Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-08-04, 11:12 PM	Camping for the night and surviving the night is as classic as D&D gets, especially at lower levels. But I want to make sure I ran it right! I also want to make sure the PCs can benefit from your tips, something along the lines of "Camping for the Night: An adventurer's checklist for making it through the night." I plan to have NPCs provide some of these tips, or if there are a LOT of mistakes in running the encounter below, I will most likely want to "rewind" and re-run the encounter so that it's totally fair. So please (civilly) critique the orc encounter below - what did the DM do incorrectly or could do better or simply missed, and what could the characters have done differently as well. Thanks very much in advance. *Very quick two-paragraph background...* Last night, we played the first session of a new Realms campaign set in Thesk in the Unapproachable East. The party (starting at 2nd level) left the safety of Phent, a large town, headed for the Thesk Mountains in search of adventure, specifically a somewhat displaced and supposedly enchanted Rashemi berserker lodge they heard about that caught their interest. They left Phent shortly after dusk, and for the night, I rolled a "hit" encounter chance under "settled" column since they would still close to Phent. An ogre came up on the Thesk chart in the UE book (EL 1-5), and with almost one casualty, they took the ogre down. Which made sense, since it counted as a very difficult encounter (CR 3 creature vs. EL 2 party = Very Difficult encounter = 1-4 EL higher than the party's EL, per the DMG). *And now on to the encounter...* The terrain on the way to the Thesk mountains from Phent is mostly open: somewhat uneven plains, short grasses, hard and rocky dirt, with an occasional boulder or tree. So, cover and shelter are rare, although movement speed is otherwise unhindered. Soon after their fight with the ogre, it was time to set up camp, so the party paired up for watches. The gnome bard and the gnome rogue/illusionist and his owl familiar decided to take first watch. The half-orc barbarian and human rogue would take second. The gnome bard decided to douse his torch - which he had lit to guide them since leaving Phent - when they finished setting up camp and the half-orc and human went to sleep. Full moon, weather was cool, calm, and clear - it was the first day of Eleint (~1st day of September). During the first gnome watch, I rolled up another encounter "hit." It produced 5 blood orcs - which are very similar to standard orcs except they are LE, use heavy flails typically, and work for Thayan red wizards as loyal bodyguards that the wizards actually "create" by magical baptism. The blood orc warriors in UE are specifically CR 1 each. Surprise Round Anyway, I decided that due to the lack of light source (no more torch), that the blood orcs were spotted by the two gnomes and owl only within 10' - essentially right upon them. Now that both sides were aware of eachother, I decided there was no surprise round. So I had the two gnomes and the blood orcs roll initiatitive. Round 1: The PC party decided that top priority was to wake up the half-orc barbarian and human rogue. So, winning initiative, the gnome ill/rog woke up the half-orc, who was now prone, but conscious. I ruled it was a standard action for the gnome to wake up the half-orc. Then the blood orcs went. Three attacked the gnome bard, and hurt him badly. The other two orcs attacked the prone half-orc barbarian, gaining a +4 to their roll since their target was prone. They hurt him enough to send him bleeding into unconsciouness and dying. None of the orcs had problems seeing their enemies, bc they have darkvision, so no reason for them to worry about concealment miss percentages due to lack of light. Next, the human rogue tried to "wake up on her own." I ruled she could do this with a Will save vs. DC 15. This part I wasn't sure about, especially since fighting had broken out, so I gave her a +2 circumstance bonus to the save since fighting had started. Unfortunately, she failed, and kept sleeping. Finally the gnome bard went, and was threatened by a total of 4 of the 5 orcs. In a tough situation he simply attacked, not having too many advantageous places to step to. He missed. Round 2: Gnome ill/rog fires his Lantanese pistol at an orc, stepping away, but missing it. Even if he had hit, the orc was 5' away, and the orc would benefit from concealment miss chance, since the gnome couldn't see in the dark. Blood orcs attack. Gnome bard falls. Two characters down now. They move to threaten the gnome ill/rog and prone human rogue. The human rogue rolls a Will save to wake up again. This time I ruled she got a +4 bonus to her save, the +2 circumstance bonus stacking for each additional combat round beyond the first. She woke up, but was prone, and I ruled she could take no other actions since she spent the round "trying to wake up." Round 3: Gnome ill/rog decides its time to run, nearly certain it's the only option for the remaining surviving party members now, vowing to come back for them. He risks two AoO's as he runs. Luckily, neither orc catches the gnome rog/ill, and he runs a total of 80' in a straight line way (20' base x4) in one of the few directions that provoke only two AoO's. The 5 orcs now descend upon the prone human rogue: five attacks with a +4 bonus since she's prone, and three hit, knocking her out and crushing her dead. Round 4: The gnome ill/rog continues his escapre, running another 80' in the darkness away from the horrible defeat and the certain slaughter. The blood orcs act. I decide that being LE, and serving a Thayan red wizard, they let the gnome go, and decide not to give chase, instead choosing to first make sure the fallen adventures are all dead and then loot them. Not afraid of the