The Netflix show “Delicious in Dungeon” is popular with modern D&D players but what they might not have noticed is that it’s an old school dungeon crawl, including wandering monsters and random encounters. It’s a very good example of how old school D&D was played: There’s a dungeon; it has distinct levels; there are multiple adventuring parties; parties go back to town to resupply (usually - that’s a key part of the story), there are traps; there are monster lairs; there are wandering monsters that are themed to the level; there are repeat encounters with the same party/monsters. It’s perhaps the best representation of how D&D was originally played.
Aren't JRPG's based heavily on the old-school RPGs? It's pretty noticeable with the way orcs are depicted in Japanese fantasy media, where they have pig-like traits. Similar to how they're depicted in old-school fantasy artwork.
@@badideagenerator2315 D&D hit Japan like a thunderclap in the late 80s. Just to feed the appetite for fantasy fiction that deverloped, some DMs novelized their campaigns which gave birth to the 'light novel' genre. The anime Record of Lodoss War is an example of a light novel that was adapted to anime. Ironically it depicts a D&D world that is much more story-driven than what we got in Delicious in Dungeon.
@@flowthrake And even before there were any official translations available there, Wizardry and Ultima had been inspiring homegrown FRPGs like Ys, Dragon Quest, and Final Fantasy for years.
Yes, totally! It also helps with "we just spent 5 minutes fighting a monster and are low on hit points and spells, so we're just going to camp here for eight hours and rest..." WHOOPS! Wandering monsters found your camp!
A lot of people get so hung up on narrative and gameplay being separate elements in DnD that they forget these things are supposed to complement each other, like a yin and yang kind of thing. Having the players deal with the challenges of an unpredictable and dangerous environment, even if these challenges don't mean anything in the broader scope of what the adventure is about, can directly or indirectly lead to the kind of exciting moments that people play this game for. A group of goblins wanders up and attacks, maybe the players use up some resources that cause them to struggle and get creative later in the fight against the dragon. Maybe they defeat the goblins but start investigating their presence further, the DM can think on their feet and come up with some brand new material that branches off what they originally intended. Maybe the encounter with the goblins informs the players what the world is like through their presence and unique appearances, or teaches them to be careful. Maybe they get defeated and captured by the goblins, the adventure takes an exciting twist. Or maybe it's been awhile since the players got to let off some excess violence and it's just good as a tool for the DM to pace out their game between other significant encounters. Or if you're running something where violence is a less appealing solution to your problems, especially in old-school games, it could be a chance for the players to sneak, trick, or talk their way past a tense and difficult situation.
Yeah, randomness can create some of the most tension filled and memorable moments , the players are heading back to town bloodied and battered, nearly out of spells, but laden with loot and that random goblin patrol goes from a minor inconvenience to a potential disaster/triumphant stumble over the line which will have every player on the edge of their seats.
I love wondering monsters, random encounters and flying by the seat of your pants style gaming in general. This is why Dungeon Crawl Classics is my favorite RPG of all time.
Wandering Monsters / Random Encounters can add excitement, flavor, suspense, information, or support (as loot, magic or even allies) to a game. They have their place though and should be carefully considered by the DM before using them in game
I do use Wandering Monsters / Random Encounters in my campaign but with consideration. In my last session (1/2e AD&D) the party was sailing through an Archipelago known for pirates, monsters and unusual events. We treated almost as a hex crawl despite sailing through charted waters. The encounters were everything from extreme weather, to pirates, to ocean hazards (whirlpool), to a mysterious island that wasn’t supposed to be where it was. The random encounters filled in the blanks and helped tell the story. Not all encounters are hostile either. The party can meet interesting NPCs who they can engage with for help or information. They can come across an area of unusual terrain indicating a powerful magic effect or creature near by. Random Encounters can be a wonderful way to add excitement and tension or wonder to your game.
This is *exactly* how I make random encounter tables for my game! I treat them a little differently than wandering monsters but the same general principals apply. Your Archipelago game sounds like so much fun! Thanks for sharing, and for watching and commenting. Cheers!
I have always loved wondering monsters, probably because the very first monster I faced as a kid was a Zombie, which was a wondering monster. Still like setting out watches during the night and rolling for wandering monsters. Great channel!!
Thank you so much for watching and commenting! And also, thanks for sharing your story about your first monster! I love hearing stories like this from my fellow gamers. Cheers!
We always used random encounters, which included wandering monsters, wandering NPCs and random world building or plot scenarios. Our campaigns were sandboxes, and the focus was on events happening in the land that the players could engage with or ignore. The randomness helped with immersion but also strategy, since if the players know that even the DM doesn’t necessarily know what might happen it really ups the collaboration between DM and players. It makes the players think twice about being unprepared, and they also know they do not - should not - treat every event as a combat. As DM is was fun to weave the randomness into a story. For example, the players may look up NPCs they met on the road because they might have useful connections; the players may end up with nemesis’s, side quests, mysteries to pursue, etc. It really makes the world seem more real, rather than a story woven around the players.
Wandering Monsters are what makes players really have to watch the clock and be careful. Wanna spend extra turns searching for secret doors - good luck with that. Wanna rest up for a long time somewhere - good luck on that. Wanna explore a dead end sequence of rooms - good luck with that. Sometimes you don't find the monster, it finds you.
Yes, exactly! I always thought it was cool they were in "First Fantasy Campaign" as well - they're older than the game itself. I didn't really intentionally try to make a clickbait thumbnail, as that's not really my style, but in case it wasn't clear from my video, I like (and use) Wandering Monsters, especially in the old-school game I run for my daughter and her friends. Thank you very much for watching and commenting. I really appreciate it.
Some of the best story beats I've ever seen in games I've played in and games I'm DMing is when the party makes an unexpected choice and ends up somewhere random and I just need to fill a session with some entertainment so I roll up a wandering encounter that sometimes turns into a whole new campaign. My players randomly went the wrong direction on an abandoned road and they came to a bridge guarded by some gnolls, and some other mixed baddies , they became fascinated with them, fought them a bit and then decided to parlay. The dice allowed it so I just played along. Turns out this gang worships a giant forest wyrm and it turned into a whole sub plot about learning why this wingless dragon was in this particular mountain range. I basically threw out my planned campaign and let them go down the rabbit hole. Everyone had a blast.
By the time Dragonlance showed up I had already been playing and running games for 10 years. Before that, games were episodic or sandboxes. Dragonlance was super popular, because it was the birth of railroading, and sub par DM's could look like real DM's by running them.
Yes, Dragonlance was very railraid. But it was also epic. And the end of keep on the boarder lands, or even against the Giants the player really didn’t get a sense of being important, like the character in a novel. Dragonlance allowed you to be a Frodo or Conon type character that would change the world. That was an if change, and I think its popularity meant at least some people liked that epic feel for their characters.
Excellent video. I'm glad you brought up resource/time management. In AD&D, Random encounters are the impetus for movement and making progress through the dungeon and or wilderness, until such time as the PCs can return to civilization (ideally with loot so they can level up). These unplanned encounters are part of the "time" system that includes encumbrance, resource management, listening at doors, searching for secret passages, and mapping , etc. PCs should want to maximize time in the "dungeon," which means moving quickly to get as much loot as they can carry and then escape back to the village. In AD&D, the DM checks once every 6 turns (1 hour) for the chance of an encounter. PCs want to move quickly and reduce the overall number of times that the DM makes an encounter check (do you want to enter the dungeon with a 90' movement speed or a 30' movement speed?). Random encounters are with creatures that are not in a lair, therefore they have little to no loot but still force the party to burn resources. Having a map allows the PCs to get out of the dungeon faster (x5 movement rate), resource/inventory management and encumbrance help the PCs to move faster and or decide what to drop if things go sideways (pack your backpack well and you can go from 30' to 120' pretty quickly). How long should they spend listening at a door, or searching for a secret door that just has to be there? Pulling at a thread has consequences to the integrity of the system as a whole. If you want to reduce the chance of random encounters that "waste" time and resources, have a map and manage the mechanics so you can move fast. :) I'm not saying tables need to use Random Encounters, but it does change (if not break) the system (AD&D at least).
I agree with your points and it's one of the reasons I wanted to make the video to help folks understand that they aren't just "meaningless combats" but rather a part of the procedural structure of the game. Thank you for adding extra context, and for watching and commenting!
I love wandering monsters and "random" encounters. However, in my case, the only thing "random" is the timing. I always tailor my random encounters to serve a purpose. Some of those purposes may be: * To slow the group down(pacing) * drop hints about things they may be facing in the near future * maybe a loot drop to give them an edge in an upcoming difficult encounter * dropping plot hints and extra information (or need to know info I forgot to give them) * pulling extra resources out of the party to make a future encounter a bit more challenging * Dropping a plot thread (especially useful for introducing backstory plots) and my PERSONAL favorite * Getting them off their butts and forcing a decision when they are taking way too long overthinking something! *** As you spend the last 10 minutes discussing how to get past the guards, one of them turns toward the corner you are all spying from and starts walking toward you. The gleam in his eye and the hop in his step tell you he's most definitely looking for a quiet shadow in which to relieve himself." There's no reason that random encounters and wandering monsters can't and shouldn't be used to advance the overall story or even drop a new plot thread. Bottom line, if the encounter is relative to the setting and /or the story, there's no reason for it to FEEL random to the players.
I love all Daddy Rolled a 1 videos! Agreed, I like both random encounters and resource management. Random encounters demonstrate that the world is not a static place just waiting for an adventurer to come strolling by. I like resource management because accomplishing goals with limited resources is a more satisfying victory than winning with everything you could possibly want always at the ready. Wandering monsters should make sense in the context of your environment. Where did the goblins come from? From the pool of monsters in the dungeon. The wandering merchant was on his way to the market in the next town. Etc. Thanks for this.
I really appreciate you taking time to make a comment! I agree with all your points. It's been really refreshing to see so many folks who embrace the idea of Wandering Monsters, although I think perhaps it's because due to my age, I tend to appeal to an older crowd who just accept them as part of the game. In any event, thank you so much for watching and for your support of the channel. Cheers!
Obviously I like the random encounter, wandering monster and reacton/morale mechanics. Wandering monsters are part of the timer adding urgency to play. Taking time in a dungeon increases the danger! But I do think the gonzo random tables are mood killers, instead, as you pointed out, use themes from the adventure or like the Acolytes actual npcs that can reveal things. I believe this adds realism and intrigue to any setting.
I'm so glad you enjoy them! When my wife and I first started dating, we were long distance and we'd chat on the phone pretty much every night and to mix things up, sometimes I would read to her and I remember her telling me once she loved when I did that because it made her fall asleep! I was, at the time, slightly offended she would say that, but over time I've come to accept it! I'm glad you find them relaxing, and thank you so much for watching and commenting! Cheers!
Because most game sessions are limited by how much time you have, I like to roll up potential random encounters before the session starts. Then I can mix them in based on how far the party is progressing in the time we have remaining. I get the old school appeal of having something completely unexpected show up, but sometimes it burns too much time from the main adventure.
Considering how much time you have to actually game makes a lot of sense. I, too, like to do some of my random rolling during my prep but for wandering monsters, I tend to leave that to happen "live" during the session. They come up very seldom but the times they have, some fun things have happened in my daughter's group. But I completely understand folks who don't use them. Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
Thanks for the response Martin. I feel like the time element is something a lot of D&D advice channels tend to forget. If I'm running an adventure that I want to take 1-2 sessions before the party moves on, then I've got to balance the PCs interacting with the main mission vs including other encounters. Although some of the most memorable scenes are from those other encounters to be fair.
Argh! I'm so sorry that happened! I know a few friends who experienced that, but my mom was always very supportive of me playing the game, as you probably noticed if you've watched a few of my videos, as I bring her up often.
People don't like wandering monsters? Is the dungeon supposed to be static? Things live there. They'll walk around doing their home things. Not having them would be like walking into an office building and expecting all the halls to be always empty. To only encounter the denizens if you enter their office. There is never any reason for anyone to leave their own spaces. Of course not. That would be silly.
What a fantastic presentation of a fascinating topic! I love how you bring the history to it! I've been having difficulty listening to the long form presentation and rpg topics in general are at the moment on the backseat of my interests as the global politics and geopolitics are so intriguing at this time (another one of my long time special interests). But I'll try to watch this video especially all the way through soon and I'm happy to know that I can always come back to your videos to catch up on all the cool topics. I still make a point also to check them out as you publish and always like them because of course I like them 😁 I'm also two sessions into a new OSE/Dolmenwood game with my main group so I need the good for inspiration. Cheers!
Always glad to see you here in the comments! I'm excited to hear more about your OSE/Dolmenwood game! Thanks so much for stopping by to chat and leave a comment!
I used to be in the "hates wandering monsters" camp, but now I'm firmly in the other. I even made some very extensive wandering monster tables for my Warhammer 4e game, including tables for all the major bad guy factions, plus regular bandit/outlaw types, plus a few other human types. And then I put a couple entries on each faction that say "roll again on this table, and another random table." So for instance I had a wandering monster encounter that was a group of savage orcs who were hunting a dragon. Now my players just sailed right on by that one, lol. No interest in getting caught up in that mess, but the idea of having intersecting tables of random encounters can really help spark new ideas. Like what does an encounter with zombies, and skaven clanrats look like? What are they both doing there?
