Boooo We Hate Torches
Wanted to share two good posts on Illusory Sensorium: "There Is No Light" and "Doom Clock". Totally agree with the critical dimensions of those blogs, especially about the futility of light-as-resource-management and the disappointment of the hazard die in its attempt to simplify the typical dungeon exploration procedure. Really good reading!!
That being said, I phrased the above like that because I care less for his proposal of the doom clock. This is a personal preference thing, not me trying to dog on him. I feel like the basic dynamics of site structure and exploration procedure already increase risk and tension as the game progresses, especially as players lose hit points and delve into deeper parts (i.e., higher levels) of the site. The impact of risk necessarily increases as time passes, even if its frequency does not—and imagine how tedious it would be if the frequency of random encounters did increase.
Anyway, light. How do you make light feel like it matters when you're not penny-pinching about it (which, ultimately, doesn't matter either)? Easy! Make torchbearing a task. Someone in the party needs to hold a torch, meaning they can't do anything else because they need to provide enough light for everyone else to do their own tasks. The torchbearer also becomes an easy target in the eyes of monsters, further incentivizing switch-offs between players (or motivating them to hire someone else to carry torches for them). Those are all just natural consequences of exploring a dark space, rather than anything formally mechanized that needs to be tracked and proceduralized.
Impactful enough. Emphasizes the worker placement game, too. Combine that and a basic bitch encounter check, and you would probably be good to go. Might update TURN along these lines because it's less annoying haha.
If touchbearing a task that makes a character pretty much passive entity during the play (unable to do anything else), do you think there will be a lot of players who have their characters with all these abilities but willing to do nothing in the game but being mobile candlestick? I don't really think that most of the groups of players will have a fair switch-off – more likely, as per human nature, one character will be chosen as scape-torch-goat based upon "well, you have nothing better to do and the rest of us is much more useful" principle. Hiring somebody to carry the torch just makes the hire into one more entity to manage on a virtual, if not a real, spreadsheet – as torchbearer is target to monsters their HPs should be monitored and maintained (unless PC party intends to leave a trail of dead lanternboys)
ReplyDeleteI don't see how this approach solves the problem without creating more of problems.
in my experience, deciding who's the one carrying the torch is already an annoying process that makes them (necessarily) less active! and it doesn't prevent them from doing more passive things during exploration, which i like to do, like investigating one's surroundings and asking questions. the only thing that's taken for granted, which has also been my experience, is that you probably have enough torches to last the entire delve rather than acting as if it's a question---which isn't for some people who play longer sessions, e.g., but in my experience with shorter sessions focused more on character interactions it feels very vestigial.
Deletethe outcome is still the same as if you had to track torches: it's better to hire someone to carry torches for you! you still track their hit points ofc, but at least you're not tracking their inventory, and their function with respect to exploration (to free up player-characters' hands) is clearer.
Hi Marcia, thank you very much for responding to my post, and giving my humble blog a signal boost! I had forgotten even your TURN module descended from the OED. I really like your take on early D&D exploration procedure as worker placement game, and definitely see your approach of a dedicated torchbearer fitting into that framework. However, I do have a couple of concerns with leaving it at that.
ReplyDeleteYou indicate that you don't see the value in random encounter frequency or threat increasing as attrition of HP and escalating threat from pushing deeper already occurs. That's fair, but the number one cited reason to bother tracking torches in the first place was wanting each delve to be 'on a clock,' with the ever-looming threat of being lost in pitch darkness. I agree this isn't strictly necessary (if random encounters are at least on average resource-depleting, you have your clock) but there is an aesthetic to a stepping-down risk die that has an experiential impact in play. Further, unless you play quite long delves/sessions, it's hard to have enough such encounters at the conventional frequency of 1-in-6 per 2 turns to actually cause meaningful attrition. My aim is to manifest a sword of Damocles that spurs players to treat time as precious, but doesn't actually need to punish them too much. It's bark should be louder than its bite.
Another couple of assumptions from my own play that mean 'mileage may vary' include that I don't usually consider just brashly entering a room to take a turn. Instead if they approach carefully and quietly (getting to hear ahead and potentially surprise any occupants) that is what takes a turn. That and not counting combat as a turn (only the following rest if desired) means my players can progress several rooms without rolling the die, but then when they slow down because they suspect a secret door or need to disarm a trap, we are then rolling for encounters. Also, I try to configure my own dungeons and encounter tables (or edit published ones I run) to include fewer 'stocked' creature encounters and leave more of that to the encounter roll. It is easier for me to prep a location like this (I don't need to set characters to be chained to one place or design patrol loops), and produces pleasing surprises in play.
Ultimately, I think what I'm still trying to find is what Chris McDowall dubbed 'graphene' encounter rules: https://www.bastionland.com/2022/05/graphene.html Light but strong/rigid. I'm happy leaving the sensory deprivation and dread of flickering torches in seemingly-boundless caverns up to free form play, but when it comes to having the boogie-man leap out from that umbral veil, I want the game to gently but firmly say "Now - your hands are tied."
hi illusory sensorium, thank you as well for reading and for your excellent posts!! totally agree that increasing frequency of encounters is a nice way to reintroduce the clock aspect of exploration. for me it's not that it doesn't achieve that, but as a matter of my own pref i'd rather forgo such a clock than leave it all as a 1-in-6.
Deletealso that's really interesting you include less 'stocked'/static/etc monsters in your prep! that was smth i was talking about w friends a while ago, that it feels both more dynamic and also less to keep track of. cool to not be the only ones!!
thank you again for reading and commenting! :)