This D&D Monster SUCKS. This is why.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
- Reserve your VIP spot for Monsters of Drakkenheim here! get.monstersof...
Help me quit my day job: ko-fi.com/defi...
Today we talk about a relatively niche but potentially campaign-ending monster many budding DMs are privy to use in times of desperation. I have a lot of dice & opinions here. This is one of them. Your fun is valid. You play however you want.
Credit where credit is due:
"Alchemist’s Tower" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Fluffing a Duck" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Life of Riley" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Local Forecast: Elevator" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Long Note One" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Run Amok" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Two Finger Johnny" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
"Unanswered Questions" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommon...
Music: Chicken Picking Country Guitar by Redafs.com, Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
Music: Sneak Up on You by Redafs.com, Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 License
Get in early on Monsters of Drakkenheim's Kickstarter for VIP dice & other Eldritch goodies: get.monstersofdrakkenheim.com/6
My desk smells fishy.
Dog I have to know, is that a real-100% genuine-raw octopus you crammed into that bottle?
@@LegendaryGelder yee
@@DeficientMasterare you secretely belle delphine
It’s awesome to see you advertise Dungeon Dude material! You’re on the precipice of collaborating with Ginny Di, I can feel it
This is the best advertisement I’ve seen for Dungeons of Drakkenheim! Backing that Kickstarter now!
Now you gave me the idea of an ogre that is fated to always meet the party, becoming more and more broken with each encounter as the reality around it warps and breaks
The chronomancer responsible for subjecting that ogre to such a miserable fate seems like the real monster!
Trolls regenerate. It would be a simple curse to have one remember their previous fates.
Oh my gosh, it could be that the orc is just traveling around aimlessly, but every time he makes a choice on where to go it just so happens that it’s where the party is! The Quantum Party!
Ever read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? Agrajag is pretty much this
Oh, that sounds like the pirates in Asterix 🤣
I believe that player agency is about giving players enough information to make INFORMED decisions. An arbitrary choice to go left or right with no information about what lies on either path is not a real decision. There is no player agency there to take away by having an ogre on both paths. Now if the players hear that the dungeon entrance is somewhere to the north, but that there is a dryad who might be able to help to the south then it isn't an arbitrary decision anymore and if they choose to go North, they better not find a dryad there. I would probably have the ogre be a random encounter that can show up to the north or the south.
Thank you. This is concrete advice that is applicable to a lot of situations (and that's rare 😉)
Interestingly enough, the hypothetical example you gave at the beginning was actually an example of the quantum ogre being executed well, as at least in that case the players' choice actually does change the outcome (ogre with fire damage/resistance or ogre with frost damage/resistance).
I unironically love that the D&D RUclips ecosystem has reached secondary and tertiary levels where so we can hear about counter-opinions based on mainstream tuber opinions, instead of just reiterations of those opinions.
Do I like the idea of quantum ogres? Yes, in theory! Do I agree with all of the criticisms of quantum ogres? Pretty much, yeah. Hearing different perspectives and opinions on them helps us know the right or wrong way to use ideas like this without having to do quite so much trial and error ourselves
You understand the term Quantum Ogre has ALWAYS been negative, right? It was created to illustrate why the illusion of choice is a bad thing.
There is no right or wrong way. Improvisation is not for everyone and not every session can vary from 2 hours to 8 hours with ease, especially if you're in a convention setting
The "you play however you want bit" sends me over the edge 😂😂
I feel like YPHYW is more and more often standing in for, "No offense, but I think you're doing it wrong!" XD
@@sweatyeti It always has been lmao
Deficient seems to hold resentment for "re-education camps".
Quantum clues are a thousand times better than locking a clue behind one specific thing or character you absolutely have to encounter. Sly Flourish is 100% right in saying that clues should often be separated from the NPCs giving them.
It depends on whether or not the fun the players are looking for is 'the challenge of the puzzle of figuring out where the clues are'. Which is not the only way to have fun with mysteries, but is one of them.
They don't need to actually be quantum though. You can have the clue come in several different forms, which might even give the party meaningfully different information. You can create a whole bunch of clues with different ways to get the clue, different information given by the clue, etc that will all show up in different places to gently nudge the party in the right direction.
Highly dependent on context. The right question at the right time to the wrong person. I feel like should depend on the clue
Eh, my problem with quantum clues is that they often feel super separate from their environment.
I prefer the 3 clue rule, where the next piece of the puzzle always has at least 3 clues in separate places that can individually prove the conclusion. That way, you don't have the randomly inserted quantom clues.
The best thing is to always have at least one of the clues in a Schrodinger Scenario so you can plop it down on the road in a pinch.
Nah. Clues tied to their giver/place is good. Forcing players to only solve the challenge with THOSE clues is what sucks.
I think there's a time and place for quantum monsters. What's become problematic and more prevelant as a cut prep corner is playing cup & balls with your encounters, similar to your second example. Your first example, between the forest and the mountain pass, is the perfect place to quantum your monster. The terrain layout is where the players have agency, not the monsters they encounter, in this case.
there is no time or place for them. your players' decisions determine what they encounter. not you.
Yes. Quantum ogres are only a problem when you are overusing them without proper care and/or to force stuff on the players.
@@MarcioLiao they're always a problem. one use is too many.
@@mnmnrtno they are not.
@@MarcioLiao yes they are.
Overreliance on this technique can certainly ruin games, but the alternative seems to be requiring the DM to plan out every possible encounter within the players' feasible travel radius within the time span of of a single session. As the player levels get higher, the GM has to expand their chart of potential encounters to a world-spanning, and eventually existence-spanning range if they want to be prepared if the players decide to just ignore all of their hooks and walk, fly, or teleport in a random direction just to see what's there.
Player Agency is not, nor should it ever be, universal. If my players decide to zig instead of zag, I'll try to accommodate their choice _to a reasonable degree,_ but under no circumstances am I going to throw away every combat encounter I meticulously design for them just because they decided to turn around and walk the other way. The GM should work to make sure the players have fun, but the players also need to put in that effort to make sure all of the work their GM does in preparation for their session isn't completely meaningless. I'm not in favor of Quantum Adventures where every significant encounter for the next several sessions is determined entirely by what lets the GM get all of their encounters done, but this isn't a black-and-white issue where a Quantum Encounter is _always_ bad no matter how it's handled.