fleeing gnome being any threat, they can take their time efficiently finishing off and looting their enemies. Because armor takes a lot more time to take off, and bc it's usually bulky and/or heavy, those are the only items the blood orcs decide to leave behind on the three corpses. End of Encounter / Fallout The blood orcs move on, having made quite a score for their Thayan master - healing potions, a few hundred platinum and gold coins, and several useful weapons, mundane items, and rations. Painfully ironic, from the adventuring party's perspective. The gnome ill/rog waits a few minutes and then makes his way back to where he ran so furiously from. About 500' away (this is how far he wanted to run), I rule he has a little trouble finding his friends in the darkness (he has no torches or light source). So it takes several minutes longer than it would have in daylight. (I wasn't sure how to rule him possibly getting lost in finding the battle site). When he finds them finally, he moves off about 50 paces and tries to get some sleep. Fortunately, no encounters come up this time on my rolls, and he sleeps. In the morning, he uses his tent to make a makeshift guirne (sp?) and drag along the human rogue back to town - he can't take everyone so he chooses her. I rule he now moves only at 15' while doing so, and it takes him most of the day to get back to Phent. He makes it to the safety of Phent without another coming up, meeting up with a few guards, who he convinces with Diplomacy to help him recover his friends' bodies. They do this, and then the gnome ill/rog then goes to work out a deal using Diplomacy again, at the Temple to Waukeen to bring back his dead friends, and succeeds in doing so. The party is deeply in the temple's debt, and the adventure will continue from here next session.
A Flying Buddha 09-08-04, 11:26 PM	Listen checks man! Can't forget the listen checks! The gnomes should have probably *heard* 5 orcs coming up on them and done something about it. The sleeping rogue should have heard the battle (I forget now what it is.... like DC 0 for hearing a battle but -5 for sleeping, so anything higher than a 5 (not to mention listen bonus) should have let her awake and help out right away. As far as tips go, don't pair up the two tiny gnomes together. This shuold be common sense. If there are 2 tough chars in the party, one of them should be on watch while the other sleeps. If anyone can cast light it should be cast as soon as an encounter happens at night, to get rid of the miss chances (and in this case dazzle the orcs to boot.) I don't think you need to redo the encounter necissarily, but maybe give them a chance to recover some of their gear if it would make you feel a little more fair.
The Odd One 09-09-04, 12:00 AM	A bit harsh, in my opinion. From the sounds of it, they weren't a particularly optimized group, missing a cleric, and having no full casters (well, the bard, but Prestidigitation doesn't count :) ). With a party that DOESN'T qualif as standard, 5 Blood Orcs being sent in should have been predictably difficult. At low levels, physical threats are by far the most dangerous of any. As a DM who doesn't use Random Encounters almost ever, I'm certainly not the foremost expert in how this should have been handled, but even toning it down one Blood Orc would have made the encounter difficult. Definately read up on standard adventuring skills like Listen, Spot, Search, and such, just to make sure your doing things more according to the book. Now, with all the critiquing out of the way, I have to say, you definately did a solid job at being a good DM. You used Rule 0 and stuck to it. You were firm with your decisions, however with enough sympathy so that the players don't think you're trying to kill them. Also, you handled the ressurections well; it got the characters back with some plot hooks attatched. Essentially, I think you did well with what you know. However, I do advise that you take note of exactly what abilities your group's party has, and to try to keep the encounters at at least a managable level.
The Odd One 09-09-04, 12:12 AM	I somehow managed a double post. :)
Nom 09-09-04, 01:01 AM	Apologies if you're not using standard rules, but there's something here that strikes me as odd... Full moon, weather was cool, calm, and clear - it was the first day of Eleint (~1st day of September). Anyway, I decided that due to the lack of light source (no more torch), that the blood orcs were spotted by the two gnomes and owl only within 10' - essentially right upon them.I'm a human with average vision, and I can spot large shapes at a couple of hundred metres under a full moon. Let alone gnomes, who can "see twice as far as a human in starlight, moonlight, torchlight, and similar conditions of poor illumination. He retains the ability to distinguish color and detail under these conditions". Unless the orcs were actively using Hide checks against the gnomes' Spot checks, encounter distance should be a lot greater than only 10 foot. And, as pointed out, don't forget the Move Silently and Listen checks. Note also that the CR 1 rating assumes an "average" encounter situation. In this case, you have a completely unprepared level 2 party against an EL 6 encounter. That's TPK territory. Finally, you need to consider at what point and how the orcs detected the party. The "pre-encounter" period can be almost as important as the encounter itself. Skill checks are particularly relevant in this period. I'd agree with "The Odd One" that you did a pretty good job of winging it. However, it's always a good principle to prepare as much as possible before introducing encounters in a non-standard environment. If it's obvious that certain rules are going to be relevant (eg sleeping characters, night vision) then you should have reviewed the rules thoroughly before introducing the encounter.
