to be fair, this table on its own, combined with a spark table could lead to some great things - even 1D6 goblins that are “perilous” or a “vibe” will lead to vastly different interpretations on the fly - eg, are they really well armed? are they breaking for camp and not violent? invites adventure in its own right 💯
You can definitely use that technique! It just depends on how much engineering you like doing, I enjoy getting quite specific with prep, but this works as a generative tool as well!
this is how I'm going to use it as im developing a square card-based word/spark "engine" and a tight set of d# list reference tables that i want to be modular and iterative that can work with any game engine.
Hard agree on the focus a small table gives, expecially for dungeon environments. I think I would probably use a larger table or nest some sub-tables for an environment that needs more variety such as travelling to different areas during overland travel (I like to throw a lot of vibe into those) but perfect for an area where themes, threats and information need to be very front and centre.
The template is disgustingly useful and I will squirrel that way for future use. It's going to get applied to the crypt and keep areas of the adventure I'm beavering away at right now.
My one complaint is that you didn't publish this a few weeks ago when I could have used it for something I was running - terribly inconsiderate!
How would you combine this D6 system described in your blog post with the tracks and traces system?
In the "Tracks and Traces" system, 1 is monster(s) and 2 is lair. 3-6 are tracks, spoor and traces.
In your system designed here, it's somewhat similar; 1-2 are threats/challenges/combats, while 3-6 are more roleplaying, exploration and puzzle driven.
So in that manner they seem very similar. I don't think just combining the two into a D12 table would work right, though. Maybe it could work if there was a strategy for using one or the other? Tracks and traces works really well for... tracking enemies... outside of safety (town, camp, etc). The system you describe here seems better for whent he players AREN'T explicitly exploring new territory and/or tracking quarry. Though the "tracks and traces" system doesn't seem like it's ONLY for hunting/tracking situations, either. I'd like to get your opinion
So I would use this roughly as a modification to the table result, 1 is the actual encounter, 2 is finding somewhere it’s based but not walking right into it, and 3-6 would be a hint of the encounter. Roll that as a d6 alongside your normal encounter table basically!
Oh, I see. So instead of encountering a monster or lair directly, I could make it so that if the players were too “encounter“ a “creature“, I could instead use the “tracks and traces“ system.
Well, there could definitely be upsides and downsides to that. For example, it would mean the players would encounter creatures less often since they would instead encounter tracks, traces and spoor more often.
So if I wanted to run a game that had more player agency that would give them more agency because they could then choose to ignore the tracks, traces or spoor.
With a 2/6 chance to encounter a creature or lair on your table and a 2/6 chance on the other table as well, that would give an 11% chance per die roll (random thing check) for encountering monsters or their lair.
I think that percentage chance is similar to other systems actually. I’ll think about it… it does seem cool. I would like to use your system, and this could combine both.
I also like the idea of using subsystems for each dice result, just so that I know as a dungeon master I’m not gonna be getting the same results in the same session (like obviously if you rolled the same result on your table in the same session, you would improvise or have different scenarios for that result prepared so you didn’t literally encounter the same thing twice)
to be fair, this table on its own, combined with a spark table could lead to some great things - even 1D6 goblins that are “perilous” or a “vibe” will lead to vastly different interpretations on the fly - eg, are they really well armed? are they breaking for camp and not violent? invites adventure in its own right 💯
You can definitely use that technique! It just depends on how much engineering you like doing, I enjoy getting quite specific with prep, but this works as a generative tool as well!
this is how I'm going to use it as im developing a square card-based word/spark "engine" and a tight set of d# list reference tables that i want to be modular and iterative that can work with any game engine.
Love it. I'm thinking I'd like to "nest" these with other table I have e.g., peril tables, factions, etc.
Great idea!
Hard agree on the focus a small table gives, expecially for dungeon environments. I think I would probably use a larger table or nest some sub-tables for an environment that needs more variety such as travelling to different areas during overland travel (I like to throw a lot of vibe into those) but perfect for an area where themes, threats and information need to be very front and centre.
The template is disgustingly useful and I will squirrel that way for future use. It's going to get applied to the crypt and keep areas of the adventure I'm beavering away at right now.
My one complaint is that you didn't publish this a few weeks ago when I could have used it for something I was running - terribly inconsiderate!
Expanding to a d12 table is great for a bigger situation, or even for my sandbox event table maybe!
d66 is another good option if you really need to scale up.
And yeah, I should have made something like this months ago hehe.
My beloved d12. So sadly neglected by so many.
I want to use the "Tracks and Traces" table/system from The Retired Adventurer's blog: https://retiredadventurer.blogspot.com/2013/05/a-procedure-for-wandering-monsters.html
How would you combine this D6 system described in your blog post with the tracks and traces system?
In the "Tracks and Traces" system, 1 is monster(s) and 2 is lair. 3-6 are tracks, spoor and traces.
In your system designed here, it's somewhat similar; 1-2 are threats/challenges/combats, while 3-6 are more roleplaying, exploration and puzzle driven.
So in that manner they seem very similar. I don't think just combining the two into a D12 table would work right, though. Maybe it could work if there was a strategy for using one or the other? Tracks and traces works really well for... tracking enemies... outside of safety (town, camp, etc). The system you describe here seems better for whent he players AREN'T explicitly exploring new territory and/or tracking quarry. Though the "tracks and traces" system doesn't seem like it's ONLY for hunting/tracking situations, either. I'd like to get your opinion
So I would use this roughly as a modification to the table result, 1 is the actual encounter, 2 is finding somewhere it’s based but not walking right into it, and 3-6 would be a hint of the encounter. Roll that as a d6 alongside your normal encounter table basically!
Oh, I see. So instead of encountering a monster or lair directly, I could make it so that if the players were too “encounter“ a “creature“, I could instead use the “tracks and traces“ system.
Well, there could definitely be upsides and downsides to that. For example, it would mean the players would encounter creatures less often since they would instead encounter tracks, traces and spoor more often.
So if I wanted to run a game that had more player agency that would give them more agency because they could then choose to ignore the tracks, traces or spoor.
With a 2/6 chance to encounter a creature or lair on your table and a 2/6 chance on the other table as well, that would give an 11% chance per die roll (random thing check) for encountering monsters or their lair.
I think that percentage chance is similar to other systems actually. I’ll think about it… it does seem cool. I would like to use your system, and this could combine both.
I also like the idea of using subsystems for each dice result, just so that I know as a dungeon master I’m not gonna be getting the same results in the same session (like obviously if you rolled the same result on your table in the same session, you would improvise or have different scenarios for that result prepared so you didn’t literally encounter the same thing twice)