Mocking GMs for "working weawwy, weawwy hawd" doesn't change the validity of the point that the GM puts in significantly more work than the players for every session. For that work not only to often go unthanked, but in many cases actively avoided, and in this very video, ridiculed, will only further exacerbate the issue of nobody wanting to take up the GM role for their tables. Players with Characters are not the only Players at the table, and especially not the only ones that matter.
God, you're hitting it for me. Sometimes I just want to see how scenario A plays out. Sometimes I have a cool homebrew fight with dynamic terrain that I want to run.
You hit the nail on the head. Past the sarcastic, loud humor my main criticism with his opinions is he acts like the GM has to bow to the whim of the players and prepare for every possible scenario. That simply isn't possible, especially if you're playing on a VTT which requires even more prep work.
It feels like he expects (and almost encourages) players to try and derail a campaign for the sake of "player agency"
There's a midpoint here, and it revolves around two things: 1. Hooks - you should have a rough idea of what your party is going to do, and prep for that, @ 2. Good communications - your players should know that if they choose to avoid the hook, they will run into improv and/or quantum encounters. Hopefully there's a bit of respect each way. Your players know you can't prep everything, and you know that the best game they'll have is when they encounter prepared material. I try to end each game session with a quick chat about what the party's going to do next time. Perhaps it's a little meta-gamey, but it ensures everyone is going to have a good time.
Reminds me of an ogre my party encountered. We managed to talk to it, and discover its consciousness had been taken over by a wild magic sorceror named Sam who, due to a wild surge ended up getting thrown into the bodies of various beings throughout history, where it had to right some wrong before it could travel to the next body.
It was indeed a Quantum Leap Ogre.
I would add that "Not all Quantum Ogres all created equally."
Locking in specific encounters can be bad practice, but if you say: Worked hard to lay out the plans, NPCs and encounters of a village and even drawn a map with the houses, then I would totally let it slide if you say that this village is now suddenly called "Brookbridge" because your players went there instead of "Bridgebrook" where you expected.
However if you designed a quest that would take the players to "Spooky Forest" which is right next to Bridgebrook but a 7 day walk from Brookbridge, and that same NPC is still there, giving out the same quest, that *is* a bad Quantum Ogre. As well as renaming the "Spooky Forest" to "Haunted Forest". Just come up with something different, it's good practice.
And like all GM tips, there are some caveats. If you interchange human villages that's probably fine if you switch around the quests. If that dwarf or elven village we went to instead of a human one having the same layout, well it is going to raise some eyebrows.
Using content you didn't fit in earlier is fine, but if you're removing agency to visit different places the players find interesting, just don't give them that choice in the first place. Start them in that town, or lay hooks for multiple towns you've actually prepared.
It's similar to fudging dice, if you were going to fudge, don't roll. If you're going to overwrite the players' choices, don't give them options for two different towns if they're the same anyway
The utility and enjoyment of a quantum ogres shrink exponentially as proximity increases linearly.
@@TaberIVi usually fudge because i rolled on autopilot while thinking about what is happening. So, yeah, i got what you saying but sometimes the fudge has to be after rolling. Just need to be more chill about it and don't care much when, but more about how you do something.
@@ShiftyMcGogglesonly if you know they are quantum ogres.
@@MarcioLiao The better advice is _just don't roll then_ . Players will notice if you ignore die results at times, and it lessens the stakes and makes die rolls you do focus on more arbitrary.
But none of us are perfect, I've done the same, though I try to do avoid it as much as possible
Your dedication to making each video incredibly interesting and fun is simply epic. You even manage to make the quick sponsor ads fun. Keep it up sir!
this is a perfect example of the illusion of choice. You enter upon the forest, two path, left or right. You have a choice. But you don't have any information on what the possible outcomes are. It's not a true choice because it's akin to a coin flip. To give players real agency, which is one of the most important part of the job in my opinion, you must allow them to scout, give them informations, allow them to turn back.
If you really want that ogre encounter, either you give an incentive to go for it OR you make it happen later. The ogre could be patrolling outside the dungeon and instead of being the first encounter it becomes the last. Still fun to play.
there shouldn't be an encounter you want to happen. you're a referee. not a story teller.
@@mnmnrt but if the dm isnt allowed to put stuff in the world for the players to find what are the players going to do?
@@cookieman5112 why did you make up something i didn't say instead of replying to what i said?
Agreed. Players have agency only and only if they can make an *informed* choice. Otherwise they're just flipping a coin.
@@tuomasronnberg5244 it's "if and only if".
"More powerful? No - quicker, easier it is. But once you go down the quantum-ogre path, forever will it dominate your destiny."
that opening skit is so fucking good LMAO
"Crying is an action" 😂
Seriously deficient you are translating the OSR mindset and reasons why we think what we do to a 5e audience *Masterfully.*
you didn't invent respecting player agency.
@@mnmnrt We didn't, OD&D did.
If you want to get even more technical, Strategos did with its quote of " _anything can be attempted._ "
I think the first example of a quantum ogre was actually good use of the ogre. I am there with @slyflourish who made a video about it.
You prepped an ogre encounter, and the players could decide if they want to fight the fire or the ice variant. The ogre might be the same, but the party was able to choose the circumstances. Like the BBEG is the same, but the players decide when and how to fight.
The forrest quantum ogre, RP encounter, dungeon entrance where players MUST go through YOUR list ist bad.
a bad use.
@@mnmnrtexplain yourself
@@k3rvyn the world exists independently of the players. if you wait for the players to show up somewhere before deciding what's there, you're a shit DM.
@@mnmnrthow am I deciding what I do, when the players arrive? I said, and I quote, "You prepped an ogre encounter, and the players could decide if they want to fight the fire or the ice variant. The ogre might be the same, but the party was able to choose the circumstances. Like the BBEG is the same, but the players decide when and how to fight.
The forrest quantum ogre, RP encounter, dungeon entrance where players MUST go through YOUR list ist bad."
I prep stuff, and expect the players to come across of what I prepped. How does this make me a shit DM? Do you feel better, when the hot room got a fire elemental and the cold room an ice elemental?
@@k3rvyn wrong. a choice between a fire and an ice ogre is not a choice.
I find that the importance of player agency is extremely heavily dependant on what your players can do with it. Some parties world very well when you then tell you what they want and you work to accomodate it. Some parties you have to point in a direction pretty directly for them to do stuff. Generally, the second kind of party works better with combat heavy games, since combat basically forces everyone to do something. Whereas roleplay sessions rely largely on the players doing something on their own and roleplaying.
