This article looked interesting:
https://thecollaborativegamer.wordpress.com/2016/01/11/a-ridiculously-huge-system-of-tables-for-creating-adventures/
I like big tables for procedural generation of thought starters like this. It uses "N notation" like in Mirror of the Fire Demon, while I prefer CER. but N could easily be converted to CER by saying 1 N = the CER of the entire party, and reading "N wolves" as "Wolves greater than or equal to N * Party CER" But overall, noice.
https://thecollaborativegamer.wordpress.com/2016/01/11/a-ridiculously-huge-system-of-tables-for-creating-adventures/
I like big tables for procedural generation of thought starters like this. It uses "N notation" like in Mirror of the Fire Demon, while I prefer CER. but N could easily be converted to CER by saying 1 N = the CER of the entire party, and reading "N wolves" as "Wolves greater than or equal to N * Party CER" But overall, noice.
Thanks for the props, Benjamin! We obviously share a love of big tables for generating things procedurally. Nice!
ReplyDeleteI was tempted to use CER, actually - it's a good idea. The case for using CER is that it takes into account the party's level of capability, whereas "N" only takes into account the number of PCs.
But I ended up using N, because I already have a different system for taking into account the party's level of capability - it's my "Peril Ratings" mechanic, which is a bit like B.A.D in the Action series. (See here for details: https://thecollaborativegamer.wordpress.com/adventures/a-system-for-creating-adventures/peril-ratings-explained/)
Your CER idea is a really good one, though.
YOu got me thinking at more length about this, so I've posted a longer response on my blog. Thanks again, Benjamin.
Deletehttps://thecollaborativegamer.wordpress.com/2016/01/12/n-vs-cer-introducing-peril-ratings/
I can think of a few edge cases where your system of Peril + N makes more sense than CER, and I can also think of a few edge cases where CER works great, and some cases I have personally seen with CER where the numbers don't exactly tell the truth, with some encounters turning into a total curb stomp, and others turning into a panicked retreat and regroup. But with a lot of automatic systems like this, sometimes you gotta apply some human autonomy to decide whether you need to make things easier or harder than it looks. But that's part of the fun.
DeleteIf we had a perfect algorithm for generating fun dungeons, challenging enough encounters, and just the right amount of loot, the Dungeon Fantasy GM would go extinct because a computer could make the perfect dungeon every single time. Luckily, we are no where near the RPG singularity yet.
I kinda forgot what point I was trying to make, but thanks for the response.
These are all interesting thoughts. I agree about the perfect algorithm - we're never going to get that - thank heavens!
DeleteAnd even if we did (whatever that would mean), I think tabletop roleplaying would still be worthwhile, since it's social. And tactile, too: rolling dice is fun!