Joe Khol 09-09-04, 07:46 AM	I personally think that you made one mistake which was the root of all your problems - randomly rolling encounters. With the 'encounter table' type system laid out in the DMG (which sounds like the kind of thing you are using) you are bound to roll a TPK eventually and, as your example shows, running away isn't always an option. I've always felt that randomisation in this way is a bad thing - the DM should always keep control of everything beyond the PCs own actions for the benefit of all involved. To avoid this kind of thing in the future, determine your 'random' encounters before the session. You can roll them if you want or make them up yourself but it gives you the time to both make them a reasonable challenge and also maintain continuity and campaign style. You can even slip a bit of your main plot into them if you want.
The Shaman 09-09-04, 08:15 AM	I personally think that you made one mistake which was the root of all your problems - randomly rolling encounters. With the 'encounter table' type system laid out in the DMG (which sounds like the kind of thing you are using) you are bound to roll a TPK eventually and, as your example shows, running away isn't always an option. I've always felt that randomisation in this way is a bad thing - the DM should always keep control of everything beyond the PCs own actions for the benefit of all involved. To avoid this kind of thing in the future, determine your 'random' encounters before the session. You can roll them if you want or make them up yourself but it gives you the time to both make them a reasonable challenge and also maintain continuity and campaign style. You can even slip a bit of your main plot into them if you want. Excellent advice. :thumbsup::thumbsup:
Lxarth 09-09-04, 10:32 AM	It has already been said about illumination, but Ill just say it again. If it is full moon thats alot of light in and area like: The terrain on the way to the Thesk mountains from Phent is mostly open: somewhat uneven plains, short grasses, hard and rocky dirt, with an occasional boulder or tree. So, cover and shelter are rare, although movement speed is otherwise unhindered. So how is it the Orcs managed to get withing 10' of the party? Also, it seems that the Orcs knew where to go, yet the Gnome had a hard time backtracking to his camp. I think you made the mistake here, you need to understand what CR and ECL is...and you need to plan before you play. Why put 5 Orcs at the party...oh, its because you rolled it. If its an ambush like what happened you should have made it just 2 orcs, maybe a third with a crossbow out in the darkness. The party at least had a watch, granted they had the two non-fighter up at the same time, but you should be able to see 5 Orcs in the area well before they are ten feet away.
Stuntman 09-09-04, 12:05 PM	I personally think that you made one mistake which was the root of all your problems - randomly rolling encounters. I agree with Joe here. I tend to know where all of the encounters will take place and when in my adventures. I make sure there is a reason for each encounter and it fits within the adventure or location that the PC's are in.
Leagle 09-09-04, 12:30 PM	Why put 5 Orcs at the party...oh, its because you rolled it.. Don't be so scathing. Granted, the orcs would have been tough, but in good conditions the party would have had a better than fighting chance. Notonly that, but there is a difference between creeping upon chars and fleeing in terror in the middle of the night. Somebody is bound to lose their way some of the time. *I'd like to point out however that CR does not take into account half the party being asleep. *Also, listen checks. Prior to the encounter as well as to wake up. (-10 to checks for being asleep.) The lighting is also a point worthy of mention. While it is possible to see shapes from quite a distance, it is extremely easy to miss things in the shadows. Our moon can sometimes be bright enough to make seeing at night a walk in the park when the land is flat and unobstructed, but even the slightest dip can hide things. The lack of light source should have been more of a benefit to the watch however, as a fire really does blind you to the rest of the night. All in all, you did passably well, but should make sure you include those spot (and most important, listen) checks in your situations in future. If I had been the survivor I would have waited considerably more than 5 minutes. P.s. Do not restart the encounter. I hop[e the players are not too peeved, but if you start backing down to anger (if indeed they are angry as opposed to simply disappointed) you will only give them further cause if you foster the idea that it was *your* fault. You lose credability and the game loses fun. Perhaps a similar encounter in the near future to give both you and your (undoubtably more cautious) players a boost in confidence. :)
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-09-04, 12:47 PM	Thanks for everyone's advice so far. Here are the big things I've noticed I could have done better, from a technical, rules-based standpoint: IMPROVEMENTS *Visibility for everyone should have been better - moonlight was present, so I have to look up how much light that really counts as, and determine encounter distance accordingly. *Listen checks in addition to Spot checks to notice the approaching orcs at a further encounter distance due to better lighting conditions (moonlight) than I thought existed. *Move Silently and Hide in Shadows checks opposed to the Listen and Spot checks; I had never decided for certain if the orcs were "sneaking about," although I played it as if they did. *Run and read up on all "sleeping and waking up" rules correctly, and the associated penalties to Listen shecks. COMMENTS ON EL & RANDOM ENCOUNTER TABLES I'm surprised everyone is as anti-random encounter table as they are. For three reasons: First, the EL of the orc encounter was 5 (five CR 1's), meaning it was +3 EL highter