Imo this behavior is learned. When players get used to campaigns on rails, they follow the rails, and don't know what to do when they're not there.
If you run adventures with choices, players learn they have agency.
I think that this problem arises more when player characters are not properly placed inside the campaign or the world, rather than player inexperience.
Players (GM included) should work to make sure the characters have some sort of motivation that is relevant. The GM should provide extensive information on the starting setting they have in mind and the players should use this information put their characters inside it and give them attachments, beliefs and goals that are in line with the themes of the campaign.
If you do this, the players will always have something to do, and will have more the more they play.
If you don't, no matter how experienced the players are, they won't really be motivated to go in a certain direction, unless they are motivated by metagaming, that is they pick up on where the GM wants them to go.
You could also set a specific goal the character will have (making gold) and just assume every character will have that goal. I find it a bit boring, but that's jut personal taste: it can absolutely work
I've always wondered where people draw the line between "railroading" and like, "steering the narrative." Like I literally thought the term "railroading" came from "keeping the game on track..." cause of the... tracks.
Quantum ogres seem railroad-y, and I can see how they can be necessary if they have some sort of key to progressing. But same as video games, I like having "missable" items and encounters.
there isn't a narrative. you're a referee, not a story teller.
There is no line because people usually can't agree on the topic concept. If i pick an encounter from one of the rooms that the players skip in a dungeon and reuse on another dungeon, is that Quantum ogres? Is that railroading or "disrespecting" the players agency? Or is just being smart and saving on prepr time for stuff that both you and your table thinks are more important?
And what if you do this on the same dungeon but wait for a later part? What if you do on a bifurcation? Where do YOU draw the line? Is really that strange to have more than one encounter of a type? Is really that bad to have more than one room with a single ogre on a big ogre lair?
This is more about feeling betrayed that the DM could possibly have done that, than for any actual material consequence on the game.
@@mnmnrt how could there not be a narrative? what are you doing every time you play if not taking actions to complete an overarching goal?
every adventure module has a narrative and plot hooks players can tie their backstories into, and every session whatever path they choose leads closer to the BBEG, cause what's the point otherwise?
@@mnmnrt Imagine that the main goal of the campaign is to stop BBEG before it is too late. He could be stopped by variety of ways, of course, but players need to somehow learn about them. For that they must find clues to BBEG's weaknesses and how to defeat them. And for that they need tp find a source of information. When they find said source they would probably need a means to extract information (be it deciphering the book, overhearing the dialogue of two local lords or asking a wise person to share their experience), but before that they would probably need to somehow find said source, but even prior to that they would need to feel the urge to stop BBEG,so you would need to somehow establish them as a threat.
So. At the very least we would need an enticing incident and some semblance of jourmey and climax. Is that not a narrative in of itself? I mean, sure, you don't explicitly need BBEG to run your campaign but if you have one (as most of the campaigns tend to) that already means that you have a narrative - a clear goal and a some sort of way for your players to achieve said goal. It is a narrative of itself.
I personally think that "you are not a storyteller"is a bad take, because at the table everyone (including DM) is one. DM is also a player, mind you, not just a machine. They are the ones creating encounters and locations, challenges to overcome and allies to find. Yes, I agree that they should not force players to choose specific path, but saying that they are not a storytellers is, in my opinion, pretty flawed mindset, because they, well, you jnow, also play the game
@@VasiliyOgniov campaigns don't have main goals. the players decide what their goals are. not you.
I love this! I've occasionally used your Schrödinger's technique so that certain things that need to happen before other things occur in the right sequence. Letting everything be random means that some outcomes may not make sense. But, if it isn't critical to ensuring fun occurs, I make stuff up and carry on.
Awesome video! I loved all of the references. I find myself wanting to watch each video twice - once for the message, and again for everything I missed in the background! Maybe that's the plot after all... 😊
'This is getting out of hand! Now, there are two of them!'
Oh no, quantum hydras!
The true skill of a GM is how well they can lie through their teeth to build trust that you exploit every second of every game. I am the master of their fun, through the game.
thank god you're not my dm.
@@mnmnrt How can you tell your dm doesn't use quantum ogres ? What if it was revealed that they use them ?
all my players say these are the best games they've had in 40 years@@mnmnrt
@@grogmadman522trust him. He JUST knows xD
I do not see, how using any kind of randomized encounter is helping player agency. It is just replacing gm-decicion making with a random die roll. If you want player agency, their coices must be based on something. In your example, maybe the characters have heared rumors about a dryad in the forest that might help them out, and about a dangerous ogre that is roaming the area. When the get close to the dryad clearing, they notice that the plants are getting more vibrant. Or when they get close to the ogre clearing, they may notice the remains of former ogre meals or a typical ogre stench. Then they can make a, somewhat informed, choice, on wether to proceed or backtrack and pick a different path. That ist player agency. Not rolling randomly. At least in my opinion.
you can let the players make a choice then roll for the encounter, then give them details as they approach the clearing and let them reconsider.
often random tables are tools to make prep quicker and decision paralyse less severe. Good idea to still weave the random content into the narrative after it was chosen.
Random Tables only makes prep quicker if the DM didn't have to create them or expend to much time looking for one that beter fits the situation.
The grove example, unless it's from a premade adventure and you already have the table prior to preping the session, is quicker to just place the encounters and move on.
Muh PlAyEr AgEnCy durrrrrr
I personaly thought quantum ogres more like random encounters that i prepare beforehand. Using example in the video, there are two encounters, an entrance into a dungeon and somethere in the woods there's a roaming ogre. If players meet other encounters before finding entrance, they will enter without any problems, but if they find entrance first, the ogre will appear out of the woods and block their way. This method helps me keep the pace of the game.
If you really want to have a specific scenario and nothing else, just cut out the BS and instantly frame scene when they they are supposed to start the adventure. Narrate what happened before scene. It's faster, failproof and at least you are honest, no illusions of choice.
Yeah I think the worst part of the over-used quantum ogre is that the players thought they had agency only to discover later that they were on a railroad all along. After that how are they ever going to trust that GM again? It leaves them feeling betrayed. And at best they will no longer put as much care into choices if they know they probably don't matter.
DM: "So.... do you take the forest path or the mountain pass?"
Player ::not even looking up from smartphone:: "Yeah yeah whatever. Just dice for it I guess."