Having spent over a decade creating and play testing a game of my own creation I learned early on that whenever you change rules or avoid using them as intended, you create more, often surprising problems. I equate this as the Domino effect. Most systems are very interlinked and mucking with them is like removing the odd domino. Remove too many and the rest fail to work as expected.
Something that I decided on decades ago was that most monsters have more needs than combat just as most monsters have a sense of preservation. So if it becomes apparent the PCs are winning, most monsters retreat. Few fight to the death.
Yes, exactly! It's one of the reasons I made my "Why Are the Monsters Attacking?" tables I mentioned in one of my previous videos and offered them to folks who emailed me. It's designed to go with the 2D6 Reaction Roll Tables from Basic D&D and give thoughts to the DM for *why* the monsters are doing what they're doing, which then leads to them being more dimensional and helping a DM know why they'd retreat or help or fight or ignore. They might fight to the death if they are protecting their young, for example, but not just because they randomly stumbled across a group of adventurers in a dungeon.
I agree with you that it does come down to resource management, I wasn't sure at first, but I have run it both ways and it does change the game a lot. That said I have my own wondering monster list, with different things outside of combat and many results not meaning anything if they are repeated, the treat is still there, but because a 2 on a d6 was rolled twice only one happened in back to back wondering monster rolls.
As you pointed out, there is a big difference between a random wandering monster from a general table, and a wandering monster from a bespoke/custom table tailored for the dungeon and being relevant to the adventure. As well as getting ticked off when they happen: in your example, if the PCs kill the acolytes, obviously they shouldn't show up anymore. My issue with wandering monsters is the inexhaustible random monster generator without rhyme or reason. For example there being a sealed tomb of some sort and a big deal has been made of the doors having stayed secret that only one guy knows how to open, and then you just run into living people inside it... I tend to have 'living dungeons', meaning that while my monsters have been keyed to specific locations, they do move around during their normal daily/nightly routine. And they will raise an alarm if they spot intruders.This bit the PCs in the butt in one (early-ish) adventure, when they continued faffing about while they could hear an alarm being raised. End result, the whole lair was gathered up to fight them, and they were overwhelmed and captured for slavery. Now, they managed to escape, but it was no doubt a learning experience for them. In another adventure a bit later, they needed to rescue someone from an orc lair. This time around, they were very conscious about trying to avoid causing an alarm, as well as being very conscious of the time pressure, as at any moment some orc might just wander into a room where they had killed a dozen orcs and raise an alarm. They didn't even take out ten minutes to do a bit of first aid (Healing skill, RC) between the fights, since they felt that flow of sands of time in the hourglass. End result: they totally steamrolled that lair of almost fifty orcs, being able to defeat them in piecemeal, many of them surprised at their cups or in their beds. By contrast, if the adventure involves constructs or undead who have been commanded to patrol specific areas, and the PCs clear those out, then there is no problem. The time pressure in such situations ought to come from 'outside', such as rival adventuring parties, bad guys, time limit imposed by the employer...
The purpose for wandering monsters in a dungeon crawl is part of a system to heighten tension. The other part is traps. Traps encourage you to go slow and check every corner carefully. Wandering monsters counter the slow behavior and encourage the players to go fast. If you go too slow, you get too many wandering monsters. If you go too fast, you blunder into more traps. This creates a sense of tension because you have two competing motivations in direct opposition. Hurry up and slow down. The players end up walking a tight rope. I don’t know if I read this or just came to a realization. I can do more reading to find a direct quote. I do know the description for the ear monster goes into detail about this. Basically players are encouraged to listen at doors to try and get information as to what is on the other side. This monster exists to discourage that. If the DM finds players are listening at the door too often, they are encouraged to use this monster. It kinda has a bit of an oppositional feel to it. But it’s making sure the players are challenged. For wilderness encounters, the wandering monsters is exactly how you described. A randomization aid in case you haven’t detailed the area yet or can’t think of something you want.
Just want to add. That tension only works in an exp for treasure frame work. I’m willing to accept different ones. But the exp for the wandering monsters needs to be very low for this to work.
The curse of strahd is story driven, but also treats him as a wondering monster, so I think there is room to mix them especially if it adds to the setting and in that case horror elements
Dragonlance wasn't the way I played. I thought homebrew was great. I did play dragonlance. It seemed too scripted. I like the idea of wandering monsters and it being random. It would be good to make them that makes sense. Makes sense to encounter. I like the idea of another npc party adventuring. Drow npc party for instance. Or pirates. Goblin party. Rats.
My first experience with dnd was playing adnd 2e, 3 years later were still playing that game. It never occured to me that the game could be played without random encounters. For the past 14 sessions (6 months irl) weve been traveling from one side of the map to the other, and we spend 2/3 of our sessions fighting random encounter monsters in the overworld. Its been beyond insufferable.
Wandering monsters are great, but it took me years to understand it. I do believe some modules shouldn't have random monsters. Mainly, gothic horror, where you have a mystery and a highly particular villain. Even some gothic horror modules can use them. I suggest studying the second edition Ravenloft setting to get the when to use them vs when not to. It's honestly just another tool, and as a GM/referee, you should keep it in your tool kit.
Yes, exactly! It's why I mentioned in the video how I adapted/changed the wandering monster tables in B2 to fit the game I run for my daughter and her friends. So much more satisfying and fun!
@@daddyrolleda1 I also like how you've adapted the generic response for wandering monsters. Too many of us took it to mean that literally. Just bebopping along, no rhyme or reason other than carnage. Which isn't all that more true for monsters as it is characters. Not in my opinion, anyway.
The dungeon random monster tables were scaled for the level of the dungeon so were reasonably OK for low level characters, if they insisted on going deeper than they were really capable of you could say that was on them .. but the wilderness encounter tables were a killer, those needed a little GM judgement and interference sometimes, you really don't want to hit your 1st level players with a red dragon on the trip from the town to the dungeon, that sort of thing can leave them feeling put upon, and a bit dead ;)
I agree with the thrust of your argument re: resource management. But in the spirit of fairness and accuracy, two corrections on the 5e lighting rules: 1. 5e Darkvision removes the attack/defense penalties from being blinded, but you still retain disadvantage on perception tests. A darkvision-having player is still penalized against ambushes, traps, hazards, missing useful information, and any other perception-based risk management. On paper, it's not a get-out-of-jail-free card. 2. The 5e Light spell is at-will, no-cost, doesn't use concentration, and doesn't take up hands. It use up one of your cantrips-known, but players do not feel torn between the choices so it does not apply any pressure. On paper, it's a no-downsides infinite light. In practice, most resource management rules are simply not enforced. The rules necessary to do B/X-style resource management are in 5e, they just don't want to use them. I think "goodberry solves food management" tends to be more of a cop-out than a considered belief -- the starting position is "resource management is boring and pointless" and everything after that is back-explaining. I find that the best way to sales pitch resource management is to describe it as being like Survival Horror video games. Younger people **get** that resource management in survival-horror video games is fun, and that can sometimes break the back of this belief. But that's a battle you fight on a per-person basis, and I don't believe the 5e cultural belief will ever really change on it, it simply has too much momentum.
Thank you so much! I can count on one hand the number of times I've played 5E, so my knowledge of some of the intricacies of that system is sometimes lacking. (My lack of playing is just because the folks I play with are currently running Savage Worlds and for my daughter's game, I'm running B/X - I'm not "boycotting" the game or anything like that). I really do appreciate your clarifications/corrections and also I like your analogy of the Survival Horror video games (another area in which my knowledge is extremely lacking!). Thank you very much for watching and commenting, and for your support of the channel. Cheers!
Pitching OSR as survival horror adjacent would probably help. Not 100% survival horror as in OSR you typically can fight a lot of monsters but not all and it's not a sure thing you'll win.
Can’t wait to listen to this one after work! Your videos are always the best history videos I know. Have you seen the new 50th anniversary of D&D book from MIT press? It’s a bunch of essays about the history present and future of D&D. I’m reading a chapter a night and trying to savor each one. It’s really good so far. I just got done with the Jon Peterson chapter.
The 50th Anniversary Book is on my list to get, but I'm waiting to see if anyone picks it up for me as a Father's Day gift. It looks great. I'm also interested in the WotC 50th Anniversary book(s) that are coming out later this year! Thank you again for much for your support! I truly appreciate it!
Another fun video. Have you seen the documentary on the Dungeon and Dragons Artists, Easley, Clydewell and Parkinson, I found it on Prime a few years ago.
Yes! "Eye of the Beholder," I think it's called. Great stuff. I also watched it on Prime. Thank you for watching and commenting, and for your support. Cheers!
Hi Martin, just wanted to mention that your version of First Fantasy Campaign with 88 pages is the first printing. The later printings had less pages, but this was mostly due to a change to smaller typeface. The contents are almost identical otherwise, aside from some attempts to correct typos from the first print (and adding new typos in the process!).
I use encounter tables for overland travel, with a different table tailored to each area, as well as in dungeons. But the tables aren’t all monster encounters. It can be weather, or terrain features. Citizens or military. Traders or refugees. And I use the 2d6 reaction table as well. I’ve had 5e veterans scoff at the idea at first, but it always leads to dynamic game play. Like you said in the video, it’s all how you use it. A lot of what I look for in DMing is world building, but around the table, I enjoy being surprised. No one, including me, wants to read a novel I’d write lol. Thanks for all the great content Martin. I especially enjoyed this one.
Also, I would add, as I got to the end of a video, for random monster or encounter tables, the multiple die roll, ie 2d6, is necessary. Without the bell curve, it’s too random. I like being able to have 2 unlikely, crazy results, with more grounded ones taking up the middle chunk of the table. I use all sorts of combos of dice, like 2d8+1d4 cause I love to roll lol. There’s a bell curve generator online that’s amazing for finding cool combos.
I always have a few “random” encounters up my sleeve, some have taken the party in a completely different direction, one memorable encounter had a highish level mage critically injured by an arrow in the forehead , something we have never forgotten , a double roll of a 20 for hit and crit with concealment ( his head was the only thing showing) with a bit of ad-libbed home brew created a great memory.
Yes! The idea of D&D adventures being more story like is pretty much as old as the game because different people played in different ways. D&D has never been one thing. It's always been what the players want and you can see that in the earliest days of the conversations about the game. That said, I do like wandering monsters and random encounters and tend to write up specific encounter tables for each adventure I do or collection of adventures in the same area. A temple might have different monsters to a tropical island and two tropical islands might have slightly different tables based on what is there. I also think it's erroneous that wanderingm onsters are purely random. Any populated place will have people moving about.
Brilliant stuff! I don't think you pointed out that you can always have random encounters that include one or more monsters that would usually be found in a keyed area - so if they are previously encountered elsewhere, they will not be found in that keyed area, or if they have already been found in the keyed area, they will not be randomly encountered elsewhere.
My os DM used wandering monsters & random encounters as loot/xp drops. Occasionally a side storyline to buff us before a boss encounter. I always enjoyed those sessions.
It's always interesting when I hear you mention playing WFRP, but have also often heard you mention not really liking Armor Absorption or Hit Locations...
Ah! I should clarify: I don't like armor absorption and hit locations *in* Dungeons & Dragons, as the combat system was designed from a different philosophy that's more abstract. WRFP was designed from the beginning to utilize those features, so it works within that system. Obviously you *can* add armor absorption and hit locations to D&D, but to me, that slows down the game and it sort of misses the point of the abstract design of the D&D combat system. And, all that said... I do tend to prefer combat mechanics that rely less on multiple different tables, as, again, I think it slows combat down. The hit location tables in WFRP can be really fun (and I've designed my own critical hit and critical hit tables over the years as well), but often I think I'd rather just let player quickly narrate what happened and then move to the next player so people aren't waiting as long between turns.
Yes! I mention later in the video that a benefit of using Wandering Monsters is that it helps to add/expand (or even, as you mention, create) your story. The thumbnail might make it appear that I don't like Wandering Monsters but that's why I added the "?" because I actually do like them, and use them in my daughter's game. Thank you for watching and commenting!
Wandering monsters are the best. Reaction rolls for a new friend or foe. A potential for a new lair in the map. Of course not every location be it hex crawl, dungeon or city needs them all the time. But they create events and consequences far better organically than I can plan out
Dragonlance is the pivot point in TTRPG history where sandbox play began to give way to "narrative gaming". Over time, DMing ceased to be an exercise in creative improvisation and became equivalent to a full-time job thanks to the mountain of preparation/work required to construct an elaborate world and a fully fleshed-out "story" for the players to be led through. For DMs who have neither the time nor the talent to do all the necessary work (which is probably most of them today), there are shelves full of pre-written "adventure paths" to take the players through, turning the DM into a glorified tour guide through someone else's imagination. Long gone are the days of emergent drama, where the "story" is what emerges from unpredictable player actions, not what is prescribed by a pre-written script.
I'm wondering if there's any overlap between the people who played in these early versions of RPG's and those who created the unix game "Rogue" (which developed into hack/nethack/slash'em etc)?
I've heard the term "Rogue-like" when discussing certain types of tabletop RPGs, but I'm not familiar with them, as I am not a computer/video gamer. But, I think your theory makes sense, as pretty much most of the early computer game developers were also tabletop RPG (mostly D&D) players, which is why so many concepts in CRPGs (like leveling up, etc.) have ties to D&D. Thank you very much for watching and commenting - I think this is a really interesting topic to explore. And, I truly appreciate your support of the channel. Cheers!
Hello I enjoy watching and can relate to this one the most I have always made a list of the things that can happen if the players go off my route. Like places to see monsters wondering around or even maybe other things. However I agree if it takes away from the fun we should not use it, but then again it can be fun to see what they do or what the new encounter does to change the adventure once in a while too.
If I ran a game where the simplest combat ate up an hour or more, I'd hate wandering monsters, too. Since I favor OD&D, however, I can appreciate how they add tension, foster verisimilitude, encourage smart play, and give the referee some delightful opportunities to be surprised by his own dungeon.
That's a really interesting way of looking at it. I haven't played a ton of 5E, but I do recall in 3E/3.5, combats could take up more than an hour of "real world" time, so I think your theory has some merit. Thanks for sharing, and for watching and commenting.
Another great video! I feel like people, especially new players to the game but even some older members, feel the need to follow the rules as written or the adventure as written. I feel like using a truly random table of wandering monster encounters in my experience seemed rather arbitrary , but this video shows that it doesn't have to be that way at ALL. Good insight and inspiration.
Great video. One small note though: Light spells do not use a resource in 5e. It's a cantrip, so it doesn't use up a spell slot. Players lose nothing from casting it. It's a common gripe about 5e amongst old school gamers.
Thanks for catching that. My lack of 5E knowledge is pretty clear - I can count on one hand the number of times I've played that system. As a player, the folks I normally play TTRPGs with have switched to running Savage Worlds so I don't get a lot of chances to play it. Thanks for the correction, and for watching and commenting!
This was a great video on WM's. You mentioned verisimilitude, and that is the most important reason in my campaigns for having them. Think of how boring travelling from town A to town B would be without wandering encounters. What I do: every WM encounter I have in my campaign has a reason and purpose, I still use tables and they are random. Here are two examples; Azra the Troll - An overturned beer cart lies in the road. Nearby, an enormous troll snores loudly, surrounded by empty kegs. Azra is drunk and passed out. Gojun the Terrible - An enormous dragon lands on the road in front of the group. It asks for directions to a certain village, gives the party a generous tip, and then flies off saying he intends to raze it to the ground. His name is Gojun. [He is a Brine Dragon and seeks revenge for the death of his spouse by a "Hero" of this village] I give myself a summary of what each creature is about, and how to roleplay the encounter. Some are combat as well, but I like to throw in a lot of social and unique encounters giving the players a chance to hobo kill [in the first encounter] or kill themselves [by attacking the dragon] in the second. Not every encounter should be combative, either because you simply can't beat it, or it was never meant to be combative in the first place. Furthermore, many of these, can form the basis of an adventure in and of themselves depending on how the players go about the encounter. Cheers.
I can't even wrap my head around the dislike of wandering monsters. What is actually is not logical is set piece encounters, which make the environment feel static. The dislike of wandering monsters goes hand in hand with the expectation of a pre-defined story/plot and is antithetical to a quality gaming experience. Nothing is ever tied absolutely to a fixed place in any location I build, monsters move around in and out of the locations, dynamically, you know, the way living things always do. BTW, I do like your content. I run a theology channel but I do gaming content du temps en temps, if you'd ever like to stop by Grail Country for a visit I'd love to have you.
Thank you for watching and commenting! I agree with your thoughts on Wandering Monsters (as I hope was evident by my video; sometimes I think I'm making a point very clear but upon re-watching it I see that I could've done a better job making it crystal clear). I just subscribed to your channel and will check it out when I get a chance! Cheers!
I ran a lot of D&D during the white box era. During this era, there were no narratives. The model of my game, 1977-1980, was a plate of pasta. Each strand was a story and the sauce was the wandering monsters. My players often wanted to charm or capture and question small monsters like goblins; the information was valuable. Unlike Dragonlance, which I do not remember well, the players had no reason to believe they were the protagonists of a story. It was on the players to find the story. It should never be obvious whether an encounter was part of a story or a random encounter until later. Also, there was little or no sense of urgency in the game. If you are trying to find your way to something, there is no hurry in either real time or game time. I used the random encounter tables or made my own for a particular location, always prepared before the game just like location encounters. I didn't want players to know a particular encounter was important except in retrospect.
Thank you so much! You can tell my lack of 5E knowledge! Hopefully folks got the gist of what I was saying even though my 5E mechanical knowledge is limited. 😀
Thanks for another great video with history and game mastering advice. Understanding why something was included really does help incorporating it into the game and into one's game mastering philosophy.
I really appreciate that. Thank you so much! I'm glad you find these kinds of videos helpful, and I really appreciate you watching and commenting. Cheers!
The best way I know of to keep a DM from throwing wondering monsters too much is set up ambushes with your group so he rolls the wandering monster check to see if you get the ambush someone it worked for me at least
I've learned over the years that random encounters in enclosed environments should reflect the creatures in that environment. IE: the random bug bear from room #8 going to or returning from a bathroom break.
I do think one purpose of the table is for outsiders breaking in. The goblin or NPC result could be an exploratory expedition. Then you can turn this on its head a bit and pull monsters from deeper in the dungeon exploring. I like the idea of a “boss” with a lair who goes around an area. It really only works if they’re outside the parties combat capabilities.(smart players should be able to overcome it still) Wandering monsters are best being kinda hand wavy though. Unless you’re detailing patrols(which you could do if players were on a stake out). Just the result should be explained in the context of the dungeon or ignored if it doesn’t make sense.
Wandering monsters add a touch of common sense to the fantasy world. It's a dangerous place and adventuring in dungeons and crypts, stealing the monster's treasure is a high risk - high reward business. I don't understand why as a DM, I should babysit the players by fudging the encounters to always be "balanced".
That's one of the reasons that I'm enjoying having gone back to running 1981 B/X D&D for my daughter and her friends. Starting with 3E and onward, with the invention of the CR System, there seems to be an expectation on the part of the players that an encounter will have a CR commensurate with the party's level, and I just don't like to play that way and it frustrated me a lot when I was running 3E/3.5. Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@daddyrolleda1 It seems that there are 2 major schools of thought in the RPG community now: The narrative storytelling school and the world-building, simulation school. Majority of the new generation players are from the former. That is why they don't like the wandering encounters.
My game is built around random encounters. There are planned encounters. But far more random encounters. My guys hire henchman to watch their gear when they descend into the dungeon because… their henchman guarding their gear have random encounters
This was a great video. I hope you do more of this type of content. I remember wondering monsters from when I was a kid, and after years of not playing, I thought it was strange that I didn't see them in 5e. This was an inventative approach to how I can include it into my games. I look forward to adding this back in. Also, I want to mention how resource management has also been forgotten, and you talking about it turned the light bulb on in my head on a different approach to running my adventures.
I'm so glad to hear that! Thank you so much for letting me know. It's always great to hear that my ideas are helping other with their games, as that is the primary reason I make these videos. I really appreciate you watching and commenting to let me know. I look forward to hearing how your games go with our new approach on resource management!
@daddyrolleda1 by the way, every time you talk about your daughter's game, I can't help but think how fun it would be to be in that one! I don't watch much live play anymore, but I'd watch that just to get the feel for your style of play.
That was one of the sticking points with Wandering Monsters in the early editions - they didn't carry treasure/gold, so if you decided to fight them, you stood to gain very little (since in those editions, XP = Gold).
It totally can - there's definitely a limit and also it takes a good group and particularly a good referee to know how to use it properly so it enhances the game rather than *becoming* the game.
I've long used wandering monsters, especially in a more sandbox or dungeon/hex crawl campaign. I'll even use them in more "story" games, not just D&D. Good things to do in my experience: -Have the stronger monsters in an area potentially wander. If you run into them they'll usually bug out if things don't look like it's going well for them. If you kill them out of their lair, then they won't reappear. Really nasty monsters might kill off rivals in a region. For example some really nasty big apex predator might well whack all of its competition. The megaladon shark or dragon turtle might have eaten all the lesser apex predators. -Only lesser monsters should repopulate. -Don't be afraid to skip an encounter if things are tense enough. The other way around, if things are lagging, throw in an encounter! -Monster tables are also a suggestion for what to find on particular "dungeon levels", not just wandering monsters.
New monsters can always move in to challenge. The wilderness table has frequency for repopulation for areas. Monsters should only not repopulate (even big ones though not that specific guy) if the players set up patrols. I’d love to see players set up a perimeter on level 2 with constant patrols to clean the place out. I don’t know if it’s sustainable or cost effective but I’d like to see them try.
I HATED wandering monsters! The DM usually designed the dungeons so that the pre-determined monsters were nearly equal to the party...so, that means the party fights a battle and barely survives, and while they are resting to recover, here comes a wandering monster that just cleans up and destroys everyone...and worse still is that WANDERING MONSTERS HAVE ZERO TREASURE!
Great video and I think 5e DMs should use the reaction table as an initial reaction in 3e you could use all the Charisma powers to change that reaction (sorry if you said this I might have missed it). Another thing I might have missed but I think its important if its said twice is in relation to random encounters, they are not meant to be random per se the roll when an encounter happens should be random (I like 1-2 on a d6 for the wilderness, but 1 for well traveled roads for instance) but what the encounter is doesn't need to be random I predetermine what encounter happens based off the random encounter table before the 1st game session, one for each time of day (dawn, morning, midday, day, night & dusk) in the regions I expect the players to be in. Then when an encounter does happen I pull one for that time of day, and make a mental note to roll a new one for that time slot. If you become an experienced DM you can do this in the moment, but I suggest this for newbie DMs.
Out of blue TH-cam recommended me this video. I am kind of surprised that young players not are fans of random encounters of such kind. I thought they grew up on CRPGs mainly and should be used to this kind of things. I, personally, don't mind them. It helps world building. "It's dangerous place. Expect dangerous things, which live here"
17:40 If this sounds like you: "I have a story, and wandering monsters just screw it up. Because it's taking time to do something that doesn't move MY story forward...I know what they should be doing." Just know you aren't a Game Master, you are a train conductor. Go write a book, because that ain't D&D. Your players determine the story. You put story ELEMENTS in a world, and the players may or may not interact with them. Shame on anyone that GMs this way. Seriously.
Great video! In response to your soapbox rant about Dragonlance "not being real D&D", I've never seen anyone make that argument. What I have seen many times is people arguing that Dragonlance is not "old school" D&D - AKA it's not OSR. And I think they're absolutely right for the exact reasons you outline. What makes this is a hot topic is the fact that AD&D is generally considered OSR, and yet some of its most popular modules were trad adventure arcs. Some people think Dragonlance is old and therefore OSR, when really it's the first departure from old-school gaming.
In my opinion, as soon as the story is predetermined, you are using the D&D mechanics to play out a novel/movie/modern adventure. There’s nothing wrong with that, it is certainly a way to play. Personally,I prefer (and have exclusively run for 37 years) a game where the story is created by the characters actions. Not knowing how anything will resolve until the characters decide is one of the true joys of being a DM. I don’t think I could run a game where I had to force the characters down a predetermined path. I think this must be why so many DMs complain about players ruining their games. I also think players ruin those games on purpose. I believe it is an immature act of rebellion against the loss of their agency. I bet most of them don’t even realize that’s why they do it. Anyhoo… just some thoughts. Great stuff as always. BECMI Forever! Long Live King Elmore!!
In the AD&D DMG a wandering monster table is given with the (incomplete) sample dungeon on page 94, and in the scripted example of play (pp 98-99) the DM makes regular wandering monster checks. Under "Time in the Dungeon" on page 38, it says that keeping accurate time is essential so that the DM knows when to roll for wandering monsters, and it recommends the number of rolls be "moderated" while the party is resting, to allow spell casters to refresh their spells. On page 97, the section about finding traps and listening at doors suggests that the DM make more frequent wandering monster checks if the players are being over-cautious and checking everything. (Not sure how they are supposed to know when to be cautious and when not.) On the same page it mentions that bashing down a door triggers three(!) checks for wandering monsters. Finally there is a cursed "jewel of attacks" that causes a 100% chance of encountering wandering monsters. FWIW, I think wandering monsters make sense if you are focused on an exploration mode of play, where the tension arises from what's around the next corner and the players are encouraged to cut and run sometimes. If you prefer a cinematic game that alternates between character-focused roleplaying and orchestrated combats, then wandering monsters make no sense.
Me & my gaming group always used wandering monsters weather we played a "Old School" D&D game or a "Story Line" game. Places are dangerous & Wandering Monsters represent the dangers of an area be it random monsters or a guard patrol. If a DM is running a "Story Line" game & never uses wandering monsters, & then before we get to an objective has a bunch of goons attack us I will at least roll my eyes, & probably be pissed that he CHOSE to sick them on us. Even if we did as much as possible to avoid that. If a random rolled Wandering monster hit us in the same scenario, well that's fate, I can't blame the DM. I loved the Dragonlance books, but didn't care for the modules. I had already read the books, so why play the module that I already knew the ending to was my thought.
I'm quite late in commenting on this topic, but... As someone who started running AD&D1E, then later BD&D from the Rules Cyclopedia, in the early '90s I came up playing and running sandbox style games rather than big narrative games. When you're a heavy academic track student (I was aiming to maximize AP classes and AP tests once I got to high school) and when doing campaign and session prep eats your life if you let it, you have to find the efficient way to bang things out. For my GMing style, the best efficiencies came from modularity in layout for everything and keeping absolute premapped encounters to a minimum. I'm constantly rolling dice behind my screen, it'd be impossible for the players to know whether what I just rolled and wrote a note about was a trap just ahead, a secret door they didn't notice, a treasure hoard deeper into the dungeon, the captured duke's daughter they were looking for dying because they'd taken too long getting there, the troop of goblins now suddenly trying to rush at them from up the corridor, something happening far off on another continent that would soon change the local political dynamics, et al
I can't see a world without random encounters. Everything in its place with no chance of something or someone just wandering around. I believe it was The Citadel of Fire that was basically a "wandering encounters" dungeon. You could encounter almost anyone almost anywhere, especially the BBEG and his entourage. We once had a wandering monster encounter that was a "Party" of adventurers. They were about as tough as we were but we didn't know that. The DM took quite a bit of time fleshing them out. We didn't attack them and had a peaceful encounter exchanging some information. We later found out, similar to your group, that this Party was ransacking the dungeon that we were going to and bragging about it. We had later encounters with this group who's name escapes me and almost came to blows with them. However, the town guard just happened to be coming by(wandering monster encounter?) and put a stop to it. A living world is much better than a preplanned world where everything is set and fixed.
Wandering monsters show the players that they are not the center of the world. They are the center of the game, but not the world. Yes, there is a difference. The world goes on happening with or without the players. "I have a story...." You'te not a Dungeon Master, you're a wanna be novelist. Go write a book. The Dragonlance books are great. The modules are shite railroads. Classic Adventure Gaming for the win.
I think even the name can put people off but really your “wandering monster” table can be anything, including friendly encounters or even friendly encounters with monsters (reaction rolls, Charisma is so much more important in old school)! NPC wasn’t really a term when these things were kicking off so a “wandering monster” could be a human, an elf, a merchant, a fairy, or a dragon or whatever.
I've run the same dungeon that I wrote with its own curated random encounter table 3 times now, and I haven't enjoyed the random encounters. They've felt overly random, without significantly impacting the resource management, while also really taking me out of my flow as a GM. I think in the future I'll either try the underclock, or employ a D4 timer with a ThinkDeck pull and the encounter table I already made for on-the-spot inspiration.
Thanks for the video! I use wandering monsters all the time, every game I run, without fail. There is no place in my setting where things are not wandering around. :)
After going through the early Monty Haul phase, we decided to try to play a better, btb version of the game. The first mod that I tried to DM in this style was Ravenloft, and while not as linear as the DL mods, there is definitely a linear aspect to it. I was so frustrated that the players weren’t complying with the storyline and I tried to force it. What a lesson! The PCs were being smart and inventive, and I just wanted to follow the plot. We all got better at the game. Letting the players do anything is core to the game. If they completely leave the mod setting, all the better! Wandering monsters figure into this as well. The world isn’t scripted either. The monsters are out there looking to eat and for treasure too. I sometimes have a random party camped at the exit to the dungeon to rob the players. Why wouldn’t they? Everything in the game should have some agency and intelligence.
ironically, when I was running my hex and dungeon crawl, I used the default monster tables in OSE and miraculously almost everything I rolled up turned out to be something that actually does or would live in the dungeon. The dungeon is at the edge of a swamp, no bullywugs are in my dungeon, but they showed up as random encounters. The entire eco-system of killer bees (which were in the dungeon being bred by kobolds) --> which are eaten by robber flies --> which are eaten by tiger beetles, somehow happened through random encounters. When they were in the undead-themed part of the dungeon, the wondering monsters also turned out to be undead. It was a bunch of super weird coincidences like that over and over, even though I didn't actually mean to have very interesting encounters I was just being lazy.
what I like about Random encounters/wandering monsters is it makes it so that I as the DM have to be on my toes also. Its not just ME making stuff up for them, but makes it a little bit out of my control, and hit helps build the "story". I dont have to do what the dice say, but it can add two what I have happen. I dont always directly use Random charts but let the dice dictate ideas, which sometimes totally changes the story or creates new ideas for the story!!!!
There is always the possibility of running into something hostile in an environment it's no different from real life if you were to run into an animal in the woods. What irks me is DMs that treat EVERY wandering encounter as a threat to fight. It does break up the tension and flow at times sure but can help get you some grind in for xp and to have fun. Combat was always my favorite part. The most boring moments I ever had were the downtimes of role-playing out political discussions and chatting with non-hostile npcs. Sure yes it has a place...but I'm not sitting through several plus hours of negotiations when as a martial combatant I do my talking with force over speech. Take it for what you will.
Great video as always. I personally hated the move to the Dragonlance style adventures, where the pcs are by default heroes destined for greatness. My group started playing DL1 and pretty swiftly abandoned it, after years of zero to hero gaming in our homebrewed setting it just felt sterile and way too on-rails to be any fun. Now I've started DMing again after a 35 year gap, one of the things I really enjoy is the unpredictabiloty of the game, I never fail to be surprised by the decisions of my group! and rather than try and force them to do what I imagined I find it great fun to allow them to approach problem solving in their own unique way! So yes to wandering monsters and letting the dice decide, it's these sort of events that create real tension and moments everyone will remember and enjoy.
Dave Arneson did have wandering monsters in his game and often they were following the sense of why they were there kind of like what you’re thinking. They had a kind of ecology or reason to be there. The main purpose of the monster was not necessarily to have combat like you’re saying, but to break up the plan and linear story, thinking players sometimes fall into if all you’re doing is playing a game that is a following like a novel, it gets rather monotonous and predictable. The sad thing is early in the creation of dungeons and dragons. It was a lot missed in Dave not being allowed to explain certain game elements. The missing rulebook as I would put it The closest analogy, many players have getting into dungeons and dragons when they hear the word role-play is novels and stories. Not realizing this is more like choose your own adventure with lots of random elements coming in at any angle making you think on your feet. I love your comment about the whole, keeping track of things and following through with anticipating the unexpected. Dave was definitely all about the unexpected. Heck his gameplay followed the unexpected even when he was playing with David Wesely. The easy way I would put it out is explain that think about a military camp, you’re going to have garbage running up and down the court or checking things out. Or you might have other monsters trying to find a place to shelter up. But I love the idea of other player groups or groups similar to the group going through as players, but are just NPC’s trying to do the same thing. And yeah, monsters don’t necessarily sit in the same room all the time waiting for players to show up and suddenly act surprised that is way too cliché I look at it and I heard Dave talk about it is that you have the main story arc with a backstory and a lot of other things going on and the players are the ones who try to figure out what path to giving them the proper empowerment. I know you used a different term for the same thing. I don’t get players who freak out about random monsters or encounters. The only thing that comes to my mind is that they are used to rules as written, meta-gaming, And working with a anticipated, worked out plot and plan When I do a module, I often have actors not known to the players with a totally different desire and plan of their own. The players may grasp one story, not realizing there’s a lot of interwoven story archs going on at once. small note about how to Arnesson recorded his stuff he would write things in the margin of his notes, which is probably a big thing that Tim had problem with. It really required to explain what those notes meant. They were important notes in his manual. In regards to Dragonlance, they were very popular modules because they were presented very nicely and they became very good models to do a module in. I don’t know a single game, master, who actually ran the games, at least not exactly as it was written. Because there is no fun in doing a module where you are forced to follow a action and you don’t have any other option. That’s just not how the intelligent player typically plays. I know in Japan they love the style of gaming. But in US in the early days, it was not the main way to do it. Everyone wanted to show that they could do something unexpected and so linear story or railroading some people call it. Not go over well. Again, what I’m doing in my game I am explaining a lot of the options and giving diagrams to make it easier to understand the different way of thinking about how to do a game
great video. I liked your charts at the end.Personally I love the challenge of random encounters on the fly.I switched to Shadowdark after the Hasbro OGL crap. SD has so many charts on encounters that i use on the fly. For example I rolled "cultist examining ruins" worked perfectly and added some intrigue as the players saw a lone man studying some old obelisk. Turned out that while watching him to determine his purpose, I ended up rolling another encounter, "horse gets pulled into water by a tentacled horror." I had to figure out what was happening fast. I decided the horse was the cultists horse and was down the river a way off and only visible to the keen eyesight of the elf. When the horse was pulled in the stranger yelled in panic about his steed "Chancey". In the end the players befriended the man and promised to take him back to town. They camped and the next day they explored some of the ruins and had one of the players die by a collapsing wall. His new character became the cultist. The wall was also a random encounter.So I feel the dice make the story more then I do, I am just a referee and interpreter. I try to keep my games very open with rumors to guide the players in the direction they wish to go. I would say Random encounters are a complete must have.
I have developed a deep hatred for "scripted adventures", where everything must happen in a specific order, with every encounter accurately set up to the point of telling you what the enemy do action by action, with treasures and loots already calculated to the last copper piece, and so on... That's not an adventure, it's a theatrical script or an interactive novel. In my opinion, players make the story through their decisions and their actions. The DM reacts to that and puts in the game new challenges and possible interactions. And random encounters are a great instrument to manage the world around the player characters and make it more alive. I as DM do not create the story, I enjoy it from a first row seat after having set up the scenery. Notice that I wrote "random encounters", not "wandering monsters". The latters are just one of the many possible types of the formers. Those can be almost anything, from passers by along a road to natural hazards, from climate changes to weird location the players stumble upon, from bizarre phenomena to unespected obstacles on the way, and so on. The weird thing about random encounters is that they can be used to manage completely expected happenings too: things that are bound to happen under certain circumstances, but not in a specific spot and/or not at a predetermined time. They are supposed to happen, but you just don't know where or when, or even if. I agree on the resource management part. That should be a fundamental part of roleplaying games, but since 4th edition it has been increasingly left out of the system, by heavy use of easy recovery (rest mechanics, healing surges, etc.) or unlimited availability (instant recovery of hit points, neverending spell components, etc.). There is no place for randomness in encounters either in the latest systems. They are incredibly deterministic about everything, giving detailed instructions about what to put into your games and when. They are boring for a DM like me, which prefers to throw things at the party to see how they manage the situation, without giving a shit about balance or fairness.
On that last point of "if you play 5E and don't like the reaction roll and would rather use your bonuses, then go ahead and use your diplomacy instead." I would say those are two fundamentally different questions/answers. The reaction roll is setting up the initial situation. A diplomacy check is due to player action to change the situation. Both can be used together.
I remember my first solo play through in module B2 in which wandering monsters are a detection risk as your party explores the different lairs in the CoC. It definitely introduces a degree of stealth play, but more importantly keeps the play more chaotic so it feels less like you are just playing through the rooms like they were just a golf course. Considering there is not much plot or narrative development in B2, the wandering monster table adds a degree of suspense. Definitely a bit lazy, but it adds a bit of sandbox feel to the campaign to have a random table of elements that might be encountered, as well as exact table and chance for something to be found in any given spot of a lair.
Completely off topic, but just wanted to inform you nearly every time you say "daddy rolled a 1" I can't help but repeat it to the tune and tempo of "janie's got a gun" by Aerosmith - do with that info what you will, I just wanted to share lol.
Edit at 28 min you say all of this and more. For the algorithm! To me wandering monsters were always from one area exploring another. It wasn’t a monster not in the game. I’d have wandering monsters not in their lair because they were elsewhere and it stopped the surgical strike syndrome that many groups devolved into. However I stopped using them in recent years. I think they need to come back.
The Netflix show “Delicious in Dungeon” is popular with modern D&D players but what they might not have noticed is that it’s an old school dungeon crawl, including wandering monsters and random encounters. It’s a very good example of how old school D&D was played: There’s a dungeon; it has distinct levels; there are multiple adventuring parties; parties go back to town to resupply (usually - that’s a key part of the story), there are traps; there are monster lairs; there are wandering monsters that are themed to the level; there are repeat encounters with the same party/monsters. It’s perhaps the best representation of how D&D was originally played.
Aren't JRPG's based heavily on the old-school RPGs?
It's pretty noticeable with the way orcs are depicted in Japanese fantasy media, where they have pig-like traits. Similar to how they're depicted in old-school fantasy artwork.
@@badideagenerator2315 D&D hit Japan like a thunderclap in the late 80s. Just to feed the appetite for fantasy fiction that deverloped, some DMs novelized their campaigns which gave birth to the 'light novel' genre. The anime Record of Lodoss War is an example of a light novel that was adapted to anime. Ironically it depicts a D&D world that is much more story-driven than what we got in Delicious in Dungeon.
@@flowthrake And even before there were any official translations available there, Wizardry and Ultima had been inspiring homegrown FRPGs like Ys, Dragon Quest, and Final Fantasy for years.
Well, except for eating the monsters on a regular basis. I mean it likely did occur , but not regularly.
Never heard of this show; guess I'll watch it.
The random surprise and the disruptive events to the best laid plans are epic. Breaks up the wash, rinse, repeat sensation of here we go again.
Yes, totally! It also helps with "we just spent 5 minutes fighting a monster and are low on hit points and spells, so we're just going to camp here for eight hours and rest..."
WHOOPS! Wandering monsters found your camp!
@@daddyrolleda1 Thanks for the ideas of trying bitters in your other video. It's going to be a random encounter event all on its own.
A lot of people get so hung up on narrative and gameplay being separate elements in DnD that they forget these things are supposed to complement each other, like a yin and yang kind of thing. Having the players deal with the challenges of an unpredictable and dangerous environment, even if these challenges don't mean anything in the broader scope of what the adventure is about, can directly or indirectly lead to the kind of exciting moments that people play this game for.
A group of goblins wanders up and attacks, maybe the players use up some resources that cause them to struggle and get creative later in the fight against the dragon. Maybe they defeat the goblins but start investigating their presence further, the DM can think on their feet and come up with some brand new material that branches off what they originally intended. Maybe the encounter with the goblins informs the players what the world is like through their presence and unique appearances, or teaches them to be careful. Maybe they get defeated and captured by the goblins, the adventure takes an exciting twist.
Or maybe it's been awhile since the players got to let off some excess violence and it's just good as a tool for the DM to pace out their game between other significant encounters. Or if you're running something where violence is a less appealing solution to your problems, especially in old-school games, it could be a chance for the players to sneak, trick, or talk their way past a tense and difficult situation.
Yeah, randomness can create some of the most tension filled and memorable moments , the players are heading back to town bloodied and battered, nearly out of spells, but laden with loot and that random goblin patrol goes from a minor inconvenience to a potential disaster/triumphant stumble over the line which will have every player on the edge of their seats.
I love wondering monsters, random encounters and flying by the seat of your pants style gaming in general. This is why Dungeon Crawl Classics is my favorite RPG of all time.
Wandering Monsters / Random Encounters can add excitement, flavor, suspense, information, or support (as loot, magic or even allies) to a game. They have their place though and should be carefully considered by the DM before using them in game
I really want to try DCC after flipping through a couple books.
I need to find a group to play DCC with as well. Definitely gives off that OD&D vibe.
I do use Wandering Monsters / Random Encounters in my campaign but with consideration.
In my last session (1/2e AD&D) the party was sailing through an Archipelago known for pirates, monsters and unusual events. We treated almost as a hex crawl despite sailing through charted waters. The encounters were everything from extreme weather, to pirates, to ocean hazards (whirlpool), to a mysterious island that wasn’t supposed to be where it was. The random encounters filled in the blanks and helped tell the story. Not all encounters are hostile either. The party can meet interesting NPCs who they can engage with for help or information. They can come across an area of unusual terrain indicating a powerful magic effect or creature near by. Random Encounters can be a wonderful way to add excitement and tension or wonder to your game.
This is *exactly* how I make random encounter tables for my game! I treat them a little differently than wandering monsters but the same general principals apply.
Your Archipelago game sounds like so much fun! Thanks for sharing, and for watching and commenting. Cheers!
I have always loved wondering monsters, probably because the very first monster I faced as a kid was a Zombie, which was a wondering monster. Still like setting out watches during the night and rolling for wandering monsters. Great channel!!
Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
And also, thanks for sharing your story about your first monster! I love hearing stories like this from my fellow gamers. Cheers!
We always used random encounters, which included wandering monsters, wandering NPCs and random world building or plot scenarios. Our campaigns were sandboxes, and the focus was on events happening in the land that the players could engage with or ignore. The randomness helped with immersion but also strategy, since if the players know that even the DM doesn’t necessarily know what might happen it really ups the collaboration between DM and players. It makes the players think twice about being unprepared, and they also know they do not - should not - treat every event as a combat. As DM is was fun to weave the randomness into a story. For example, the players may look up NPCs they met on the road because they might have useful connections; the players may end up with nemesis’s, side quests, mysteries to pursue, etc. It really makes the world seem more real, rather than a story woven around the players.
Wandering Monsters are what makes players really have to watch the clock and be careful.
Wanna spend extra turns searching for secret doors - good luck with that. Wanna rest up for a long time somewhere - good luck on that. Wanna explore a dead end sequence of rooms - good luck with that.
Sometimes you don't find the monster, it finds you.
Yes, exactly! I always thought it was cool they were in "First Fantasy Campaign" as well - they're older than the game itself.
I didn't really intentionally try to make a clickbait thumbnail, as that's not really my style, but in case it wasn't clear from my video, I like (and use) Wandering Monsters, especially in the old-school game I run for my daughter and her friends.
Thank you very much for watching and commenting. I really appreciate it.
Some of the best story beats I've ever seen in games I've played in and games I'm DMing is when the party makes an unexpected choice and ends up somewhere random and I just need to fill a session with some entertainment so I roll up a wandering encounter that sometimes turns into a whole new campaign.
My players randomly went the wrong direction on an abandoned road and they came to a bridge guarded by some gnolls, and some other mixed baddies , they became fascinated with them, fought them a bit and then decided to parlay. The dice allowed it so I just played along. Turns out this gang worships a giant forest wyrm and it turned into a whole sub plot about learning why this wingless dragon was in this particular mountain range.
I basically threw out my planned campaign and let them go down the rabbit hole. Everyone had a blast.
By the time Dragonlance showed up I had already been playing and running games for 10 years. Before that, games were episodic or sandboxes. Dragonlance was super popular, because it was the birth of railroading, and sub par DM's could look like real DM's by running them.
Yes, Dragonlance was very railraid. But it was also epic. And the end of keep on the boarder lands, or even against the Giants the player really didn’t get a sense of being important, like the character in a novel. Dragonlance allowed you to be a Frodo or Conon type character that would change the world. That was an if change, and I think its popularity meant at least some people liked that epic feel for their characters.
Excellent video. I'm glad you brought up resource/time management. In AD&D, Random encounters are the impetus for movement and making progress through the dungeon and or wilderness, until such time as the PCs can return to civilization (ideally with loot so they can level up). These unplanned encounters are part of the "time" system that includes encumbrance, resource management, listening at doors, searching for secret passages, and mapping , etc. PCs should want to maximize time in the "dungeon," which means moving quickly to get as much loot as they can carry and then escape back to the village. In AD&D, the DM checks once every 6 turns (1 hour) for the chance of an encounter. PCs want to move quickly and reduce the overall number of times that the DM makes an encounter check (do you want to enter the dungeon with a 90' movement speed or a 30' movement speed?). Random encounters are with creatures that are not in a lair, therefore they have little to no loot but still force the party to burn resources. Having a map allows the PCs to get out of the dungeon faster (x5 movement rate), resource/inventory management and encumbrance help the PCs to move faster and or decide what to drop if things go sideways (pack your backpack well and you can go from 30' to 120' pretty quickly). How long should they spend listening at a door, or searching for a secret door that just has to be there? Pulling at a thread has consequences to the integrity of the system as a whole. If you want to reduce the chance of random encounters that "waste" time and resources, have a map and manage the mechanics so you can move fast. :) I'm not saying tables need to use Random Encounters, but it does change (if not break) the system (AD&D at least).
I agree with your points and it's one of the reasons I wanted to make the video to help folks understand that they aren't just "meaningless combats" but rather a part of the procedural structure of the game.
Thank you for adding extra context, and for watching and commenting!
I love wandering monsters and "random" encounters. However, in my case, the only thing "random" is the timing. I always tailor my random encounters to serve a purpose. Some of those purposes may be:
* To slow the group down(pacing)
* drop hints about things they may be facing in the near future
* maybe a loot drop to give them an edge in an upcoming difficult encounter
* dropping plot hints and extra information (or need to know info I forgot to give them)
* pulling extra resources out of the party to make a future encounter a bit more challenging
* Dropping a plot thread (especially useful for introducing backstory plots)
and my PERSONAL favorite
* Getting them off their butts and forcing a decision when they are taking way too long overthinking something!
*** As you spend the last 10 minutes discussing how to get past the guards, one of them turns toward the corner you are all spying from and starts walking toward you. The gleam in his eye and the hop in his step tell you he's most definitely looking for a quiet shadow in which to relieve himself."
There's no reason that random encounters and wandering monsters can't and shouldn't be used to advance the overall story or even drop a new plot thread. Bottom line, if the encounter is relative to the setting and /or the story, there's no reason for it to FEEL random to the players.
I love all Daddy Rolled a 1 videos! Agreed, I like both random encounters and resource management. Random encounters demonstrate that the world is not a static place just waiting for an adventurer to come strolling by. I like resource management because accomplishing goals with limited resources is a more satisfying victory than winning with everything you could possibly want always at the ready. Wandering monsters should make sense in the context of your environment. Where did the goblins come from? From the pool of monsters in the dungeon. The wandering merchant was on his way to the market in the next town. Etc. Thanks for this.
I really appreciate you taking time to make a comment! I agree with all your points. It's been really refreshing to see so many folks who embrace the idea of Wandering Monsters, although I think perhaps it's because due to my age, I tend to appeal to an older crowd who just accept them as part of the game.
In any event, thank you so much for watching and for your support of the channel. Cheers!
Obviously I like the random encounter, wandering monster and reacton/morale mechanics. Wandering monsters are part of the timer adding urgency to play. Taking time in a dungeon increases the danger!
But I do think the gonzo random tables are mood killers, instead, as you pointed out, use themes from the adventure or like the Acolytes actual npcs that can reveal things. I believe this adds realism and intrigue to any setting.
I havent played since high school roughly 20 years ago but I love your videos. I put them on to sleep/relax. Thanks for all the uploads!
I'm so glad you enjoy them!
When my wife and I first started dating, we were long distance and we'd chat on the phone pretty much every night and to mix things up, sometimes I would read to her and I remember her telling me once she loved when I did that because it made her fall asleep! I was, at the time, slightly offended she would say that, but over time I've come to accept it!
I'm glad you find them relaxing, and thank you so much for watching and commenting! Cheers!
Because most game sessions are limited by how much time you have, I like to roll up potential random encounters before the session starts. Then I can mix them in based on how far the party is progressing in the time we have remaining. I get the old school appeal of having something completely unexpected show up, but sometimes it burns too much time from the main adventure.
Considering how much time you have to actually game makes a lot of sense. I, too, like to do some of my random rolling during my prep but for wandering monsters, I tend to leave that to happen "live" during the session. They come up very seldom but the times they have, some fun things have happened in my daughter's group. But I completely understand folks who don't use them.
Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
Thanks for the response Martin. I feel like the time element is something a lot of D&D advice channels tend to forget. If I'm running an adventure that I want to take 1-2 sessions before the party moves on, then I've got to balance the PCs interacting with the main mission vs including other encounters. Although some of the most memorable scenes are from those other encounters to be fair.
I was always a bit cheesed that the same year my mom burned my 1st core books was the year they changed the covers. Stupid Satanic Panic.
Argh! I'm so sorry that happened! I know a few friends who experienced that, but my mom was always very supportive of me playing the game, as you probably noticed if you've watched a few of my videos, as I bring her up often.
People don't like wandering monsters? Is the dungeon supposed to be static? Things live there. They'll walk around doing their home things. Not having them would be like walking into an office building and expecting all the halls to be always empty. To only encounter the denizens if you enter their office. There is never any reason for anyone to leave their own spaces. Of course not. That would be silly.
Great point about the reaction rolls making things extra interesting, and possibly even beneficial, for the party!
Thanks! It's one of my favorite tables in all of B/X D&D, and the 2D6 style table is so useful for so many differently circumstances.
@@daddyrolleda1 I totally agree! 🙂
A proper moral and reaction system turns charisma from a dump stat into the most powerful stat.
What a fantastic presentation of a fascinating topic! I love how you bring the history to it!
I've been having difficulty listening to the long form presentation and rpg topics in general are at the moment on the backseat of my interests as the global politics and geopolitics are so intriguing at this time (another one of my long time special interests).
But I'll try to watch this video especially all the way through soon and I'm happy to know that I can always come back to your videos to catch up on all the cool topics. I still make a point also to check them out as you publish and always like them because of course I like them 😁
I'm also two sessions into a new OSE/Dolmenwood game with my main group so I need the good for inspiration. Cheers!
Always glad to see you here in the comments! I'm excited to hear more about your OSE/Dolmenwood game!
Thanks so much for stopping by to chat and leave a comment!
@@daddyrolleda1 Thank you!
Quote from our thief player, some 35+ years ago:
"Could we have some wandering experience'
Ha! That cracked me up!
I used to be in the "hates wandering monsters" camp, but now I'm firmly in the other. I even made some very extensive wandering monster tables for my Warhammer 4e game, including tables for all the major bad guy factions, plus regular bandit/outlaw types, plus a few other human types. And then I put a couple entries on each faction that say "roll again on this table, and another random table." So for instance I had a wandering monster encounter that was a group of savage orcs who were hunting a dragon. Now my players just sailed right on by that one, lol. No interest in getting caught up in that mess, but the idea of having intersecting tables of random encounters can really help spark new ideas. Like what does an encounter with zombies, and skaven clanrats look like? What are they both doing there?
Having spent over a decade creating and play testing a game of my own creation I learned early on that whenever you change rules or avoid using them as intended, you create more, often surprising problems. I equate this as the Domino effect. Most systems are very interlinked and mucking with them is like removing the odd domino. Remove too many and the rest fail to work as expected.
Yes, exactly! The smallest seemingly innocent change can have pretty big ramifications if you're not careful.
Something that I decided on decades ago was that most monsters have more needs than combat just as most monsters have a sense of preservation. So if it becomes apparent the PCs are winning, most monsters retreat. Few fight to the death.
Yes, exactly! It's one of the reasons I made my "Why Are the Monsters Attacking?" tables I mentioned in one of my previous videos and offered them to folks who emailed me. It's designed to go with the 2D6 Reaction Roll Tables from Basic D&D and give thoughts to the DM for *why* the monsters are doing what they're doing, which then leads to them being more dimensional and helping a DM know why they'd retreat or help or fight or ignore. They might fight to the death if they are protecting their young, for example, but not just because they randomly stumbled across a group of adventurers in a dungeon.
I agree with you that it does come down to resource management, I wasn't sure at first, but I have run it both ways and it does change the game a lot. That said I have my own wondering monster list, with different things outside of combat and many results not meaning anything if they are repeated, the treat is still there, but because a 2 on a d6 was rolled twice only one happened in back to back wondering monster rolls.
As you pointed out, there is a big difference between a random wandering monster from a general table, and a wandering monster from a bespoke/custom table tailored for the dungeon and being relevant to the adventure. As well as getting ticked off when they happen: in your example, if the PCs kill the acolytes, obviously they shouldn't show up anymore. My issue with wandering monsters is the inexhaustible random monster generator without rhyme or reason. For example there being a sealed tomb of some sort and a big deal has been made of the doors having stayed secret that only one guy knows how to open, and then you just run into living people inside it...
I tend to have 'living dungeons', meaning that while my monsters have been keyed to specific locations, they do move around during their normal daily/nightly routine. And they will raise an alarm if they spot intruders.This bit the PCs in the butt in one (early-ish) adventure, when they continued faffing about while they could hear an alarm being raised. End result, the whole lair was gathered up to fight them, and they were overwhelmed and captured for slavery. Now, they managed to escape, but it was no doubt a learning experience for them.
In another adventure a bit later, they needed to rescue someone from an orc lair. This time around, they were very conscious about trying to avoid causing an alarm, as well as being very conscious of the time pressure, as at any moment some orc might just wander into a room where they had killed a dozen orcs and raise an alarm. They didn't even take out ten minutes to do a bit of first aid (Healing skill, RC) between the fights, since they felt that flow of sands of time in the hourglass. End result: they totally steamrolled that lair of almost fifty orcs, being able to defeat them in piecemeal, many of them surprised at their cups or in their beds.
By contrast, if the adventure involves constructs or undead who have been commanded to patrol specific areas, and the PCs clear those out, then there is no problem. The time pressure in such situations ought to come from 'outside', such as rival adventuring parties, bad guys, time limit imposed by the employer...
The purpose for wandering monsters in a dungeon crawl is part of a system to heighten tension. The other part is traps.
Traps encourage you to go slow and check every corner carefully.
Wandering monsters counter the slow behavior and encourage the players to go fast.
If you go too slow, you get too many wandering monsters. If you go too fast, you blunder into more traps.
This creates a sense of tension because you have two competing motivations in direct opposition. Hurry up and slow down.
The players end up walking a tight rope.
I don’t know if I read this or just came to a realization. I can do more reading to find a direct quote.
I do know the description for the ear monster goes into detail about this. Basically players are encouraged to listen at doors to try and get information as to what is on the other side. This monster exists to discourage that. If the DM finds players are listening at the door too often, they are encouraged to use this monster.
It kinda has a bit of an oppositional feel to it. But it’s making sure the players are challenged.
For wilderness encounters, the wandering monsters is exactly how you described. A randomization aid in case you haven’t detailed the area yet or can’t think of something you want.
Just want to add. That tension only works in an exp for treasure frame work.
I’m willing to accept different ones. But the exp for the wandering monsters needs to be very low for this to work.
Event (leads to deeper tables)
1 Hazard
2 Encounter
3 Omen
4 - 6 No event
The curse of strahd is story driven, but also treats him as a wondering monster, so I think there is room to mix them especially if it adds to the setting and in that case horror elements
Dragonlance wasn't the way I played. I thought homebrew was great.
I did play dragonlance. It seemed too scripted.
I like the idea of wandering monsters and it being random.
It would be good to make them that makes sense. Makes sense to encounter.
I like the idea of another npc party adventuring. Drow npc party for instance. Or pirates.
Goblin party. Rats.
My first experience with dnd was playing adnd 2e, 3 years later were still playing that game. It never occured to me that the game could be played without random encounters. For the past 14 sessions (6 months irl) weve been traveling from one side of the map to the other, and we spend 2/3 of our sessions fighting random encounter monsters in the overworld. Its been beyond insufferable.
Wandering monsters are great, but it took me years to understand it.
I do believe some modules shouldn't have random monsters. Mainly, gothic horror, where you have a mystery and a highly particular villain. Even some gothic horror modules can use them. I suggest studying the second edition Ravenloft setting to get the when to use them vs when not to.
It's honestly just another tool, and as a GM/referee, you should keep it in your tool kit.
The only issue I have with wandering monsters is if they don't fit the flavor of the setting, once I figured that out as a GM, it was easy to fix.
Yes, exactly! It's why I mentioned in the video how I adapted/changed the wandering monster tables in B2 to fit the game I run for my daughter and her friends. So much more satisfying and fun!
@@daddyrolleda1 I also like how you've adapted the generic response for wandering monsters. Too many of us took it to mean that literally. Just bebopping along, no rhyme or reason other than carnage. Which isn't all that more true for monsters as it is characters. Not in my opinion, anyway.
"I don't use wandering monsters because they ruin my planned-out story."
Wait 'til they see what the players are like.
The dungeon random monster tables were scaled for the level of the dungeon so were reasonably OK for low level characters, if they insisted on going deeper than they were really capable of you could say that was on them .. but the wilderness encounter tables were a killer, those needed a little GM judgement and interference sometimes, you really don't want to hit your 1st level players with a red dragon on the trip from the town to the dungeon, that sort of thing can leave them feeling put upon, and a bit dead ;)
I agree with the thrust of your argument re: resource management. But in the spirit of fairness and accuracy, two corrections on the 5e lighting rules:
1. 5e Darkvision removes the attack/defense penalties from being blinded, but you still retain disadvantage on perception tests. A darkvision-having player is still penalized against ambushes, traps, hazards, missing useful information, and any other perception-based risk management. On paper, it's not a get-out-of-jail-free card.
2. The 5e Light spell is at-will, no-cost, doesn't use concentration, and doesn't take up hands. It use up one of your cantrips-known, but players do not feel torn between the choices so it does not apply any pressure. On paper, it's a no-downsides infinite light.
In practice, most resource management rules are simply not enforced. The rules necessary to do B/X-style resource management are in 5e, they just don't want to use them. I think "goodberry solves food management" tends to be more of a cop-out than a considered belief -- the starting position is "resource management is boring and pointless" and everything after that is back-explaining.
I find that the best way to sales pitch resource management is to describe it as being like Survival Horror video games. Younger people **get** that resource management in survival-horror video games is fun, and that can sometimes break the back of this belief. But that's a battle you fight on a per-person basis, and I don't believe the 5e cultural belief will ever really change on it, it simply has too much momentum.
Thank you so much! I can count on one hand the number of times I've played 5E, so my knowledge of some of the intricacies of that system is sometimes lacking. (My lack of playing is just because the folks I play with are currently running Savage Worlds and for my daughter's game, I'm running B/X - I'm not "boycotting" the game or anything like that).
I really do appreciate your clarifications/corrections and also I like your analogy of the Survival Horror video games (another area in which my knowledge is extremely lacking!).
Thank you very much for watching and commenting, and for your support of the channel. Cheers!
Pitching OSR as survival horror adjacent would probably help.
Not 100% survival horror as in OSR you typically can fight a lot of monsters but not all and it's not a sure thing you'll win.
The reaction table being removed from play is, in my experience, why wandering monsters have a bad reputation.
I may change my mind, but off the top of my head, I think it's my favorite table in the entire B/X edition!
Thank you for watching and commenting!
Can’t wait to listen to this one after work! Your videos are always the best history videos I know. Have you seen the new 50th anniversary of D&D book from MIT press? It’s a bunch of essays about the history present and future of D&D. I’m reading a chapter a night and trying to savor each one. It’s really good so far. I just got done with the Jon Peterson chapter.
The 50th Anniversary Book is on my list to get, but I'm waiting to see if anyone picks it up for me as a Father's Day gift. It looks great. I'm also interested in the WotC 50th Anniversary book(s) that are coming out later this year!
Thank you again for much for your support! I truly appreciate it!
Another fun video. Have you seen the documentary on the Dungeon and Dragons Artists, Easley, Clydewell and Parkinson, I found it on Prime a few years ago.
Yes! "Eye of the Beholder," I think it's called. Great stuff. I also watched it on Prime.
Thank you for watching and commenting, and for your support. Cheers!
Hi Martin, just wanted to mention that your version of First Fantasy Campaign with 88 pages is the first printing. The later printings had less pages, but this was mostly due to a change to smaller typeface. The contents are almost identical otherwise, aside from some attempts to correct typos from the first print (and adding new typos in the process!).
I use encounter tables for overland travel, with a different table tailored to each area, as well as in dungeons. But the tables aren’t all monster encounters. It can be weather, or terrain features. Citizens or military. Traders or refugees. And I use the 2d6 reaction table as well. I’ve had 5e veterans scoff at the idea at first, but it always leads to dynamic game play. Like you said in the video, it’s all how you use it. A lot of what I look for in DMing is world building, but around the table, I enjoy being surprised. No one, including me, wants to read a novel I’d write lol. Thanks for all the great content Martin. I especially enjoyed this one.
Also, I would add, as I got to the end of a video, for random monster or encounter tables, the multiple die roll, ie 2d6, is necessary. Without the bell curve, it’s too random. I like being able to have 2 unlikely, crazy results, with more grounded ones taking up the middle chunk of the table. I use all sorts of combos of dice, like 2d8+1d4 cause I love to roll lol. There’s a bell curve generator online that’s amazing for finding cool combos.
I love wandering monsters, to spice things for me when I'm running and to force the party to make decisions/manage resources.
I always have a few “random” encounters up my sleeve, some have taken the party in a completely different direction, one memorable encounter had a highish level mage critically injured by an arrow in the forehead , something we have never forgotten , a double roll of a 20 for hit and crit with concealment ( his head was the only thing showing) with a bit of ad-libbed home brew created a great memory.
Yes! The idea of D&D adventures being more story like is pretty much as old as the game because different people played in different ways. D&D has never been one thing. It's always been what the players want and you can see that in the earliest days of the conversations about the game.
That said, I do like wandering monsters and random encounters and tend to write up specific encounter tables for each adventure I do or collection of adventures in the same area. A temple might have different monsters to a tropical island and two tropical islands might have slightly different tables based on what is there. I also think it's erroneous that wanderingm onsters are purely random. Any populated place will have people moving about.
Random encounters have been the more memorable through the years.
I think that by-and-large, that can be so true!
Brilliant stuff! I don't think you pointed out that you can always have random encounters that include one or more monsters that would usually be found in a keyed area - so if they are previously encountered elsewhere, they will not be found in that keyed area, or if they have already been found in the keyed area, they will not be randomly encountered elsewhere.
My os DM used wandering monsters & random encounters as loot/xp drops. Occasionally a side storyline to buff us before a boss encounter.
I always enjoyed those sessions.
Sounds like a lot of fun! Thanks for watching and commenting!
It's always interesting when I hear you mention playing WFRP, but have also often heard you mention not really liking Armor Absorption or Hit Locations...
Ah! I should clarify: I don't like armor absorption and hit locations *in* Dungeons & Dragons, as the combat system was designed from a different philosophy that's more abstract.
WRFP was designed from the beginning to utilize those features, so it works within that system.
Obviously you *can* add armor absorption and hit locations to D&D, but to me, that slows down the game and it sort of misses the point of the abstract design of the D&D combat system.
And, all that said... I do tend to prefer combat mechanics that rely less on multiple different tables, as, again, I think it slows combat down. The hit location tables in WFRP can be really fun (and I've designed my own critical hit and critical hit tables over the years as well), but often I think I'd rather just let player quickly narrate what happened and then move to the next player so people aren't waiting as long between turns.
Wandering monsters were an important part of the game. They were used when D&D did not have a story
Yes! I mention later in the video that a benefit of using Wandering Monsters is that it helps to add/expand (or even, as you mention, create) your story. The thumbnail might make it appear that I don't like Wandering Monsters but that's why I added the "?" because I actually do like them, and use them in my daughter's game.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
Wandering monsters are the best.
Reaction rolls for a new friend or foe.
A potential for a new lair in the map.
Of course not every location be it hex crawl, dungeon or city needs them all the time.
But they create events and consequences far better organically than I can plan out
Dragonlance is the pivot point in TTRPG history where sandbox play began to give way to "narrative gaming". Over time, DMing ceased to be an exercise in creative improvisation and became equivalent to a full-time job thanks to the mountain of preparation/work required to construct an elaborate world and a fully fleshed-out "story" for the players to be led through. For DMs who have neither the time nor the talent to do all the necessary work (which is probably most of them today), there are shelves full of pre-written "adventure paths" to take the players through, turning the DM into a glorified tour guide through someone else's imagination. Long gone are the days of emergent drama, where the "story" is what emerges from unpredictable player actions, not what is prescribed by a pre-written script.
I'm wondering if there's any overlap between the people who played in these early versions of RPG's and those who created the unix game "Rogue" (which developed into hack/nethack/slash'em etc)?
I've heard the term "Rogue-like" when discussing certain types of tabletop RPGs, but I'm not familiar with them, as I am not a computer/video gamer. But, I think your theory makes sense, as pretty much most of the early computer game developers were also tabletop RPG (mostly D&D) players, which is why so many concepts in CRPGs (like leveling up, etc.) have ties to D&D.
Thank you very much for watching and commenting - I think this is a really interesting topic to explore. And, I truly appreciate your support of the channel. Cheers!
Hello
I enjoy watching and can relate to this one the most
I have always made a list of the things that can happen if the players go off my route. Like places to see monsters wondering around or even maybe other things. However I agree if it takes away from the fun we should not use it, but then again it can be fun to see what they do or what the new encounter does to change the adventure once in a while too.
Yes, this is exactly how I feel!
Thanks so much for watching and commenting, and for your support of the channel. I really appreciate it!
If I ran a game where the simplest combat ate up an hour or more, I'd hate wandering monsters, too. Since I favor OD&D, however, I can appreciate how they add tension, foster verisimilitude, encourage smart play, and give the referee some delightful opportunities to be surprised by his own dungeon.
That's a really interesting way of looking at it. I haven't played a ton of 5E, but I do recall in 3E/3.5, combats could take up more than an hour of "real world" time, so I think your theory has some merit. Thanks for sharing, and for watching and commenting.
Another great video! I feel like people, especially new players to the game but even some older members, feel the need to follow the rules as written or the adventure as written. I feel like using a truly random table of wandering monster encounters in my experience seemed rather arbitrary , but this video shows that it doesn't have to be that way at ALL. Good insight and inspiration.
Great video. One small note though: Light spells do not use a resource in 5e. It's a cantrip, so it doesn't use up a spell slot. Players lose nothing from casting it. It's a common gripe about 5e amongst old school gamers.
Thanks for catching that. My lack of 5E knowledge is pretty clear - I can count on one hand the number of times I've played that system. As a player, the folks I normally play TTRPGs with have switched to running Savage Worlds so I don't get a lot of chances to play it.
Thanks for the correction, and for watching and commenting!
This was a great video on WM's. You mentioned verisimilitude, and that is the most important reason in my campaigns for having them. Think of how boring travelling from town A to town B would be without wandering encounters. What I do: every WM encounter I have in my campaign has a reason and purpose, I still use tables and they are random. Here are two examples; Azra the Troll - An overturned beer cart lies in the road. Nearby, an enormous troll snores loudly, surrounded by empty kegs. Azra is drunk and passed out. Gojun the Terrible - An enormous dragon lands on the road in front of the group. It asks for directions to a certain village, gives the party a generous tip, and then flies off saying he intends to raze it to the ground. His name is Gojun. [He is a Brine Dragon and seeks revenge for the death of his spouse by a "Hero" of this village] I give myself a summary of what each creature is about, and how to roleplay the encounter. Some are combat as well, but I like to throw in a lot of social and unique encounters giving the players a chance to hobo kill [in the first encounter] or kill themselves [by attacking the dragon] in the second. Not every encounter should be combative, either because you simply can't beat it, or it was never meant to be combative in the first place. Furthermore, many of these, can form the basis of an adventure in and of themselves depending on how the players go about the encounter. Cheers.
I can't even wrap my head around the dislike of wandering monsters. What is actually is not logical is set piece encounters, which make the environment feel static. The dislike of wandering monsters goes hand in hand with the expectation of a pre-defined story/plot and is antithetical to a quality gaming experience. Nothing is ever tied absolutely to a fixed place in any location I build, monsters move around in and out of the locations, dynamically, you know, the way living things always do. BTW, I do like your content. I run a theology channel but I do gaming content du temps en temps, if you'd ever like to stop by Grail Country for a visit I'd love to have you.
Thank you for watching and commenting! I agree with your thoughts on Wandering Monsters (as I hope was evident by my video; sometimes I think I'm making a point very clear but upon re-watching it I see that I could've done a better job making it crystal clear).
I just subscribed to your channel and will check it out when I get a chance! Cheers!
@@daddyrolleda1 You make great stuff. Hope you find Grail Country interesting.
I ran a lot of D&D during the white box era. During this era, there were no narratives. The model of my game, 1977-1980, was a plate of pasta. Each strand was a story and the sauce was the wandering monsters. My players often wanted to charm or capture and question small monsters like goblins; the information was valuable. Unlike Dragonlance, which I do not remember well, the players had no reason to believe they were the protagonists of a story. It was on the players to find the story. It should never be obvious whether an encounter was part of a story or a random encounter until later. Also, there was little or no sense of urgency in the game. If you are trying to find your way to something, there is no hurry in either real time or game time. I used the random encounter tables or made my own for a particular location, always prepared before the game just like location encounters. I didn't want players to know a particular encounter was important except in retrospect.
in 5e Light is no longer a resource, because it's a cantrip now and you can cast infinite cantrips per day.
Thank you so much! You can tell my lack of 5E knowledge! Hopefully folks got the gist of what I was saying even though my 5E mechanical knowledge is limited. 😀
Thanks for another great video with history and game mastering advice. Understanding why something was included really does help incorporating it into the game and into one's game mastering philosophy.
I really appreciate that. Thank you so much! I'm glad you find these kinds of videos helpful, and I really appreciate you watching and commenting. Cheers!
The best way I know of to keep a DM from throwing wondering monsters too much is set up ambushes with your group so he rolls the wandering monster check to see if you get the ambush someone it worked for me at least
Ambushes can be a great deterrent from wandering monsters!
Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@daddyrolleda1 happy to help
I've learned over the years that random encounters in enclosed environments should reflect the creatures in that environment.
IE: the random bug bear from room #8 going to or returning from a bathroom break.
Yes, exactly! That's one of the ways I like to approach it. I think the tables *need* to be adjusted/created with the overall scenario in mind.
I do think one purpose of the table is for outsiders breaking in. The goblin or NPC result could be an exploratory expedition.
Then you can turn this on its head a bit and pull monsters from deeper in the dungeon exploring.
I like the idea of a “boss” with a lair who goes around an area. It really only works if they’re outside the parties combat capabilities.(smart players should be able to overcome it still)
Wandering monsters are best being kinda hand wavy though. Unless you’re detailing patrols(which you could do if players were on a stake out).
Just the result should be explained in the context of the dungeon or ignored if it doesn’t make sense.
Wandering monsters add a touch of common sense to the fantasy world. It's a dangerous place and adventuring in dungeons and crypts, stealing the monster's treasure is a high risk - high reward business. I don't understand why as a DM, I should babysit the players by fudging the encounters to always be "balanced".
That's one of the reasons that I'm enjoying having gone back to running 1981 B/X D&D for my daughter and her friends. Starting with 3E and onward, with the invention of the CR System, there seems to be an expectation on the part of the players that an encounter will have a CR commensurate with the party's level, and I just don't like to play that way and it frustrated me a lot when I was running 3E/3.5.
Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@daddyrolleda1 It seems that there are 2 major schools of thought in the RPG community now: The narrative storytelling school and the world-building, simulation school. Majority of the new generation players are from the former. That is why they don't like the wandering encounters.
Why do you not have a discord server, and if you do, why have I never seen it?
I think because I'm a Luddite and Discord honestly intimidates me! Let me look into it, though. I've used Discord maybe twice in my life.
My game is built around random encounters. There are planned encounters. But far more random encounters. My guys hire henchman to watch their gear when they descend into the dungeon because… their henchman guarding their gear have random encounters
+10 points for talking about the Dirty Projectors
+30 points to you for staying through the Bonus Content. 😁
In modern D&D parlance, you now have Advantage until the next video drops.
This was a great video. I hope you do more of this type of content. I remember wondering monsters from when I was a kid, and after years of not playing, I thought it was strange that I didn't see them in 5e. This was an inventative approach to how I can include it into my games. I look forward to adding this back in. Also, I want to mention how resource management has also been forgotten, and you talking about it turned the light bulb on in my head on a different approach to running my adventures.
I'm so glad to hear that! Thank you so much for letting me know. It's always great to hear that my ideas are helping other with their games, as that is the primary reason I make these videos. I really appreciate you watching and commenting to let me know. I look forward to hearing how your games go with our new approach on resource management!
@daddyrolleda1 by the way, every time you talk about your daughter's game, I can't help but think how fun it would be to be in that one! I don't watch much live play anymore, but I'd watch that just to get the feel for your style of play.
philosophers perhaps? oh 'wandering' not 'wondering'
Ha! That gave me a chuckle. Thanks!
Two thumbs up for wandering monsters.
👍👍 😁
Thank you very much for watching and commenting!
I think an encounter doesn't have to be a combat is a huge concept
Non-combat encounters are some of my favorite things to design when I'm working on session prep!
I like random encounters. Just make it so characters get Experience Points, Gold, and Items from them.
That was one of the sticking points with Wandering Monsters in the early editions - they didn't carry treasure/gold, so if you decided to fight them, you stood to gain very little (since in those editions, XP = Gold).
@@daddyrolleda1 What would you say the most appealing part of old TSR Dungeons and Dragons is?
Some resource management can really bog the game down.
It totally can - there's definitely a limit and also it takes a good group and particularly a good referee to know how to use it properly so it enhances the game rather than *becoming* the game.
I've long used wandering monsters, especially in a more sandbox or dungeon/hex crawl campaign. I'll even use them in more "story" games, not just D&D. Good things to do in my experience:
-Have the stronger monsters in an area potentially wander. If you run into them they'll usually bug out if things don't look like it's going well for them. If you kill them out of their lair, then they won't reappear. Really nasty monsters might kill off rivals in a region. For example some really nasty big apex predator might well whack all of its competition. The megaladon shark or dragon turtle might have eaten all the lesser apex predators.
-Only lesser monsters should repopulate.
-Don't be afraid to skip an encounter if things are tense enough. The other way around, if things are lagging, throw in an encounter!
-Monster tables are also a suggestion for what to find on particular "dungeon levels", not just wandering monsters.
New monsters can always move in to challenge.
The wilderness table has frequency for repopulation for areas. Monsters should only not repopulate (even big ones though not that specific guy) if the players set up patrols.
I’d love to see players set up a perimeter on level 2 with constant patrols to clean the place out.
I don’t know if it’s sustainable or cost effective but I’d like to see them try.
I HATED wandering monsters! The DM usually designed the dungeons so that the pre-determined monsters were nearly equal to the party...so, that means the party fights a battle and barely survives, and while they are resting to recover, here comes a wandering monster that just cleans up and destroys everyone...and worse still is that WANDERING MONSTERS HAVE ZERO TREASURE!
Great video and I think 5e DMs should use the reaction table as an initial reaction in 3e you could use all the Charisma powers to change that reaction (sorry if you said this I might have missed it). Another thing I might have missed but I think its important if its said twice is in relation to random encounters, they are not meant to be random per se the roll when an encounter happens should be random (I like 1-2 on a d6 for the wilderness, but 1 for well traveled roads for instance) but what the encounter is doesn't need to be random I predetermine what encounter happens based off the random encounter table before the 1st game session, one for each time of day (dawn, morning, midday, day, night & dusk) in the regions I expect the players to be in. Then when an encounter does happen I pull one for that time of day, and make a mental note to roll a new one for that time slot. If you become an experienced DM you can do this in the moment, but I suggest this for newbie DMs.
Out of blue TH-cam recommended me this video.
I am kind of surprised that young players not are fans of random encounters of such kind. I thought they grew up on CRPGs mainly and should be used to this kind of things.
I, personally, don't mind them. It helps world building. "It's dangerous place. Expect dangerous things, which live here"
17:40 If this sounds like you: "I have a story, and wandering monsters just screw it up. Because it's taking time to do something that doesn't move MY story forward...I know what they should be doing." Just know you aren't a Game Master, you are a train conductor. Go write a book, because that ain't D&D. Your players determine the story. You put story ELEMENTS in a world, and the players may or may not interact with them. Shame on anyone that GMs this way. Seriously.
Great video! In response to your soapbox rant about Dragonlance "not being real D&D", I've never seen anyone make that argument. What I have seen many times is people arguing that Dragonlance is not "old school" D&D - AKA it's not OSR. And I think they're absolutely right for the exact reasons you outline. What makes this is a hot topic is the fact that AD&D is generally considered OSR, and yet some of its most popular modules were trad adventure arcs. Some people think Dragonlance is old and therefore OSR, when really it's the first departure from old-school gaming.
In my opinion, as soon as the story is predetermined, you are using the D&D mechanics to play out a novel/movie/modern adventure. There’s nothing wrong with that, it is certainly a way to play. Personally,I prefer (and have exclusively run for 37 years) a game where the story is created by the characters actions. Not knowing how anything will resolve until the characters decide is one of the true joys of being a DM. I don’t think I could run a game where I had to force the characters down a predetermined path.
I think this must be why so many DMs complain about players ruining their games.
I also think players ruin those games on purpose. I believe it is an immature act of rebellion against the loss of their agency. I bet most of them don’t even realize that’s why they do it.
Anyhoo… just some thoughts. Great stuff as always.
BECMI Forever!
Long Live King Elmore!!
In the AD&D DMG a wandering monster table is given with the (incomplete) sample dungeon on page 94, and in the scripted example of play (pp 98-99) the DM makes regular wandering monster checks. Under "Time in the Dungeon" on page 38, it says that keeping accurate time is essential so that the DM knows when to roll for wandering monsters, and it recommends the number of rolls be "moderated" while the party is resting, to allow spell casters to refresh their spells. On page 97, the section about finding traps and listening at doors suggests that the DM make more frequent wandering monster checks if the players are being over-cautious and checking everything. (Not sure how they are supposed to know when to be cautious and when not.) On the same page it mentions that bashing down a door triggers three(!) checks for wandering monsters. Finally there is a cursed "jewel of attacks" that causes a 100% chance of encountering wandering monsters. FWIW, I think wandering monsters make sense if you are focused on an exploration mode of play, where the tension arises from what's around the next corner and the players are encouraged to cut and run sometimes. If you prefer a cinematic game that alternates between character-focused roleplaying and orchestrated combats, then wandering monsters make no sense.
Me & my gaming group always used wandering monsters weather we played a "Old School" D&D game or a "Story Line" game. Places are dangerous & Wandering Monsters represent the dangers of an area be it random monsters or a guard patrol. If a DM is running a "Story Line" game & never uses wandering monsters, & then before we get to an objective has a bunch of goons attack us I will at least roll my eyes, & probably be pissed that he CHOSE to sick them on us. Even if we did as much as possible to avoid that. If a random rolled Wandering monster hit us in the same scenario, well that's fate, I can't blame the DM.
I loved the Dragonlance books, but didn't care for the modules. I had already read the books, so why play the module that I already knew the ending to was my thought.
I'm quite late in commenting on this topic, but...
As someone who started running AD&D1E, then later BD&D from the Rules Cyclopedia, in the early '90s I came up playing and running sandbox style games rather than big narrative games. When you're a heavy academic track student (I was aiming to maximize AP classes and AP tests once I got to high school) and when doing campaign and session prep eats your life if you let it, you have to find the efficient way to bang things out. For my GMing style, the best efficiencies came from modularity in layout for everything and keeping absolute premapped encounters to a minimum. I'm constantly rolling dice behind my screen, it'd be impossible for the players to know whether what I just rolled and wrote a note about was a trap just ahead, a secret door they didn't notice, a treasure hoard deeper into the dungeon, the captured duke's daughter they were looking for dying because they'd taken too long getting there, the troop of goblins now suddenly trying to rush at them from up the corridor, something happening far off on another continent that would soon change the local political dynamics, et al
I can't see a world without random encounters. Everything in its place with no chance of something or someone just wandering around.
I believe it was The Citadel of Fire that was basically a "wandering encounters" dungeon. You could encounter almost anyone almost anywhere, especially the BBEG and his entourage.
We once had a wandering monster encounter that was a "Party" of adventurers. They were about as tough as we were but we didn't know that. The DM took quite a bit of time fleshing them out. We didn't attack them and had a peaceful encounter exchanging some information. We later found out, similar to your group, that this Party was ransacking the dungeon that we were going to and bragging about it. We had later encounters with this group who's name escapes me and almost came to blows with them. However, the town guard just happened to be coming by(wandering monster encounter?) and put a stop to it.
A living world is much better than a preplanned world where everything is set and fixed.
Wandering monsters show the players that they are not the center of the world. They are the center of the game, but not the world. Yes, there is a difference. The world goes on happening with or without the players.
"I have a story...."
You'te not a Dungeon Master, you're a wanna be novelist. Go write a book.
The Dragonlance books are great. The modules are shite railroads.
Classic Adventure Gaming for the win.
I think even the name can put people off but really your “wandering monster” table can be anything, including friendly encounters or even friendly encounters with monsters (reaction rolls, Charisma is so much more important in old school)! NPC wasn’t really a term when these things were kicking off so a “wandering monster” could be a human, an elf, a merchant, a fairy, or a dragon or whatever.
I've run the same dungeon that I wrote with its own curated random encounter table 3 times now, and I haven't enjoyed the random encounters. They've felt overly random, without significantly impacting the resource management, while also really taking me out of my flow as a GM. I think in the future I'll either try the underclock, or employ a D4 timer with a ThinkDeck pull and the encounter table I already made for on-the-spot inspiration.
Thanks for the video! I use wandering monsters all the time, every game I run, without fail.
There is no place in my setting where things are not wandering around. :)
After going through the early Monty Haul phase, we decided to try to play a better, btb version of the game. The first mod that I tried to DM in this style was Ravenloft, and while not as linear as the DL mods, there is definitely a linear aspect to it. I was so frustrated that the players weren’t complying with the storyline and I tried to force it. What a lesson! The PCs were being smart and inventive, and I just wanted to follow the plot.
We all got better at the game. Letting the players do anything is core to the game. If they completely leave the mod setting, all the better!
Wandering monsters figure into this as well. The world isn’t scripted either. The monsters are out there looking to eat and for treasure too. I sometimes have a random party camped at the exit to the dungeon to rob the players. Why wouldn’t they? Everything in the game should have some agency and intelligence.
ironically, when I was running my hex and dungeon crawl, I used the default monster tables in OSE and miraculously almost everything I rolled up turned out to be something that actually does or would live in the dungeon. The dungeon is at the edge of a swamp, no bullywugs are in my dungeon, but they showed up as random encounters. The entire eco-system of killer bees (which were in the dungeon being bred by kobolds) --> which are eaten by robber flies --> which are eaten by tiger beetles, somehow happened through random encounters. When they were in the undead-themed part of the dungeon, the wondering monsters also turned out to be undead. It was a bunch of super weird coincidences like that over and over, even though I didn't actually mean to have very interesting encounters I was just being lazy.
what I like about Random encounters/wandering monsters is it makes it so that I as the DM have to be on my toes also. Its not just ME making stuff up for them, but makes it a little bit out of my control, and hit helps build the "story". I dont have to do what the dice say, but it can add two what I have happen. I dont always directly use Random charts but let the dice dictate ideas, which sometimes totally changes the story or creates new ideas for the story!!!!
There is always the possibility of running into something hostile in an environment it's no different from real life if you were to run into an animal in the woods. What irks me is DMs that treat EVERY wandering encounter as a threat to fight. It does break up the tension and flow at times sure but can help get you some grind in for xp and to have fun. Combat was always my favorite part. The most boring moments I ever had were the downtimes of role-playing out political discussions and chatting with non-hostile npcs. Sure yes it has a place...but I'm not sitting through several plus hours of negotiations when as a martial combatant I do my talking with force over speech. Take it for what you will.
Great video as always. I personally hated the move to the Dragonlance style adventures, where the pcs are by default heroes destined for greatness. My group started playing DL1 and pretty swiftly abandoned it, after years of zero to hero gaming in our homebrewed setting it just felt sterile and way too on-rails to be any fun.
Now I've started DMing again after a 35 year gap, one of the things I really enjoy is the unpredictabiloty of the game, I never fail to be surprised by the decisions of my group! and rather than try and force them to do what I imagined I find it great fun to allow them to approach problem solving in their own unique way! So yes to wandering monsters and letting the dice decide, it's these sort of events that create real tension and moments everyone will remember and enjoy.
Dave Arneson did have wandering monsters in his game and often they were following the sense of why they were there kind of like what you’re thinking. They had a kind of ecology or reason to be there. The main purpose of the monster was not necessarily to have combat like you’re saying, but to break up the plan and linear story, thinking players sometimes fall into
if all you’re doing is playing a game that is a following like a novel, it gets rather monotonous and predictable. The sad thing is early in the creation of dungeons and dragons. It was a lot missed in Dave not being allowed to explain certain game elements. The missing rulebook as I would put it
The closest analogy, many players have getting into dungeons and dragons when they hear the word role-play is novels and stories. Not realizing this is more like choose your own adventure with lots of random elements coming in at any angle making you think on your feet.
I love your comment about the whole, keeping track of things and following through with anticipating the unexpected. Dave was definitely all about the unexpected. Heck his gameplay followed the unexpected even when he was playing with David Wesely.
The easy way I would put it out is explain that think about a military camp, you’re going to have garbage running up and down the court or checking things out. Or you might have other monsters trying to find a place to shelter up. But I love the idea of other player groups or groups similar to the group going through as players, but are just NPC’s trying to do the same thing.
And yeah, monsters don’t necessarily sit in the same room all the time waiting for players to show up and suddenly act surprised that is way too cliché
I look at it and I heard Dave talk about it is that you have the main story arc with a backstory and a lot of other things going on and the players are the ones who try to figure out what path to giving them the proper empowerment. I know you used a different term for the same thing.
I don’t get players who freak out about random monsters or encounters. The only thing that comes to my mind is that they are used to rules as written, meta-gaming, And working with a anticipated, worked out plot and plan
When I do a module, I often have actors not known to the players with a totally different desire and plan of their own. The players may grasp one story, not realizing there’s a lot of interwoven story archs going on at once.
small note about how to Arnesson recorded his stuff he would write things in the margin of his notes, which is probably a big thing that Tim had problem with. It really required to explain what those notes meant. They were important notes in his manual.
In regards to Dragonlance, they were very popular modules because they were presented very nicely and they became very good models to do a module in. I don’t know a single game, master, who actually ran the games, at least not exactly as it was written. Because there is no fun in doing a module where you are forced to follow a action and you don’t have any other option. That’s just not how the intelligent player typically plays. I know in Japan they love the style of gaming. But in US in the early days, it was not the main way to do it. Everyone wanted to show that they could do something unexpected and so linear story or railroading some people call it. Not go over well.
Again, what I’m doing in my game I am explaining a lot of the options and giving diagrams to make it easier to understand the different way of thinking about how to do a game
great video. I liked your charts at the end.Personally I love the challenge of random encounters on the fly.I switched to Shadowdark after the Hasbro OGL crap. SD has so many charts on encounters that i use on the fly. For example I rolled "cultist examining ruins" worked perfectly and added some intrigue as the players saw a lone man studying some old obelisk. Turned out that while watching him to determine his purpose, I ended up rolling another encounter, "horse gets pulled into water by a tentacled horror." I had to figure out what was happening fast. I decided the horse was the cultists horse and was down the river a way off and only visible to the keen eyesight of the elf. When the horse was pulled in the stranger yelled in panic about his steed "Chancey". In the end the players befriended the man and promised to take him back to town. They camped and the next day they explored some of the ruins and had one of the players die by a collapsing wall. His new character became the cultist. The wall was also a random encounter.So I feel the dice make the story more then I do, I am just a referee and interpreter. I try to keep my games very open with rumors to guide the players in the direction they wish to go. I would say Random encounters are a complete must have.
I have developed a deep hatred for "scripted adventures", where everything must happen in a specific order, with every encounter accurately set up to the point of telling you what the enemy do action by action, with treasures and loots already calculated to the last copper piece, and so on... That's not an adventure, it's a theatrical script or an interactive novel.
In my opinion, players make the story through their decisions and their actions. The DM reacts to that and puts in the game new challenges and possible interactions. And random encounters are a great instrument to manage the world around the player characters and make it more alive. I as DM do not create the story, I enjoy it from a first row seat after having set up the scenery.
Notice that I wrote "random encounters", not "wandering monsters". The latters are just one of the many possible types of the formers. Those can be almost anything, from passers by along a road to natural hazards, from climate changes to weird location the players stumble upon, from bizarre phenomena to unespected obstacles on the way, and so on.
The weird thing about random encounters is that they can be used to manage completely expected happenings too: things that are bound to happen under certain circumstances, but not in a specific spot and/or not at a predetermined time. They are supposed to happen, but you just don't know where or when, or even if.
I agree on the resource management part. That should be a fundamental part of roleplaying games, but since 4th edition it has been increasingly left out of the system, by heavy use of easy recovery (rest mechanics, healing surges, etc.) or unlimited availability (instant recovery of hit points, neverending spell components, etc.).
There is no place for randomness in encounters either in the latest systems. They are incredibly deterministic about everything, giving detailed instructions about what to put into your games and when. They are boring for a DM like me, which prefers to throw things at the party to see how they manage the situation, without giving a shit about balance or fairness.
On that last point of "if you play 5E and don't like the reaction roll and would rather use your bonuses, then go ahead and use your diplomacy instead."
I would say those are two fundamentally different questions/answers. The reaction roll is setting up the initial situation. A diplomacy check is due to player action to change the situation. Both can be used together.
I remember my first solo play through in module B2 in which wandering monsters are a detection risk as your party explores the different lairs in the CoC. It definitely introduces a degree of stealth play, but more importantly keeps the play more chaotic so it feels less like you are just playing through the rooms like they were just a golf course. Considering there is not much plot or narrative development in B2, the wandering monster table adds a degree of suspense. Definitely a bit lazy, but it adds a bit of sandbox feel to the campaign to have a random table of elements that might be encountered, as well as exact table and chance for something to be found in any given spot of a lair.
Completely off topic, but just wanted to inform you nearly every time you say "daddy rolled a 1" I can't help but repeat it to the tune and tempo of "janie's got a gun" by Aerosmith - do with that info what you will, I just wanted to share lol.
Edit at 28 min you say all of this and more. For the algorithm!
To me wandering monsters were always from one area exploring another. It wasn’t a monster not in the game. I’d have wandering monsters not in their lair because they were elsewhere and it stopped the surgical strike syndrome that many groups devolved into. However I stopped using them in recent years. I think they need to come back.