulfilled, but what the players themselves did. It was not typically pre-planned, but virtually ex-post-facto instead.

Interestingly, I seem to recall at least some random encounters finding their way back into Paizo's adventure paths, though I could be wrong about that.

kyoryu
2013-08-24, 01:36 PM
If that's the case, then I think that both companies, for lack of a better description, simply missed part of the point of AD&D, that "plot" was not something that the players fulfilled, but what the players themselves did. It was not typically pre-planned, but virtually ex-post-facto instead.

I think it's also accurate to say that the typical playstyle of D&D drifted by the time WotC and Paizo were involved. Instead of being typically centered around location-based sandboxes, they became centered around (mostly linear) "plots". In those types of games, random encounters don't make a lot of sense.

This shift really started in the mid 80s, and I think that, more than anything, WotC and Paizo accepted the reality of how the game was played at the time. Sadly, I think that 3.x has a lot of legacy rules and balance points that don't make a lot of sense in that style of game.

hamlet
2013-08-24, 05:09 PM
I think it's also accurate to say that the typical playstyle of D&D drifted by the time WotC and Paizo were involved. Instead of being typically centered around location-based sandboxes, they became centered around (mostly linear) "plots". In those types of games, random encounters don't make a lot of sense.

This shift really started in the mid 80s, and I think that, more than anything, WotC and Paizo accepted the reality of how the game was played at the time. Sadly, I think that 3.x has a lot of legacy rules and balance points that don't make a lot of sense in that style of game.

It started earlier, actually.

There are those that say that Hickman and Wes ruined D&D with the Dragonlance modules.

I'm not one of them, but I think they irrevocably changed what folks expect out of D&D.

Chambers
2013-08-24, 06:28 PM
Did either WotC or Paizo ever really use wandering monsters or random encounters in any of their Adventures? I believe to vaguely remember the occasional random encounter on overland trips between dungeons, but I don't recall ever seeing anything that would be an incentive to not just rest before leaving every single room.

Yes, definitely. Keep on the Borderlands and White Plume Mountain both had wandering monsters/random encounters. Others probably did as well but those are two that I've read. In my experience of playing D&D the 15 minute workday is most prevalent in 3.5 and hasn't been such an issue in the 1st edition games I've played.

Part of this is monster design. Fights are over faster in 1st edition than in 3.5. Part of this is that monsters aren't necessarily scaled like they are in 3.5. While you might encounter a tougher Orc or named villain, an Orc is an Orc is an Orc and they all generally die in one or two hits. A room full of a dozen kobolds or goblins really isn't a threat to a party of 7 and won't drain as much resources as an adjusted EL fight in 3.5 would. A lot of fights in older editions are against multiple enemies of lower EL (to use 3.5 terms) and as such they are typically weaker than the party. I've had sessions where we've cleared entire levels of dungeons without needing to stop to rest. Conversely we've had sessions where we needed to retreat after just one or two rooms.

Edit: Misread the question. I'll have to check whether WoTC (not TSR) had wandering monsters but I'm pretty sure they did.

Thinker
2013-08-24, 10:49 PM
It started earlier, actually.

There are those that say that Hickman and Wes ruined D&D with the Dragonlance modules.

I'm not one of them, but I think they irrevocably changed what folks expect out of D&D.

Could you elaborate? How were the Dragonlance modules different from what other people were making at the time?

Frozen_Feet
2013-08-24, 11:03 PM
They were among the first modules to be extensively story-driven, instead of location-based. To quote Wikipedia, about the second DL module "Dragons of Flame":


Rick Swan reviewed the adventure in The Space Gamer No. 73. Swan praised the module for its vivid and non-stereotypical characterizations, challenging and engaging encounters, and well-crafted storyline. He does note that "The story is so tightly scripted that occasionally players may feel more like observers than participants", and cautions that Dungeon Masters (DMs) will need to stay alert to keep the players on track. However, he concludes by stating that "If you've given up on Dungeons & Dragons, Dragons of Flame is a great way to get reacquainted."[3]

Steve Hampshire reviewed the module for Imagine magazine, giving it a positive review.[4] He noted that DL2 retains many of DL1's strengths of detail, clarity and layout. However, Hampshire had a few reservations about DL2, notably that "the players have to go along with the plot to make any sense of it at all." [4] He felt that, given the lack of real freedom for the players, keeping up interest might be a problem. He also thought DL2 to be fairly short and that it would make little sense outside of the DL series. However, Hampshire concluded his review by noting that "as one of the series [...] it has 'Dallas' appeal."[4]