@@4saken404 Genuine question, why are the players finding out? DM would have to have an Int of 6 to actually reveal "oh yeah it was going to be that combat no matter which path you took" to the players. No, you just move on with the campaign, that was the encounter that was always planned for that choice, and if they decide to backtrack and go the other way, well, you better be good at improv.
@@gameraven13Players get wise to shit. For example, the DM could have the monster manual or module open to a certain page, ask which way people decide to go, and then never go to a different page. Do this a few times and people will start to notice.
Also there are less obvious things that people still pick up on even if subconsciously. In fact I don't think it's ever taken me more than a single session with a DM to figure out that we're being railroaded.
I managed to make this work with the main quest giver. I based him off Walt Disney he is a lich frozen underneath a theme park and every time the party runs into him it’s an animatronic that is made to look and sound like him. Basically he has robotic avatars all over the map constantly monitoring the party.
So he’s constantly keeping tabs on you. It doesn’t matter what you do. Every villain you defeat you just eliminate his competition every quest brings him closer to his goals.
Basically he acts as a benefactor while pulling a ton of Xanatos gambits in the background. He will make business offers tailored to your backstory and exploit character flaws in order to get you to work for him.
He offers the best loot and quest rewards to make it more tempting every time you encounter him. Unlike your typical big bad he won’t directly oppose the party.
He is patient and will wait for the party to accept the quests he arranged for them to find and let them do the work for him.
I named him Sabastian Miles or Smiles for short.
The founder and ceo of the Smiles entertainment company.
0:55 Nope. The correct answer is "It doesn't matter what's behind Door #2. No-one will be opening it anyway *because it's on fire!"*
Caveat: when is a choice not a choice? Whenever you didn't give enough detail to make it meaningful. "Left" and "right" are usually meaningless while "Follow the ogre tracks" or "run away" are choices. Only the latter involves player agency.
Yes! Big thing I've been working on in my prep (& perhaps a follow up for this video) is providing that initial detail/hint/warning in every choice.
This is a game about decision making, and all decisions rely on the quality of information you get from the senses filtered by the DM.
I'll be talking more about it in my upcoming video on Exploration & Discovery.
I apply this logic to everything in my games. The monsters live where they live, the treasures dont move around and the dungeon entrances are where they are. My guys either find them or they dont. I refuse to force the players into anything. It makes my job incredibly frustrating and difficult but its all worth it when the players find something unexpectedly.
I love a good sandbox.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "incredibly frustrating and difficult" as to why people use quantum content over pure static design. I think there's a much happier middle for most tables where both principals synergies rather than combat each other.
Your sponsor segment was wonderful. You are now one of a scant few who can make ads fun to watch.
“Whooo’s thaaat Pokem-OH MY GOD!”
Wake up babe, new Deficient just dropped
If a player loses their agency in the woods and no one is around to point it out, did they really lose it?
I'm fairly new to GMing and I feel like from thsi the main time I used a quantum ogre is a time I probably would do again in that context. The player party was 4 humans and an elf, and there was 5 abandoned houses to search so they split up, I put a few small flavour thigns in most of the houses, a neat consumable magic item in one at random, but the diary written in elvish that was the main clue on where to go next, I put into the house the elf player went to, in hindisght I guess I could've just rolled for it or just picked one beforehand for consistency to have a moment of collaboration, and deciding ranodmly may be slightly better for letting the outcome be the players deciding to either play it as "look how helpful my character is" or "my charcter finding something only they could. But its a good thing to be thinking about even fi I dont feel as bad about it as "reskinning the same enoucnter no matter where you go" If I wanted to do something like that, I'd try to set up the players were being followed or tracked, or that the ambush was close to a location the enemies would know the players would try to approach.
there shouldn't be "where to go next". stop running stories. run games.
I got you, but instead, you could have allowed another character that doesn't know elvish to find that book, then it would create a need for interaction between players, making your elf also feel very helpful because other character though that they needed their help.
PS: I'm not trying to say that you are wrong, by any means.
@@guilhermegasparini3523that are tons of ways to do things. But at a specific time, with specific level of experience, specific preferences, and specific mood, quantum ogres/fudging/any other topic that people get really mad about it, was the solution you could think and successfully used.
Doesn't matter that you had a better """Moral""" decision if you either could not have think about it or implemented on the spot. Especially when you don't think that there's anything wrong on doing it.
@@mnmnrt With all due respect, that's psychotic. Some campaigns/quests are designed around getting to a specific thing. Do you literally just never prep and improv all your games?
@@tabbune the opposite. everything in the world exists independently of the players. they choose how to interact with it.
Last Session My players had to go somewhere, through a portal they were collaboratively creating. I had a really cool encounter prepared for the case they didn't roll good enough to actually land where they were trying to go. So I actually hopped they failed and saw this cool thing I cane up with. But I was strong and kept to the rules I had set for myself. They didn't land where I secretly wanted them to. Now I'm planning to use the encounter in tomorrow's session
NGL that's the most legit looking D&D potion prop I've ever seen.
I love that you have player agency as the only aspect in s tier. This is so vital and I will remember this! I use quantum ogres for tone/gameplay flow, like if I can tell that my players are itching for combat: boom, ogre. But i always find a way to tie the encounter into the current story beat or have purpose in the environment. It’s just a matter of improv to keep the game flowing. However, I don’t like to switch encounter locations or quantumly set up scenarios because that’s actually harder for me to mentally juggle. Things are where they are and they are grounded in those locations, the players have agency to stumble upon those places or not.
There's a lot to be said about the goals of the game for something like this. If the adventure you got your friends together to play STARTS with an ogre. Then quantum that ogre the game has to start. Nobody wants to meet up to play for ten minutes and then go home because the PCs decided not to play the game. But if your players know there's an ogre? Then you've "actualized" the ogre and it is no longer quantum. Or if your players say "Let's go down the other path, X path might have ogres" Then un-quantum that ogre immediately and hide it under the rug. I would argue that the ogre being on both paths is fine for some types of games if the PCs have no information, but a type a game it absolutely would not be would be an exploration game like a hex crawl. Finding out what is at a location is part of the game, so whatever is there has to be a constant. But if your game is a series of events? It matters less.
were those two guys in the beginning the ones who say things like "these 5 d&d builds are absolutely BROOOOOKEN?" Because I think we're thinking of the same channel. And they seem cool enough, but I'm so over 5e and all the crunch. Cairn, ICRPG, and Dragonbane all solve the crunch craziness for me. As always, I was delighted to see you drop a new video because they're bloody brilliant!
