Rolling in OSR is an
Encounter Story Prompt
<;">
I posted on tumblr recently about an epiphany I had with regards to
dice in the OSR. I'll quote my original text here (with some editing
notes):
I think I get one of the roles dice play in OSR games, that I didn’t
get before.
I used to think dice were for randomly deciding between things a
human [at the table] couldn’t fictionally determine, or it would be
wrong for one to do so: e.g. does an attack hit in combat? Hard to say
in the fiction if all that is said is “I swing my sword” and not super
fair for any one person (GM or player) to simply declare. I though this
philosophy was also valid for random encounters, reaction rolls, open
door checks… but I think there’s something else dice can do.
I re-read this
blog post, this
one too, and watched this Bandit’s Keep
video. The first discusses “the oracular power of dice,” the central
point being that dice are “game oracles,” giving glimpses of the
abstract question. The second looks at random encounters and suggests
you take an OD&D wilderness encounter roll, and turn it into an
interesting situation on the fly, using the usual rolls (reaction,
distance, surprise, etc.) as prompts for forming this. The last
discusses what “getting lost” in a hexcrawl means: is it realistic? How
do we fictionally justify this?
I think all of these point to the same idea: dice provide abstracted
(in the game sense) answers to exploration questions, though not a full
answer. The structure of rolls, the questions they answer, fill in
blanks the GM might have about, say, an encounter, in a way that
promotes creativity (by making compromises of apparent roll result
paradoxes).
The natural conclusion of dice being oracles then, is that the GM is
an interpreter, one who must make sense of the seeming paradoxes and
deliver the news to a wider table. This will involve some improvisation,
creativity, and a feel for the world and its inhabitants. It also sounds
very fun. I can brainstorm a couple of reasons why a group of bandits
might be friendly towards the party (did they mistake them for comrades?
Are they on the lamb and looking for genuine help, or to exploit?).
GM-procedural dice rolls are then worldbuilding prompts, ready to be
riffed on at the table.
I read once in a Marc Miller interview (creator of
Traveller), that early on when making games, he didn’t want
someone else to do the imagining for him. I like this idea. Give me some
leads, and I will make do with however many bandits, at any distance,
with any sort of attitude.
<;">
And I think I'm starting to think this idea can be applied more
broadly. I want to explore the idea of "riffing off procedures and
numbers" in two different contexts.
<> <;">
My post covers the basic idea that goes here. But let me expand on it
a bit. What rolls go into an encounter, say, in a hexcrawl?
<;">
<;">
There's checking for an encounter (which for this discussion assume
it comes up positive), there's distance, surprise, number appearing, and
reaction. In line with my post above, this provides the base framework
for building the encounter in the hex.
<;">
<;">
You should immediately think of what the encounter is doing here. You
may wish to proceduralize this further, say, using a table like Maze
Rats' "Wilderness Activities" table. Or perhaps you have sufficient
worldbuilding to determine what this type of encounter usually does. OK,
let's say you've figured out why the NPCs of this encounter are present
here. Then what?
<;">
<;">
Look at reaction and surprise. Remember, these are abstract, and not
binding to the letter of the result. "Surprise" doesn't have to mean
that someone is getting jumped, but definitely that someone is caught
off-guard or unaware. Similarly, reaction may need some interpretation
for different encounters. Do dragons and goblins follow the exact same
mindset for reaction? Probably not. But low is agreeable to the party,
and high is disagreeable. The in-between can be ruled accordingly.
<;">
<;">
Number appearing is also a great prompt. This is the final key to the
interpretation. This will seal the deal of if an encounter attacks or
looks to parley. If the NPCs could take the party, they might try for it
(if the reaction roll is telling of such). Or they might simply demand
treasure from the party. Or, ambush (if surprise is appropriate). Oh,
and now you should have 4 more ideas for how this could play out if we
include lairs.
<;">
<;">
The big take-home point is these rolls are prompts for improvising an
encounter, rather than designing one. I encourage more GM's to try this.
However, these rolls are not a gold standard of encounter improvisation
- if you find yourself routinely missing some information for an
encounter, build yourself a little table to help out.
<;">
<;">
Much of this applied to the dungeon. You might wish to adjust the
activities table, but of course, that is up to you.
<;" id="enemy-tactics-follow-from-stat-blocks">Enemy Tactics
follow from Stat Blocks <;">
I want to take a different spin on my point: stat blocks ALSO server
as prompts for interactions.