the party's average level of 2. This means it counts as a "Very Difficult" encounter (DMG p. 51-52). The result in actual play was that they did beat the ogre, and one character did almost die - exactly like the DMG says a "Very Difficult" encounter usually goes. Second, using the Thesk encounter table in UE made sense to me. Encounters occur 12% chance per hour, as I decided they were in the "Settled" area of Thesk, meaning close to civilization. The Thesk encounter table covers EL's 1-5. That means 20% of the Thesk encounter table on there is "Easy" or "Easy if handled properly" per the DMG. Another 20% of encounters count as "Challenging." So 40% of the encounters the party could handle well enough, and the last 60% count as "Very Difficult," specifically 1-3 EL higher than the average party level of 2. A few encounters at the various EL's were not hostile, combat-oriented ones - but only a few, say 5% of the table. So here's where the DMG discussion on "Tailored vs. Status Quo Encounters" on p. 48 of the DMG comes in. A good adventure and campaign has both of these. The tailored encounters are more suited to the parties' skills and abilities, where the DM purposely designs them as such. Status quo encounters are what makes the world more real - Thesk area encounters ARE the Thesk encounter table, regardles of the partys' level or make-up. I did talk to the players specifically about this before the campaign and session started, so everyone knew there would be a mix of encounters that suited them better (i.e. with two rogues in the party, I'd add more trap encounters, for example, and feature more cosmopolitan encounters), as well as encounters that just are what they are bc of where and what they are in the world. And to me, that means using the encounter table provided for a given area of the world - in this case, Thesk. Thanks again very much for everyone's civil feedback. I'm considering rerunning the encounter just bc of the lighting conditions being much different, and the listen checks not being made (I did make Spot checks, but I started the encounter at very close encounter distance bc I assumed lighting was very poor). Then again, the players are disappointed, not angry, with how the encounter turned out, especially since they had beaten an ogre earlier that night. The feel they made some big mistakes, like how they set up watch, and not buying horses to get them to their destination much faster - that same night if they went by horse. I didn't think of the "losing credibility" thing like Leagle mentioned, if we did do a do-over. I'll think about that too. Thank you!
Phrennzy 09-09-04, 01:47 PM	Don't rerun it. No rewinds.
justind dm 09-09-04, 01:57 PM	I think you did good, and as long as your players are satisfied, that is what the game is about. I agree with previous posters, the gnomes should have seen and heard the orcs before 10' (listen and spot checks). I would also rule that the gnomes could scream (as a free action) thus greatly improving the rogues attempts to wake up. You mentioned a pistol type weapon (gunpowder?) and if this is the case, that would have awoken any sleeping characters. I don't necessarily disagree with random encounters, but I think you should have dropped a couple of orcs off of that as soon as you rolled it - after all, they had just been hurt by the ogre. Something to keep in mind with random encounters, you need to have a reason for them being there. Were the orcs you rolled trailing the characters to loot them, or where they just in the area and happened to stumble onto the camp? If that the latter is the case, I would rule the orcs were not attempting to move silently, so the gnomes would get bonuses to their listen checks (in addition to the racial +2) so the gnomes may have had time to rouse the other players and draw their weapons. Of course, with the full moon and the orcs blindsight the orcs would have spotted the camp from a good distance, but the same holds true for gnomes (who would see fine in moonlight). I don't think I would have bothered with a miss percentage at all. Overall, it all worked out in the end, so no worries. I agree, don't replay the encounter unless that is something your players really want. You may allow them to meet up with some of those orcs in the future though, so they can kill them and get back some of their previous gear.
DragonsArt 09-09-04, 03:24 PM	Here are my comments: 1) A CR5 encounter is not always a CR5 encounter. Two Very difficult encounters back to back (meaning no rest) is like a CR 8 encounter (or higher). You gave them a very difficult encounter which tapped their resources, then gave another encounter. Bad mojo. 2) Orcs have darkvision, not low-light vision. The gnome (not to mention the owl) would have seen like near daylight on a full-moon, whereas the orcs would have normal human vision in the dark until they got within 60ft to use their darkvision. 3) It's a free action to shout. The gnome should have awaken the person and shouted, giving BIG bonuses to the other character's listen checks. 4) Prone characters still threaten and make AOOs. If the orcs moved around a prone character, he would still get AOOs. 5) What armor were the orcs wearing? Don't forget that armor check penalties affect HIDE checks. 6) Remember, an ENCOUNTER isn't neccessarily a combat. The gnome could have spotted the orcs in the distance without the orcs ever knowing where the party was and that would have been just as effective as making them tromp into the camp. Personally, I would re-run the encounter. Don't make it like a rewind... instead, have the gnome suddenly wake up from dozing and explain that he was just dreaming. Apparently SOMEONE was sending a vision... =) Then roll all the hide/spot/listen checks and re-run the encounter the way it should have been run. Don't be afraid to admit when you've blundered. We're all human and we all make mistakes. Just because the DM is never wrong, doesn't mean the DM is always right.
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-10-04, 01:41 AM	If I did rerun the encounter, and I'm 50/50, I do like the idea of making it "all a dream," and having the gnomes or the half-orc and human wake up at some point during the watch. Not a bad idea at all. Hmm...
eRaz0r 09-10-04, 02:28 PM	Whether you decide to re-run the encounter or not, I'd like to address the encounter system : At lower levels, more enemies are often more dangerous than one more powerful enemy of the same EL. Why ? Because you multiply the number of PCs under attack at any time. An Ogre is a dangerous foe, but he generally only attacks one person at a time. This can give the party much needed time to react and use tactics. By the time it takes down one character, the others have all had a chance to concentrate all their death on to him. Multiple opponents can split their attention amidst the whole party. This leads to each party member having to deal with their own assailant. With a level 2 rogue or mage vs a CR 1 Blood Orc, the rogue is at a distinct disadvantage, because a single successful swipe from the Orc can take out one party member. If the PCs are lucky enough to take out two opponents quickly, then the tide turns to their favour. But with a set of tough opponents, it's more likely to turn against them than for them. Such battles are much more likely to lead to TPK, because as each PC falls, his opponent is free to aid the other enemies against the remaining PCs. I definitely side against "random" encounters in most games. The Encounter tables are not fine-tuned enough to use. You need to have experience with DMing to know if a given random encounter will be a suitable challenge or not. A Random encounter is a bit of "background" to the setting. It's not a major plot point. It doesn't contribute anything to the story. Unless the PCs are travelling where they shouldn't, it shouldn't lead to TPK. You don't have to plot every encounter. Some random encounters should be ok. But not every one leads to combat. Perhaps the Orcs crept up on the PCs and just robbed them while they slept. Perhaps they took them prisoner to sell them as slaves elsewhere. And if you adhere to the tables, you need to exercise that Rule 0 judgement and say "enough of this" if you roll up two really hard encounters in a row, with no way for the PCs to avoid either of them.
Brknlf 09-10-04, 03:00 PM	I think you've had enough advice on the main topic, I just wanted to add onto some things that eRazOr said. Random encounter tables are indeed background for a setting. However, the OP did say they were following random rumors to see if there were berserkers or not. That sounds like an exploration/adventure type game, not a massive story-arc, save the world campaign. Random encounters work well with the exploration type of game where what the PCs do is really up to the PCs and not dictated by a pre-destined story-arc. That said, the background should of been considered. You said it was five blood orcs, who are spawned agents for the Red Wizards of Thay. This makes since, but you should of decided what the blood orcs were doing for the wizards before the encounter. It sounds to me like they were secretly on their way to Phent, maybe to contact other agents of Thay or they were sent to assist a Red Wizard in the area. Rolling a random encounter certainly doesn't mean that it has to involve combat, as has been pointed out. Why were they attacking the party then? Did their orders as Thayan agents include stopping to attack random camps in the middle of the night? As eRazOr has said, random encounters represent a living, breathing world outside of a story-arc. Personally, this is why I like to plan my own random encounter charts. When I put something down for a certain region, locale, time of year, whatever, I usually have an idea of what it is actually doing there. Out of all random encounters, I'd say only 5-10% are almost certianly going to be hostile, while 25% or so are certainly non-hostile with the rest being indifferent depending on how the party reacts to the encounter. Nothing wrong with the way that it went, aside from whats been said, but an more interesting way to have handled this would have been for the gnomes to spot the orcs sneaking across the country side in the middle of the night towards Phent; an intriguing random encounter that lets the players take initiative. Several things could have developed, one being the PCs hide and let them pace. They could have realized they were Thayan agents and tried to ambush them, they could have tried to trail them to see where they were going, they could have waited for them to pass and then notified local authorities of the presence of blood orcs so close to the city. If using random encounter, either decide why things are there when the tables are made or ... if using premade random encounter tables, make up reasons for the encounter occuring. Even if it happens randomly, having some idea of motiviation for the being/creature/thing encounter will help living up the encounter itself.
Stuntman 09-10-04, 04:12 PM	I would advise against redoing the encounter. The reason is that you set a bad precedence. Pretty soon you'll be rerunning a bunch of encounters because this or that was overlooked. I feel that I know the rules very well, but I do make the occasional mistake. However, this happens all of the time considering how complex D&D is. You know now what mistakes you made in that encounter, and it will be unlikely you will make the same mistakes again. You will probably make other ones. Things like this are unfortunate, but it is best to just move on. If you want to practice, you can redo the encounter for fun.
Vanigo 09-10-04, 04:29 PM	Another thing you seem to have overlooked is the owl. A regular owl has +14 to listen checks and +14 to spot checks in shadowy illumination, plus low-light vision. An owl familiar is at least that good, and possibly better. Even if the gnomes didn't notice the orcs, the owl should have had a very good chance.