Also, Schrodinger's scenarios is genius and I co-opted the idea. I also created a folder called Schrodinger's Locales because sometimes it's fun to make the scaffolding for places and such but wait to totally populate them until game time, and then usually by random tables.
Looking for more of your opinion:
A) You listed three particular RPGs. Why would you reach for one over the others from that list?
B) What makes "Schrodinger's scenarios" and the like fun for you? Is it just cool to see what toys you and your group get to play with today, or is there something deeper going on?
There are ways to maybe reward your players for exploring the area rather than forcing encounters on them in a pre-decided order.
For example, the Dryad may be a bored, tricksy Fey who talks riddles with the Party in exchange for information about the dungeon such as the monsters inside, a general layout, or ways to bypass/disable some traps. In the same way, the ogre could be guarding a small cache of loot, or just be surrounded by the corpses of a previous band of adventurers. Killing the Orge and looting the area, the party could get an old map marking the dungeon’s location, a potion or two, a non-magical weapon, some torches, rations and other general adventuring supplies.
You could even have the two be linked with the Dryad asking the Party to take down the Ogre stinking up her woods. That turns the ogre fight from a “you stumble into a clearing with an ogre, roll initiative” to a known fight where the party can plan and strategize in advance. And if the party chooses to forge ahead and stumbles into the dungeon entrance, okay. This prep took maybe 15 minutes, makes the world cooler, and maybe could have some consequences down the line. Maybe the Ogre manages to kill the Dryad and now the forest starts to die and you have a whole new adventure hook.
Great video as always, really like the exercise of ranking aspects of the game at the end for your table.
Regarding quantum ogre, depending on the pacing of the session, it might still be valid to force a quantum encounter, in my opinion, if the session already demanded too much roleplay and I can ser the players are waiting for some action, just place the Orc no matter where they choose, or if it was too combat heavy place the driad. Not for storytelling reasons or what you want, but what you may feel the session needs.
Quantum ogres are fine. Some people like it, others don't. Usually people really tries to push a "moral" instance on it. Don't fall for that. A tool is a tool.
Yeah sometimes for pacing reasons this can be a good place to put things in, for some groups. There are some D&D groups that will get super bored if you don't throw in a mandatory amount of random hack and slash. If your group is like this, then quantum ogres are totally justified. The important thing to note is that player agency is not always a big deal for many groups.
I would just like to say the quantum ogre isn't always a bad thing if it's for a specific reason. For example, a few years back, i gave my players a few quests that went a bunch of different places a forrest, mountain, undead land, desert, etc.. but no matter what, the first encounter they were going to do was an alien aberration. This would ofcourse be out of place in any of these places, but the idea was that it was supposed to be out of place and a hint to the bigger plot which was that these creatures were starting to invade the plane and take it over. That's a long way to say i think the quantum ogre can be a useful thing so long as it makes sense.
In one of my games I had a big battle set up between the BBEG’s minions and a camp of paladins waiting to recruit orphans after the minions attacked it. I assumed they would attack the minions and clear them out so the paladins couldn’t recruit orphans. They talked it over and decided that My wizard should use there familiar to fly up and find both camps. They then wanted stealth to each camp site to get intel. I loved the idea and I came up with some mechanics and my players had so much fun roleplaying at each stage and doing skill checks back and forth from each camp site. They even added a small little combat that I hadn’t thought of where they took asked if they could find a minion guard on the edge of there camp and killed them Then they made a path to the Paladin camp so the other minions would follow them there. It was such a fun session and it helped me create a truly epic combat the next session between the players, the minions and the paladins.
That book has been thrown, dunked in the trash, slid off the table, set ablaze and NOW it has monster guts all over it. Poor thing can't catch a break.
I'd love to quit my day job too. Player agency is, as you say, how to keep your players interested. I do like your Schrodinger's options as I use them myself to save time not having to write up every last damn thing possible in the campaign. Yes, its my campaign, my story, but I'd like to see how badly my players screw it up. Excellent video, thanks for this.
Ngl if I ever intend to quantum ogre my players I would just tell them, all it really takes is a “hey, I have an encounter planned for today that no matter where you go it will be there, your destination can be whatever you want it to be but along the way this encounter is guaranteed”
The only reason I would quantum ogre my players is if I felt they haven’t fought in a while, my seasons will be in an open world setting where, while traveling, I roll on a table and something happens or doesn’t happen, even if something happens it won’t guarantee be a fight, so I would throw this in to give them some combat.
I've kind of used this, and I will note yes I have done this in my early days in its 'pure form', but later kind of had a reason. Mostly due to the fact that in the latter cases they were actively being hunted by something, its just that the players got to choose the battlefield, and later had it happen to them again but they got more forewarning so they were able to go somewhere that they knew they had an advantage and even set up traps.
Though I will note I 'am' going to steal one of the commenter's idea of a 'literal quantum ogre' that literally starts degrading after each combat, that sounds SO wacky and fun.
If you're going to use a Quantum Ogre, just make sure to include some kind of region-appropriate environmental effect ... think of them as lesser lair actions, as the monster isn't legendary.
Examples: a gusty windy day to make ranged attacks past 6 squares have a -2 to hit; a foggy day to give disadvantage on all rolls past 6 squares ... the goal is to make the players get close.
Another favorite is to say there was a heavy rain here yesterday and the ground is all muddy, DC 10 Athletics check or your movement is halved that turn ... the Ogre always passes this check.
4:00 That scenario of having the players having a combat encounter and a roleplay encounter, I'd give environmental clues that there was an ogre around.
Lots of broken branches, heavy worn-out footprints, a rock smashed through a tree trunk, etc ... then give players Nature/Survival checks to determine sequence.
If they pass the checks, they'd find the dryad first, and the dryad would ask the players to retrieve something the ogre stole, plus some of the ogre's blood, for reasons.
The dryad would tell the players that the entrance to the dungeon is well-hidden and that she would gladly tell them where it is, alongside some other wooden item reward.
About the clearing example at 4:00, I would say that the quantum ogre is a threat to player agency, but not the only one.
Not saying this is the case, of course, but I would like to add that an important part of player agency is not only the ability of making choices that matter for the game, but also the ability of making informed decisions.