<;">
<;">
There have been enough blog posts on monster tactics before that even
5e people
have taken up the call. This may seem easier in 5e, where you have
in-depth mechanics that may seem to serve as more detailed prompts for
tactics. But I think the most basic OSR stat block still provides
enough.
<;">
<;">
To highlight this point, let's look at a by-the-book bandit. AC 8
[11], 12 MV, 1HD. Weapons are generally melee according to rulebook (I
think it'd be interesting to allow bows, but let's keep it simple).
<;">
<;">
What do we learn from this? Bandits are quite mobile but HP-wise are
weak. They have meh weapons. What would YOUR tactics be, if you were a
bandit? What makes sense? If the party is surprised, then ambush and
guerilla warfare makes sense (if they rolled low reaction). If evenly
matched or so, then they want to be able to retreat quickly if they do
decide to attack. They might run away if they are outmatched, since they
are so mobile.
<;">
<;">
If you include bows, things get more complicated as kiting becomes a
possibility. Or ambush from trees. It will depend intimately on the
encounter rolls. The stat block is another thread in the encounter
improvisation tapestry. I haven't even bothered to mention leveraging
terrain and environment! Nor the variable HP rolls! Who might frontline
among the bandits? Would they retreat if they're all weak?
<;">
<;">
I think they key to running dangerous encounters with OSR enemies is
to genuinely try to kill the party with them. "Be tough, but fair" as it
says in Skorne, but it is much more fun as a GM to actually play the
NPCs with your intelligence, using GM skill over NPC skill. We kinda get
back to a weird asymmetrical "combat as chess," but with randomly
determined chess pieces and a random start configuration. But if you
roll a bad reaction for the party, run those enemies hardball.
<;">
<;">
----------
<;">
<;">
I think procedures cut down on prep IMMENSELY by providing just
enough information to help you think up something cool. I have been
lowering and lowering my prep for a while, and this is one of the keys
to it so that you can avoid meticulous encounter crafting. Procedures
are a flexible idea that allow you to do better than "Orcs attack!"
because, you can always write a new table, and you deserve a more
interesting game than that.
Popular posts from
this blog
Probably a year or two ago I read a blog post from outside the
DnD-sphere, Reality has a surprising amount of detail . It stuck with me
all this time, and eventually the little worm in my brain that this post
spawned crawled and ate its way through my neatly compartmentalized mind
into my DnD brain. I haven't reread the article since my first reading,
but the title is what really stuck with me. The worm has digested this
idea, and the result is a little nugget of an idea I want to expand upon
here. The blog post talks first about how constructing a set of wooden
steps, in a precise manner, is actually quite difficult. Figuring out
how the pieces of wood should be cut, fit together, and secured take
some planning and precision. This is all to make stairs that simply fit
together. Bearing weight is another manner. The OSR is all about having
a "realistic" world - one that operates on consistent internal logic,
even with fantastical elements. That means if you really wanted
Just a quick explanation of an OSR dungeon design principle for those
unfamiliar. This is maybe not a well-touted idea, but I've been brewing
on this idea lately. Of course, this is all centered around how I want
to play, run... etc... Take with coarse grained salt if you think your
goals are different. If you've got a dungeon, you should have some empty
rooms that don't.… do anything. As in, there is nothing 'to do' in the
room. I have been brewing this idea based on what Luke Gearing said in
his interview on the "Into the Megadungeon" podcast. I'll just rehash
what Luke conveyed in my listening: Empty rooms provide a place to rest
(my words) Empty rooms give space to a dungeon so that you don't die at
every turn Empty rooms are tactically important for managing encounters,
especially in conjunction with loops Luke gave an easy example of how
to utilize empty rooms: You pass through some empty rooms, and
eventually encounter a big room with a
I want to explain a philosophy for adventure design I have developed
on, I hope: thinking small. Honey I Shrunk the Adventure! Many good
adventures give lots of play out of small packages. This is not a new
idea. The 3 hex campaign start and 5 room dungeon are known for giving
creativity via constraints (a well-touted idea). Brevity in the
adventure text is also a much-loved and effective way to give creativity
through vagueries. I see these as a part of a core rule of thumb: do
more with less. I think this is a great design philosophy. I would like
to push it a bit further, and to a potentially new aspect of the rule of
thumb, that deserves just as much attention. Before, I have written a
scenario premise , which you can get a whole session out of (in most
cases), and I've mentioned before having a cool idea . I want to propose
a design philosophy: have the core danger of a setting fit into a single
coherent description, and a summary of an adventure location fit into a
paragrap
Get link
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment