smuonsneutrino

Black. TTRPGs & Math

  • he/him

designing Lanthorn, a TTRPG about suffering in a dungeon, but with post-PBTA/FITD vibes

--

Eternally considering a series of posts called Category Theory Out Of Context

--

pfp by @fxfi


The Problem With Monster-Based Thinking

When you're running an RPG with a lot of combat, it's important to make sure that these encounters have variety. I don't think anyone really disagrees on that front. But one thing I've noticed is that there is consistently a heavy emphasis on the monsters involved rather than the encounter per se.


This extends to basically everyone who operates in the space-- GMs, module writers, and gming bloggers alike. See, for example, Justin Alexander's excellent little video on The Goblin Ampersand:

And to be clear, the Goblin Ampersand is good advice for more than just "the combat". If you include a new monster, suddenly there's a new feature in combat, PLUS the world becomes richer: the goblins are hanging out with that monster for a reason, right?

But I think this sort of monster-based thinking can only go so far in making the actual combat part of encounters engaging. Most monsters don't add much to an encounter on their own, because they don't create recognized opportunities on their own. And even when they do, they're likely to get stale after a while.

The Power Of Encounter-Based Thinking

See, the Goblin Ampersand establishes narrative interest at a sort of "structural" level-- it makes the scenario new and memorable. But when you're designing an encounter, you need to be thinking about the moment-to-moment level. You need to establish narrative or strategic interest in this particular set of Goblins & X. The ones in the room right the fuck now.

Think about how action movies solve this problem. Most combat scenes aren't just a bunch of people beating the crap out of each other! There is very often an emotional or environmental complication to the scenario: hostages, fire, or limited access to adversaries. The best action scenes in Avatar: The Way of Water use the threat of drowning or other dangers of the sea to complicate things. Complications that create choice are hands-down my favorite encounter design tool.

The Narrative Complication

Narrative complications are encounters that put the PC's interests in conflict or otherwise create additional objectives that need to be resolved in addition to winning the fight. Do the PCs need to protect hostages? Do they need to defend someone who's performing a delicate task? Do they need to keep one or all of the adversaries alive (such as fighting a possessed friend who might still be in there)? In all of these cases, the drama of the scene itself is increased while the type of abilities that will come in handy widens. If there are hostages, the PCs now need to put themselves between the hostages and the adversaries; if they need to keep their adversaries alive, they might need to think outside the box or use more unusual tools to make sure they don't accidentally kill someone they didn't mean to.

The Added Danger

An added danger is anything that lights a (potentially literal) fire under the asses of the PCs. Maybe the kobolds brought molotov cocktails this time. Maybe they're fighting on a sinking ship. Maybe there are a number of sheer cliffs nearby. In any case, the PCs are put at risk of some danger other than the monster itself. This comes very naturally in nautical campaigns or underwater adventures, where drowning is a real factor. It also comes naturally in wooden buildings, where a fire can get out of hand quickly and seal off exits.

The monster itself may or may not be at risk from the added danger. A fire elemental can add danger by setting things on fire, but is not at risk of burning to death. An angry kobold with a molotov cocktail can also add danger by setting things on fire, but the PCs might be able to create an advantage by throwing said angry kobold into the flames. Both can create interesting situations; just make sure that the PCs are actually empowered to fight back. If the fire elemental is able to completely trap the PCs on turn 1 and then leave as they helplessly burn to death, you haven't actually complicated combat, you've just done "Rocks Fall Everyone Dies" with extra steps.

The Terrain

For a hobby that owes so much to minis wargames, I see terrain come up shockingly rarely. When Tucker's Kobolds are such a famous case-study, it surprises me that I've never once been at the table and had the GM bust out a monster who uses tunnel networks and murder holes. (That's right, I've linked to Tucker's Kobolds twice in one chost. You can't stop me.) Enemies that take advantage of murder holes, superior knowledge of corridors, cliffs, debris, windows, doors, and any other terrain feature can be both interesting and challenging to work around. When you get your hands on a stat block, think about the kinds of locations that make that stat block interesting. Maybe an example will help.

One of the best encounters I've ever run was just a quicksilver slime in a tall, narrow, heavy box with a semi-fragile mcguffin. The slime itself had a pretty run-of-the-mill stat block; its goal was to overwhelm and grapple whoever was unfortunate enough to step in it, and being a slime made of metal, it was resistant to piercing weapons. The issue with fighting this thing while it sits at the bottom of a box is that someone either has to get clever and kill the slime without damaging the mcguffin or jump into the box and try to wrestle a sentient piece of metal that spends its entire life doing nothing but wrestle. Of course the Barbarian decided to jump right in, what else was he going to do? And now the PCs needed to get him out of the box without getting his leg ripped off. They succeeded, but only after he got the Warlock dragged into the box with him and nearly drowned in mercury. What would be a fairly straightforward fight against a creature that really only has access to one attack became a memorable encounter that I keep in my back pocket to use on new groups.

Closing Thoughts

This whole chost was written with @MOOMANiBE's "recognized opportunity" in mind. When you add a complication, you give the players the chance to re-evaluate what opportunities they have, and do something different than they would have done without the complication. Combat in RPGs has a tendency to fall into monotony: the goal here is to create a situation where the players will need to use various tools or think on their feet to get what they want. (It's another post for another time, but it's generally good not to actually think very directly in terms of "solutions" when you create a problem for the PCs. They will think of something. Just set up something compelling.)

If you use the techniques above, you should start to feel your combat encounters be more memorable, and maybe even see your players role play a bit more explicitly during combat. When you present new kinds of problem consistently, it becomes easier to avoid having PCs' "socializing brains" and "combat brains" turn into totally disjointed things. If nothing else, your PCs will have more memorable combat experiences to pull from moving forward.


You must log in to comment.