If all the clearings look and sound the same, and there is no way of telling what contains what, then the players are forced to pick at random. And if that's the case, having to deal with the ogre is less "consequence of their actions" and more "oh well, we were unlucky". Which I'd say it also deprives players of agency.
Why use a Quantum Ogre in the clearing situation if you can reward their great choice of finding the Temple's entry early with a fight against an Ogre as soon as they leave the dungeon? Reward success with a highly probable TPK!
Personally the idea of having both doors have their respective ogres that will join the other in combat as reinforcement when the party does significant damage to the first one could be interesting, you could give environmental clues that both have their respective ogre and (to me atleast) it turns the false choice of which door the one ogre comes through into one larger encounter against two ogres and the party needs to determine which one would be better to weaken before the other joins in, maybe they have better tools to fight the ice ogre so they attack the fire one first so they don't need to deal with it at full health when the "real" encounter starts
Started DM'ing last year and did not realize that I had done this enough that I started locking in locations, Clearing A will always have this and B will always have that and what not. It felt off at first because my players did end up missing a good bit of my prepared content, but having heard your explanation I don't think it was the wrong move. Thanks Deficient Master!
The only thing worse than underpreparing is overpreparing unfortunately. And both are WAY to easy to do lol.
There is no right or wrong way. Improvisation is not for everyone and not every session can vary from 2 hours to 8 hours with ease, especially if you're in a convention setting
Congratulations for landing some promotion! Finally some money to pay your editor, right? Hey, Deficient have you seen anything about GiffGlyph's Darker Dungeons? I like it a lot, maybe you could talk about it in a future video. Thanks!
For anyone looking for a great Schrodinger-style TTRPG, I would highly suggest checking out Crown & Skull. Schrodinger's dungeon exploration, Schrodinger's enemy combat tactics, and of course, Schrodinger's overland travel and herb gathering.
Nice to see Courtney Campbell's Quantum Ogre being referenced in this channel. From a non-D&D DM, I salute you.
Thinking about letting my players do some of those Schrödinger rolls for me! Then I can weight my tables to have more desired outcomes come from better skill checks. Appreciate all the vids you’ve put out thank you!
I like that idea! You could throw in some PC-related scenarios about their background/backstory as well.
The quantum game session:
Me, the DM: Look guys, you don't have to go into the dungeon that you explicitly told me last session that you would explore this session, but if you go to the castle instead, we're not having a game session right now.
Your Dungeon Dudes add and jokes earned you another subscriber!
Keep ip the good work
Deficient Master:
Bard: "Quantum Ogre is only unfair when wearing Belt of Chastity. Otherwise, *BOINK*"
Quantum ain't bad as long as it's not an incoherence depending on what has been previously established. If you plan an ogre encounter, tell the players ogres are in the forest, not in the mountains, they go to the mountain and meet an ogre that isn't supposed to be there, that's weird and bad (unless you can find an explanation for it, it's not impossible that one wandered for x reason)
If it's been established there are ogres on both routes, and whichever route they take they'll meet an ogre, because you had an ogre encounter planned, that's not a bad thing. They have no way to know the exact same ogre would be waiting on the other path, because the players won't be in both places at once, unlike the ogre.
Same thing for the forest. If you have forest encounters planned, but the players' or dice's random choice decides they just stumble upon the dungeon entrance on the first try, skipping entirely all the forest could offer in terms of encounters (ogre for fighting, dryad for roleplay and possible lore and info, old bandit hideout for loot) then do the quantum ogre, because prepping the whole forest just to have the players run past all of it through sheer luck and enter the dungeon is just sad
However, if the players have a way to know where the dungeon entrance is, and B line for it, don't have them encounter the whole forest as you planned, but the quantum ogre can still be at the dungeon's entrance, because why would it not be ?
Yeah yeah useless encounter that brings nothing to the table and just uses ressources, though used ressources are a setup for later narrative tension when the dungeon boss is actually harder and there's real doubt about the combat's outcome (also because one combat per long rest is a fucking horror to handle in dnd, digging the martial caster gap even deeper)
So I quantum my ogres, my players don't know it, they don't feel it, and I don't want to prep an ogre encounter (and by that I don't just mean placing an ogre on a map and saying roll initiative, it's something interesting I took time to imagine and prep) for players to unknowingly walk right past it without ever knowing there was a possibility of encountering an ogre. What if it's not an ogre (cause honestly who gives a shit about some needless battle encounter, what dm forces to impose a battle with three goblins) but someone part of a family that has ostracised one party member, an interaction that would reveal a lot about this player's background, mindset, explain why they're adventuring, rich in roleplay ? Imagine missing that cause you decided to go through the forest and not the plains. Pretty fucking sad. And it's a good thing if the dm decides to "force" this encounter by deciding where this encounter will happen after the players make the (uninformed) decision on which path to take
The point is to give the illusion of a coherent world where things are in one place at a time, not actually manage the position of everyone and everything at all times. I don't lose anything by having my ogres be quantum. Randomly choosing to walk into the third clearing (or rolling randomly) and encountering the ogre anyways isn't removal of player agency, it's story management. Pcs head into the forest, fight ogre, talk to dryad, find dungeon entrance. Does it matter if things can't go another way if this is the most satisfying order of events ? As long as the illusion holds, everyone's happy. And even if the illusion is broken, and they know things happen as I want them to happen, isn't it the same thing as flipping a face down card to see what's on the other side ? Isn't it also removing player agency to just have a roll decide what they encounter ? You're comparing the quantum ogre to railroading, and I'll agree it can devolve into that, preparing an ogre encounter and placing it in front of your players is not railroading. It's just being smarter in adventure prep and not preparing a separate encounter for every separate direction they could walk towards and wasting 90% of them no matter what, because unless I spend the whole two weeks between sessions preparing my campaign and doing nothing else, I won't have time to do that.
I'll quantum my ogres and we'll have fun put your hand away
it's always bad.
If players can't miss certain things, then there's no joy in discovering anything
@@mnmnrt You're invited to explain how
@@TaberIV I didn't say everything had to be unmissable. Some things are there to reward players if they get smart, but some things will be encountered no matter what, because they're important. Imagine missing a plot point, information, or some other stuff, because when you looked at the map of the forest without knowing what was were you failed to encounter the dryad that would tell you about the dungeon's master and its weak points
@@grogmadman522 if my decisions don't matter, why should I show up? I'd have more agency in Diablo.