Leagle 09-10-04, 04:43 PM	Then again, the players are disappointed, not angry... ...I didn't think of the "losing credibility" thing like Leagle mentioned, if we did do a do-over. I'll think about that too. As Stuntman said, redoing things sets a bad precedence, but if you can work around it then don't rule it out if you feel strongly for it. Just as long as you pay it mind when you make your choice. Like you have said, you can work around the issues. Don't let your players feel too bad though! It is okay to accept some responsibility in front of them, so they don't unjustly feel like failures. ;) Whatever happens, next time they will be more cautious (both as characters and players) and you will be more knowledgable of generic rules like ambiant light and skill checks.
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-10-04, 07:53 PM	I'm now leaning towards a compromise of how to continue the game and simultaneously "do over" the encounter - using the dream sequence plot device that DragonsArt suggested. It's an intriguing and original solution. Not only does it add the strange and mysterious question of "Why did I dream that?" or, if they make the leap, "Why would someone send me a vision of that?" The latter becomes a interesting long-term plot element, where I can have some unknown ally or even enemy be responsible for sending the vision, dream, or nightmare "warning." At the same time, it gives me the opportunity to run the encounter more soundly a second time around from a game rule standpoint. Especially using Listen checks (especially the owl's) in addition to Spot checks, and taking into the actually better lighting than I ran the first encounter having. Listen & lighting: those two things alone, run correctly, would have made a significant difference in that encounter. Unless somehow every check was failed miserably until the orcs were right upon them. Highly unlikely, but not impossible, given moonlight, the owl, etc. It's hard for me to ignore how poorly I considered those two elements of the encounter, and I want to do it right. If the PCs still have a difficult time, some die, or all die, so be it - and I'd still feel for the PCs, but I'd feel a lot more comfortable about the "fairness" and rules accuracy concerning how the encounter was run. So what does everyone think of the dream/nightmare/vision/sending approach? Do I stand to lose credibility as a DM this way compared to simply re-doing the encounter? Any other downside to it that you suggest I think about or watch out for? It would certainly make a nice twist and surpise for the players, if anything!
Leagle 09-11-04, 10:00 AM	So what does everyone think of the dream/nightmare/vision/sending approach? Do I stand to lose credibility as a DM this way compared to simply re-doing the encounter? Just be careful with dreams. I'm not too sure JR stepping out of the shower was very popular! It can work, but then, it can also just be plain silly.
Nom 09-11-04, 10:24 AM	My advice: consider it a "learning experience" and keep going. Doing things over just messes up the flow and leads to a search for "the perfect resolution".
Phrennzy 09-11-04, 01:51 PM	Personally I think the dream vision is a terrible idea. It reeks of "do-over". The damage is done, you have learned. Sometimes bad things happen to players. If you want to offset some of the damage, give them more treasure than normal on the next encounter or two, to offset the money lost for the Raise Dead spells, and to allow them to buy some new equipment to replace the stuff they lost. As for the lost level due to death, you might just give them that level back, admitting the mistake. That's a tough call. The problem with the dream/rewind and the 'giving the level back' is that there might be an expectation for similar treatment in the future.
DinubaBear 09-12-04, 07:42 AM	I think the dream is a terrific explaination! Except he should wake from the "Nightmare" and be shaken. (the lone gnome who survived had the dream). Where else but in a dream would Lowlight vision Gnomes who should be able to see as well as humans in daylight since the full moon be blind as a bat? Where else would he Alert Familiar Owl also be blind and inactive at night, being nocturnal by nature except in a dream? Where else but in a nightmare would I move so slow I could only wake a single companion as a full round action? Where else but in a dream would a gunshot fail to instantly wake the rogue who had to still struggle to wake on her own? Where else, but in a nightmare would I see a group of orcs work in hive-like coordination to effectively kill off my companions one by one. He wakes shaken, and notices his companion gnome is also dozing. Then, due to this warning sent to him in a horrific dream he notices the Bloodorcs Intently sneaking off on their mission for the Red Wizards. He has the warning that this will be a tough battle, and also that they are on an imprtant task that they should investigate & try to trail the orcs. This causes you to come up with a subplot for the orcs imprtant enough for this type of warning. I don't see it as a (Wasn't it Bobby instead of JR coming out of the shower?) Dallas - the whole season was a dream- episode. But a foreshadowing, more like the An American Wearwolf in London dreams. And it covers for you as a DM. There is no encounter unless the group starts it or is noisy. Let them follow the orcs & find out a bit of subplot!
Leagle 09-12-04, 12:35 PM	I I don't see it as a (Wasn't it Bobby instead of JR coming out of the shower?) Dallas - the whole season was a dream- episode. ! I was never a fan, wasn't it more than a season?
