Going on a trip through the Alberta mountains today, up the Bow River and then down the North Saskatchewan. The scheduled distance is 425 miles, which we plan to do today, but what with stopping and staring at things, we may not get back until tomorrow. Mostly, it's an opportunity to test our new car, get some experience driving it and getting a chance to see some country that Tamara and I haven't visited together.
It's interesting to note, with respect to comments going on in the previous post, that we'll be improvising everything about the trip except (a) the route and (b) what we're bringing. We don't know where we might stay for coffee, what animals we might see, what situations might arise due to other drivers or the wherewithal of our car, what roads might be closed or routes under serious repair. We suppose I can add (c) that we know what the weather will be. But I haven't actually checked the area yet for the weather, and we'll be moving from prairie to mountains, to forest and back to prairie before coming home ... and if it turns out that one of those regions expects rain, we're going anyway.
If I were a DM and the players were making this journey, I'd definitely invent something to be waiting for them. The invention would be made with plenty of time on my part, but the actual thing waiting would be improvised, because I don't know what the players might do when actually meeting the encounter. With some things, like a group of monsters, it's obvious they're being placed in order to be killed by a party. But with other things, such as an ongoing event like a plague, a growing rebellion, a famine or the fallout from some disaster, the expected reaction of the party is defacto unknown. The stranger the circumstance into which the party enters, the less certain that reaction becomes, and the more requirement there is on the DM to be inventive in the immediate moment when the party performs their role.
A large problem with traditional D&D is that it expect to impose situations ... like a monster waiting for a party ... that are easily resolved because the party's response is obvious. Whereas the party's response to something like a recent mudslide or an open riot spreading through a countryside are far less certain. They cannot be run with a series of if-then statements. The DM must float creatively with the party's uncertain response and be ready to judge what additional experiences might arise, on the spot, given that response.
Anyway, I better get myself organised. We're leaving in 20 minutes.
Have a good trip and don't let the beholder get you! I'm just happy that after reading 'graph one I KNEW what 'graph two was gonna present.
ReplyDeleteWe don't railroad and to some extent we don't sandbox. We tend a garden.
"They cannot be run with a series of if-then statements." To me, that's the fundamental difference between a computer game and a tabletop roleplaying game, and also the appeal. "You can do whatever you want" falls flat when all I get to choose is which direction to go in a forest or how to fight some beast. No AI (currently) could react to most of what the players can think up, mostly because the developers can't provided it with the necessary tools.
ReplyDelete"an open riot spreading through a countryside" This is a great example. What would your players do if they walk into a Robin Hood situation? Will they choose the Chaotic Good option, or the Lawful Evil one? If they fall somewhere in between those options, how will they compromise? Will they choose an option that's not even "on the table", like robbing the Sheriff while he's busy fighting the merry men, or convincing the establishment that the Sheriff's actions, while legal, cause more loss of revenue than whatever is gained, leading to him being legally removed? Or will they just turn around and walk away?