I am curious. Is making sure the group meets a rival group fine if I then change the encounter based on the party decisions. I guess is a fated encounter different or just me deluding myself
I think if you prepare that the rival group is currently in this location (however specific, be it down to the numbered room or just the general area) you're not forcing anything.
I like putting rival parties on a random encounter table personally. Depending on when PCs run into them early in an adventure or as the loot's being divided up can really affect what's gonna go down between both parties, rather than me planning "and then the rivals will show up the second the PCs loot the treasure room."
I love the implication that the dnd logo is just sitting across from you at the table lmao
Additional note for newer DMs: Once your players realise you are doing this they will become completely disengaged with your world and feel betrayed by you (because you did in fact betray them! You fooled them into thinking their choices mattered), there is no better way to destroy player engagement (fudging dice rolls is a close second), and it is not easy to earn it back. This is also a general life lesson, once you destroy someones trust in you, it is incredibly difficult to earn it back and in a lot of cases it is simply impossible to get it back.
Also to clarify a little there is nothing wrong with having encounters laid out in a sequence. For instance in the video with the forrest, if it is a single forrest path and heading down it you first meet an ogre then a dryad and finally find the dungeon entrance. The bit that causes the issue is presenting the players with fake choices (which way do you go?), so if you want a sequence of encounters go for it just don't pretend like the players also have agency while you do it (and recognise that you are indeed taking their agency away and too much of this is become what people mean when they say "rail roading")
Yeah, that would be really boring to have an ogre for both terrains - I probably give them a bandit ambush in the forest with a fallen tree and cover. The mountain terrain would be probably a surprise harpy witch with difficult terrain and a flying, spell-casting enemy - probably even an RP encounter at the beginning (not-good-aligned quest or fight a higher level enemy in tough terrain). Is there still a combat encounter? yes, but the encounter is different and the nature of the combat is also different. Also players can make a partially informed choice if they consider what dangers come from combats based on the terrain.
hey dude, im a brazillian dude who loves your channel, could you make a video about nice and cheap acessories for playing rpg in general? 1 dollar of yours is like, 5 Reais (the brasillian currency) so some cheap things (or even DIY) would help me a lot and i think that it would help others too. Im asking to you bcs i trust your content (its funny, well written and informative) :D.
(my english is horrible lol)
My campaign has two systems for quests. I use a linear main quest, and a bunch of nonlinear side quests. Each side quest can tie into the main campaign and even gives clues that you otherwise wouldn't have found inside the main campaign to help you. So there's a lot of extra stuff to do and I sort of just math out where each location is when in the campaign that would happen and just link those locations into the document to the main campaign. It's more or less a open world but always ends up in the main campaign.
Using this system my players decided to follow an ice elemental from one of the side quests far beyond where they should have been and into almost the end game area of the main campaign, even though i told them they had lost those tracks long ago. They keep going like this they're going to end up at the BBEGs doorstep and his army and probably get killed for it. But this is okay because I wouldn't mind starting a new one.
I've fallen victim on multiple occasions to the trap that my story is more important than the players' agency. I must remember to embrace the chaos!
Professor DM told me to say something in the comments section of videos I like. You're welcome. Also, in your next video can you say "I'll get you Penelope Pitstop". It would make this child of the 70s very happy.
Thank you again for making these videos! I watched basically everything on your channel since I was making my first ever Oneshot and wanted to be a great DM, I definitely learned some things and my players really liked it! So, thank you again!
If I didn't keep a menagerie of quantum ogres, my players would never do anything lol. I try giving them a sandbox, but they ask me for railroad tracks 😂
I think the insidious nature of quantum ogres is that the players start reading every scenario as a linear adventure. While linear adventures are not may favorite to play or run, they aren't inherently bad, nor are they the same as railroading. However, when you take parts of the game that are non-linear by design and linearize them behind the scenes, the players will find out sooner or later the true structure of the game
I used to sleep on them, but delving into the OSR really showed me just how amazing random tables are. Now they’re one of my favorite tools for creating and running adventures.
How are random tables good for decisions? I would use them for ideas, not decisions
@@davidsantos1299 A lot of random tables, like ones for names or random encounters can help you with coming up with things on the fly in game. I usually don’t prep much and do a lot of improvisation at the game table, and random tables give me the ability to do that instead of just bullshitting on the spot.
@happy-kh4uk yes, random tables help you improvise, but if people are complaining about taking away player agency, random tables don't give the players more agency
Like you, I tend to prioritize player agency, but in certain types of campaigns that can make prep a nightmare. Sometimes certain story beats and whatnot are in fact needed. As awful as it feels when your dm railroads the whole campaign for the sake of the dm's story, it also sucks when the story isn't going anywhere. Because of this, a quantum ogre scenario is sometimes extremely useful. For example, I'm writing a campaign right now which I plan to be entirely open, but still have certain story beats so that the story of the campaign remains consistent. One technique I'm using for this is a bottleneck, where players won't be able to pass a certain point before completing three other objectives. The players can tackle these three objectives in any order they want, which will very much allow for player agency. On the other hand, the final encounter of each of these three objectives has a necessary order for the sake of certain story aspects. If I were to just switch the three bosses depending on what order they go in, the players would be able to tell. Instead, I switch certain attacks and loot and whatnot for the order to work, without making the players feel like they have no agency.
I think the distinction to make is that the illusion of player agency is just as good as actual player agency. As long as the players think that everything they're doing matters, they'll have more fun. Of course there should always be truth to that, but I think there is a time and place for certain things that technically remove player agency.
5:24. I need to think about what that means. Must be meaning that there are a lot more "B category" DMs out there.
What do you mean by "player agency"? Is that the whole thing you described or is there something more to it? Of course I have to highlight things to my players and guide them. There must be some level of railroading especially to beginner players. I mean I have 10 years of XP as DM and it was like 6 years ago that I discovered that no matter what the DM wants, the party would do the opposite even if directly told not to.Oh... that is not DND experience :)
I grew up in the church of, if you do enough exposition and foreshadowing, you won't even get to use quantum ogres.
Something players can and sometimes _should_ do, will quickly spell out bad business for the DM if he/she abuses Quantum Ogres. It's called "backtracking", and it involves going both to Zig and to Zag at some point or another. If the DM only prepared one encounter and two/more possible paths for that one encounter (the illusion of choice), what's he/she gonna put on the other path once that encounter is cleared? The example you used with the three clearings is interesting because it is more subtle, there are actually several encounters prepared and the DM is "only" shuffling the order, it's less likely to be noticed unless it's a recurring pattern.