Remnant 09-12-04, 01:06 PM	Ahhh the random encounter- a classic D&D throwback element, right up there with clerics as walking first aid kits and halflings to use as shields! Not much in the way of mechanics advice to add- that has been taken care of. I would just re-think the "swarm-kill the sleeping guy" tactic in the future- from a metagame standpoint, it is very frustrating for the player. From a pracicality standpoint, even in the day, it is easy to miss someone laying prone on the ground in a cluttered camp sight- never mind the fact that there were still hostile party members fighting when they cleaved the two sleepers apart. Remember that the orcs do not know everything the DM knows.
pookha 09-12-04, 07:25 PM	Personally, I would just say, "I screwed it up. Let's just redo that combat. This is not something I would normally do, but it was my fault so you should not be penalized." As for the dream idea: I don't really like it, but that's just my personal preference.
Kruxx06 09-13-04, 11:55 AM	The way I happen to manage things in my campains is if either I, or my players end up doing something against the rules, or something completely off the wall like sending in a encounter thats way to tough we consider it and move on. The "do-over" method is something I would seriously adivse you do not do. Because if you do this one over, what happens with you make a mistake later on? If you don't draw the line on redoing stuff now, you'll end up doing it alot. DM's/Players make lots of mistakes, especually newer ones. That being said, you did a great job of recoving from it, and now the players have something that will imerse them in your world even more. As far as random encouters I am a big fan of them. They shouldn't *BE* the campain, or the majority of the campain, but aside from the campain itself it makes a good addition if used properly. Try making your own random encounter list before hand, or if you use the book's random encouter list, tailor it to the campain/party. Also, random encounters arn't always of the violent nature, it could be something such as meeting a traveler on the road, to hearing a pack of wolves howling in the distance.
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-13-04, 12:46 PM	Because if you do this one over, what happens with you make a mistake later on? If you don't draw the line on redoing stuff now, you'll end up doing it alot. That's the only risk that I'm worried about - setting up an expectation that the DM will "bail them out" again and again when I make a mistake. I was thinking the dream sequence-style do-over would mitigate that risk to a large degree though. That being said, you did a great job of recoving from it, and now the players have something that will imerse them in your world even more. Thank you, and I thank everyone here for their courteous critiques and observations. As for "immersing them even more," I'm honestly not that excited about them owing a temple of Waukeen thousands of gold right off the bat for raising them. Then again, even if the lighting and listen checks were done correctly, they could have been killed anyway, producing a similar result: one of them narrowly escapes, gets help, and convinces the local temple to bring his dead adventuring friends back. As far as random encouters I am a big fan of them. They shouldn't *BE* the campain, or the majority of the campain, but aside from the campain itself it makes a good addition if used properly. Try making your own random encounter list before hand, or if you use the book's random encouter list, tailor it to the campain/party. Also, random encounters arn't always of the violent nature, it could be something such as meeting a traveler on the road, to hearing a pack of wolves howling in the distance. I'm glad someone is! Honestly, I'm surprised at how many responses were "against" random encounters. The world isn't very real if every encounter in Thesk is with kobolds just bc the party is 2nd level. That's not believable, challenging, or fun. Like the DMG says, standard D&D encounters are a combination of Tailored and Status Quo encounters (DMG p. 48) - which I told the players would be the way it is up front. The random encounter tables in UE provide me with exactly what makes sense for Status Quo encounters in the associated geographic regions of the Unapproachable East (and not just monsters), with most of the work done for me. The encounters I personally write up are more tailored for the story, plot, role playing potential, and goals of the adventuring party. So I feel I have a good balance already of the types of encounters available. What I'll focus on now is lighting, listen, and sleeping-related rules, which are the three things I learned on this thread that I needed to specifically improve on from the blood orc encounter.
Kronk LaSworda 09-13-04, 01:13 PM	If I did rerun the encounter, and I'm 50/50, I do like the idea of making it "all a dream," and having the gnomes or the half-orc and human wake up at some point during the watch. Not a bad idea at all. Hmm... Actually, that is a bad idea. Rerunning stuff will cause the group to not trust your GMing. Making it "all a dream" is the worst cliche you could use. The party is now in debt (good motivation to adventure), they have a new enemy in the blood orcs (good plot hooks for you) and they will want revenge (further motivation). Learn from your mistakes and move on. That's the best way to become a better GM. Good luck with your group.
Phrennzy 09-13-04, 01:29 PM	As for "immersing them even more," I'm honestly not that excited about them owing a temple of Waukeen thousands of gold right off the bat for raising them. So give them more treasure on the next few encounters. Or let them repay the temple by clearing out a wererat infested area, which is a win/win for the party - they are relieved of their debt and get more expereince in the process.