In a review by Graham Staplehurst in the July 1985 issue of White Dwarf, the module was given a rating of 7 out of 10 overall. The review contains suggestions for the DM on how to handle various rules changes and run this style of adventure, where the game is more restrictive than normal, to keep the players within the story. Staplehurst said "anyone thinking of running the whole of the DragonLance saga should bear in mind the potentially confining feeling that is part and parcel of this series" and "it's debatable how close this is to the original concept of role-playing".[1] He felt that while "The players will have to adapt to fit the characters rather than the other way round ... the authors have tried to develop the characters in a realistic manner". Staplehurst said the modules provide plenty of thrills once players settle into their roles, and opined that there are two ways of looking at these adventures: "They may be used by inexperienced players to get involved and experienced in the game (despite the fact that it is somewhat non-standard AD&D), or they represent a detailed world for players of long-standing to immerse themselves in."[1] He felt that with around twenty-four pages of text, an area map, three detailed location maps, and plenty of good art, purchasers would get their money's worth, although he could not imagine anyone wanting to use certain repeated information and extras, such as a song and poem. Staplehurst concluded the review by noting that "the players are treated as idiots if they do anything but the stated actions and though this may be a useful trick for less experienced players, it is extremely frustrating when DMing and players come up with a potentially intelligent suggestion or plan only to have to shoot it down because it 'doesn't fit the story'". He felt that players should have been allowed more options from which to choose.[1]

Before Dragonlance, D&D tended towards free-er, location-based adventures, where there was a dungeon and the players could do anything they wanted to it. The concept of over-arching plot was not seen as such important element of RPGs as nowadays.

Yora
2013-08-25, 04:22 AM
And from what I heard, Dragonlance was a very firmly entranched railroad plot. The PCs have to do what the script says they do and the ending of the campaign will be what the writers said it would be.

However, adding a narrative reason why the characters are going to explore and ransack a dungeon other than "there's treasure" isn't really a problem at all. Against the Giants had a thin "giants are raiding villages near the mountains" plot and the modules did include some explaination who gave the orders to the giants and what the prisoners in the dungeons where doing there in the first place. Not much, but there was an idea that the PCs are interacting with people and that their opponents are working on some bigger plan.


I just ran into this article on Encumbrance (http://www.paperspencils.com/2012/03/18/making-encumbrance-work/), and interestingly, just as I started reading I got an idea that happens to be pretty much the same thing as the system mentioned a bit further down. :smallbiggrin:
However, this one is more refined.

It uses a system of Encumbrance points, but to use an even simpler analogy, think of items as taking up inventory slots. Items of a significant weight take up 1 slot, items with a great weight 2 slot, and items of insignificant weight 0 slots.
The total number of slots you have for a light load is equal to your Strength score. The limit for a medium load is twice your Strength score. The maximum for a heavy load is three times the Strength Score.
As a rule of thumb, an item takes up an additional slot for every 30 pounds of weight. (30 lbs. = 2 slot, 60 lbs. = 3 slots, 90 lbs. = 4 slots, ...)

I like the idea. I think I'll write up a couple of lists of gear for characters and see if they end up in aproximately the same encumbrance category. If it's completely off, making some adjustments to what weight equals which number of slots should fix it.

The most important thing is that you don't have to get out a calculator every time you add an item to your backpack. And as the article mentions, encumbrance really is something that shouldn't be just ignored. Being slowed down when escaping and having to leave stuff behind is just too interesting to ignore.

kyoryu
2013-08-26, 12:35 AM
It started earlier, actually.

There are those that say that Hickman and Wes ruined D&D with the Dragonlance modules.

I'm not one of them, but I think they irrevocably changed what folks expect out of D&D.

Mid-to-early 80s, then. I was slightly late (mid 80s) on when DL came out.

DragonLance was the specific thing I was referring to when I said mid-80s.

Whether you think that's "ruined" or not (I personally do - plot-based is fine, but loss of player agency kind of ruins the point of the game to me), I do think that it's a very different style of game than the rules were originally designed around, and that the D&D rules don't really mesh well with the linear plot style of game.

But, that's just my opinion.

Sampi
2013-08-26, 02:53 AM
If the huge open wildernesses are a central part of the world, then they should be a central part of the game. This means that at least some adventures should take place entirely in the wilderness.

This thread has focused on random encounters, these are good. But limiting it to random encounters limits the wilderness to a secondary role. Also, place some important NPC:s in there, so the players have to go to the wilderness occasionally. For example: A wizard's tower in the middle of nowhere, built because the energy flow is good. PC's need to go there to get the history of a thing they're looking for. They need the permission of the local druid cabal to get through a particularly dangerous forest. A group of wandering monks lives in a certain forest. And so forth.

hamlet
2013-08-26, 07:24 AM
No one ever said limit it only to random encounters, merely that getting rid of them would be a huge detriment to the style of game.

They are part and parcel to the whole thing. They are clues to the players that, even while they're on a quest to alter the fate of a world perhaps, there are things going on that have nothing to do with any of that, and those things will impinge upon the PC's plans from time to time.

Sometimes, that pack of rampaging goblins/orcs was JUST a pack of rampaging goblins/orcs and not some fell plot or the minions of an evil necromancer or whatever.