I myself only use quantum hooks. Quest hooks to be precise. I will have them see a certain NPC, event or item in a non-specific part of the city depending on where they're going, because I can't expect them to be at a precise time and place within a big settlement in a bigger world, and I don't want them to accidentally skip all the adventures I've planned out. But then it's their choice if they want to follow said trail, or look for something else. If a Hook failed to interest them the first time, I'm not bothering to repeat it later. I'll just try to fish them with a new Hook. They're quantum because they could be happening in the slums, the market, or the palace, it's usually not very relevant where they stumble upon the Hook (and I can improv a bit to make it more context-friendly), but I like to think I'm not taking away any player agency, since they're not forced to interact or intervene if they don't want to.
Your quantum hooks are similar to my Schrödinger's Scenarios.
It's stuff I've prepped, I just don't know EXACTLY where/when it's going to show up. And all they are is the Inciting Incident/location, not a "and then this happens, and then THIS will happen, and then THIS happens after that!"
How they are handled and where it'll go from there is up to my players.
Oh, now you're just teasing me, putting the OSE book in plain view... I'm so close to that homebrew system of yours, and yet, so far away...
I'll put it up on the Ko-Fi just for you ❤️
@@DeficientMaster OH HELL YEAH BROTHER
How quickly you are becoming the Omni-Deficient Master. This one was a quickie, but quality-quickie all the way
This is the first RUclips channel I actively follow and check constantly for new videos. I hope my vapid comments help the money metrics in your favor.
Use a stack of 3x5 cards. When the players draw a card with an ogre, they can choose to fight it, talk to it, or avoid it. No matter their choice, tear the card up in front of them. They'll know they won't meet that ogre again, and will start to choose strategically.
Deficient getting the algorithm boost of his life from this one guy in the comments crusading against quantum ogres
These videos have been my latest addiction
3:39 Up right. Look, it's an Beholder!
This has quickly become my favorite D&D channel
Question: Does this mean that preparing for a non-quantum ogre style of play requires a much larger amount of preparation? If players can go x-ways then instead of making 1 encounter you make x encounters? Is there a solution where player agency is not undermined while reducing number of encounters as well? I am open to any kind of advice really.
I keep a handful of quantum ogres and Schrodinger's scenarios at the ready but mostly just use them to help moderate the game session's length or buff up or wear down my players. I don't fudge dice since I roll in the open but sometimes I want to help them get through the adventure, these types of encounters help me nudge the fates in their favor.
Where did you get the hats for the Peeples!? Those are so cool.
That intro cracked me up directly xD The sponsor explained the why :)
Well, in the forest path or mountain path scenario, I could totally get behind having a quantum ogre, the situation of the encounter just should be different - and the players should be told how their decision shaped the encounter
Lets say they go the mountain path, which is a bit harder to navigate, but they might suprise the ogre, who is distracted, as he is waiting to throw rocks at people who go through the forest - the players now immediately know, that they evaded an encounter where they would have to fight the ogre at range, but now they're very close to him and that's potentially more dangerous, but they can maybe sneak by or somehow push him down the mountain. So its the same enemy, but not the same encounter, depending on the players decisions
I get around this problem by not running D20 Framework games (D&D, Pathfinder) anymore, because games with low prep and that are easier to improvise in (Powered by the Apocalypse, Forged in the Dark, Dragonbane, Year Zero Engine) just make it easier for me to let the narrative the players are building do the driving.
90% of the issues with D&D are solved by... getting away from D&D.
I try to steer away from quantum ogers however it was useful when I told the players about 3 dungeons on the map and only had one prepared.
My dog heard the squeaky noise from telling players they can play however they want and brought me their squeaky toy to play with haha
Quantum Ogre is such a weird phenomenon I never understood. Why people even give players a pointless choice to begin with? Using the same example, they already made a choice to go and fight the ogre in the forest. Why distract them with random encounters or pointless choices like "do you want to investigate the bushes on the left or right" if those choices don't matter to the adventure. Just let them find and fight the ogre and if there is anything interesting you prepared as well, let them find that too.
Okay, where did you get all the helmets? Also, Drakkenhype!
I discovered your videos last week and now you are one my favorites DM channels! I love your videos.
Thinking about it, I would say it's a tool of last resort.
Good prep and sometimes also subtle guiding should be able to eliminate the need for them in the vast majority of situations.
Hmmm... That said...
In the example of picking two different directions, it could be very reasonable to have the same enemy encounter regardless of which path was taken.
I wouldn't necessarily say that the players' choice was undermined, as the "payoff" to the choice is likely further on.
Oh, or it could be that the party was being tailed, and they encounter the friend or foe regardless of the path.
Not every choice needs to result in _everything_ being different.
Still, though. The exception, not the rule.
Don't treat it like the hammer even if every problem could be a nail... if you catch my drift.
"On the far wall, you see two plain-looking doors made from roughly-cut wood. You see no signs of locks on the doors."
"I open the left door."
"The door swings open as you turn the doorknob. The room is utterly _filled_ with spiders. Many start to quickly skitter from the doorway."
"Ah! I quickly open the right door!"
"As the second door swings open, countless spiders scurry forth, as your eyes behold another room filled waste-deep with spiders."
"Why are there so many spiders!?"
"Mate, it's literally called the spider house. What were you expecting?"
Sometimes it makes sense to use a "quantum" encounter that doesn't rely on the player's agency however. For example If an NPC is moving around in the world and is expected to encounter the players in various locations, then quantum that NPC. Because it actually makes sense that they'd be encountered literally at any point, so there's no deception or "shrodinger's" element to that encounter: it just happens because that's what's occurring in the world. The NPC stumbles upon the players and the encounter proceeds from there. This makes the world feel believable and lived in: the players choices matter, obviously, but the world is going to be boring if all that ever happens is if the players do stuff. It's not a believable world if the players can tell things only happen if (to use a video game analogy) the objects in question are rendered.
Okay, but the most serious question, where do I get those Peeples hats?
6:49 your welcome for causing the awkward gap between the texts
(I didn't realize it was the full name)
Has anyone ever tried making a statblock for what a Quantum Ogre would be?
I perfectly know what it is, but since the very first time I heard it I can’t stop thinking the name is too pompous to let it be an idea only.