Having a dynamic encounter system determined by DM fiat feels a bit like moving the goalposts on the players (or pulling the rug out from under them or some such analogy). It runs the risk of being like the old "quantum ogre;" no matter what the party does or where they go, they encounter the ogre (or whatever specific encounter the DM decided was necessary to making a "good game").
Most of us are familiar with the thought experiment in role-playing that supposes the players are standing in front of two doors, one on the left and one on the right. It's supposed that a morally responsible DM already knows what is behind each door, having determined this in advance of the party's arrival. Let's say that behind one door is a tiger, and behind the other, a lady.
The concern is that the DM has the power to say which it is, once a door is opened, by fiat ... and there is a presupposition that if the dungeon is designed before the fact, being drawn out in great detail, then proof can be offered that the tiger is absolutely placed behind the right door, and the lady is absolutely placed behind the left. Otherwise, if the result is a tiger, the DM cannot be trusted. The DM can only be trusted if the result is a lady.
This goes far, far beyond doors. If the player faces two combatants, similarly armed, and one is a 5th level with 35 hit points, and the other is a non-level with 6 hit points, then it matters which combatant the player chooses to attack. There are many who would argue, vociferously, that the 5th level should be obviously 5th level, by virtue of the combat ability a 5th level would have. I do and I don't agree. Yes, over time, the 5th level's superiority ought to be evident, but if this is the first round? No. In any case, what if they're both 5th level, and one has 47 hit points and the other 26? And as you attack the one with 26, I switch them, just as in the example above I can switch the doors. How would you know?
We can take this further. At a crossroads is a sign for two towns. The one towards the west is in the midst of a plague ... and if they players go there, they might catch the plague and die. Whereas the town to the east is presently under siege ... and if the players go there, they might be seen as the enemy and be killed. Whichever way the players choose, how can they ever know I didn't decide for them?
This is the fundamental error in nearly all existing dungeon design. It presupposes that the players are faced with a smorgasboard of possibilities, and that by supping a little from door #1, and then from door #2, and finally from all the doorish episodes up to door #76, they can somehow luck their way through the dungeon and get their fill. But a non-episodic dungeon only has ONE door. The door forward. And of course it has a tiger behind it, because there's no other reason for a door to exist.
Look at it this way. If you barge into the Ogre's House, you're going to meet the ogre. There's no "quantum" about it. If you're so stupid not to realise this, then you have no business going forward. It does not matter if you enter it's house from the back door, the side door or the front door. You may see the living room before the kitchen, or the bedroom before the bathroom, but one way or the other, the ogre is in front of you.
The door is the goal post.
I've never met a party who didn't want to meet the ogre. It's the reason they're here.
P.S.,
There's always another door. The one back the way they came.
No comments:
Post a Comment