Leagle 09-13-04, 01:48 PM	let them repay the temple by clearing out a wererat infested area, which is a win/win for the party - they are relieved of their debt and get more expereince in the process. Lol, don't you mean "..win/win for the party -they are relieved of their debt and get fast healing in the process!" :rofl:
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 02:00 PM	That's the only risk that I'm worried about - setting up an expectation that the DM will "bail them out" again and again when I make a mistake. I was thinking the dream sequence-style do-over would mitigate that risk to a large degree though. This isn't a matter of they got in over their heads and got creamed. This is a blatant case of the DM disregarding NUMEROUS rules (gnomes' vision, owl's vision, listen checks, opposed spot checks, armor check penalties for the orc's move silently and hide checks, etc.). This isn't the players fault at all. The DM messed up. Suck it up and re-do the encounter. Explain that if YOU mess up, it's your perogative to re-do. If THEY mess up, it's their perogative to roll a new character. As for "immersing them even more," I'm honestly not that excited about them owing a temple of Waukeen thousands of gold right off the bat for raising them. Then again, even if the lighting and listen checks were done correctly, they could have been killed anyway, producing a similar result: one of them narrowly escapes, gets help, and convinces the local temple to bring his dead adventuring friends back. It's a BIG (as in Tarresque BIG) metagaming/compensation for you as a DM to allow the characters of their level to convince the preists to perform THOUSANDS of gold worth of resurrections on someone they don't know. You are in essence saying... I will bail you, but I'll metagame to do it. Let's think this through. WHY would the temple resurrect them? What is the reasoning for beseeching their god's favor on (I assume) unbelievers who... literally... can't even take on a few orcs. I think that is a FAR, FAR worse tactic than replaying. I'm glad someone is! Honestly, I'm surprised at how many responses were "against" random encounters. The world isn't very real if every encounter in Thesk is with kobolds just bc the party is 2nd level. That's not believable, challenging, or fun. Very true, the world isn't very realistic if you only encounter things your level. However, realistically... not all encounters are going to be hostile and not all encounters are going to happen at ground 0... like you let this one happen. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a group of orcs wandering on the next ridge, barely visible. Or the PCs witness from the top of a trench, two hill giants wrestling far below. You've added flavor, shown that your world is dangerous... and the PCs walk away going... whew... glad we didn't run into THAT. I use this all the time and you'd be suprised at how many high flying dragons, rocs, etc. fly over the party and only one person notices and points it out. The PCs go "Oooo, Ahhh" and then continue the trek. Another thing to do for encounters... let the PCs run into the creatures BODY. Remember... there's always a bigger fish. The PCs walk away wondering: What killed it? Why was it here? WHERE is the thing that killed?! Yet another thing... drop the CR and drop the monsters hp. Who's to say the orcs are running from a battle where their master (the Red Wizard) was slain. They're beat up and ragged and can barely hold their morningstars. Then, drop their hp and describe their ragged battle worn look and make them fatigued. Run the encounter and see how much flavor it adds. See things go in the world without the PCs. Like the DMG says, standard D&D encounters are a combination of Tailored and Status Quo encounters (DMG p. 48) - which I told the players would be the way it is up front. The random encounter tables in UE provide me with exactly what makes sense for Status Quo encounters in the associated geographic regions of the Unapproachable East (and not just monsters), with most of the work done for me. The encounters I personally write up are more tailored for the story, plot, role playing potential, and goals of the adventuring party. They are guidelines. Don't use this as gospel. You are the DM. You keep the world realistic... but a realistic world is nothing if all the players are dead. Remember, you really have to ask yourself... if this potentially deadly RANDOM encounter (2 CRs above the PCs) really worth potentially ending the campaign? So I feel I have a good balance already of the types of encounters available. What I'll focus on now is lighting, listen, and sleeping-related rules, which are the three things I learned on this thread that I needed to specifically improve on from the blood orc encounter. You may have a false sense of balance since you let the PCs get slaughtered. Remember, CRs are based on all things being equal. If the PCs wander into a monster camp and all the monsters are asleep, the CR MUST be reduced to reflect the lesser challenge. Conversely, when the monsters wander into camp, the CR should be increased to reflect that the PCs are not ready and this represents a GREATER challenge. Good luck!
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 02:11 PM	Actually, that is a bad idea. Rerunning stuff will cause the group to not trust your GMing. Making it "all a dream" is the worst cliche you could use. The party is now in debt (good motivation to adventure), they have a new enemy in the blood orcs (good plot hooks for you) and they will want revenge (further motivation). Learn from your mistakes and move on. That's the best way to become a better GM. Good luck with your group. The party is in debt - The party is in debt because you metagamed and allowed them to convince a temple to spend THOUSANDS of gold worth of spells on a group of unlucky adventurers. THINK ABOUT THAT. If the temple does that for a group of no name adventure want-to-be's, do they ressurect EVERYONE? Every commoner? Local official? Little child? If so, you've taken away the fear of death. Why would anyone be afraid of dying if they can just run down to the local temple and get ressurected. Metagaming is a LOUSY way to compensate for a bad call. It's sets a REALLY bad precedent that the DM will bail them out. Learn from your mistakes and move on. That's the best way to become a better GM. Good luck with your group. That's the way to become a DM... not a GOOD DM though. Playing and dealing with the players fairly and honestly is the way to becoming a GOOD DM. So decide what type of DM you want to be... the evil overlord... or the beloved benefactor. Death to Tyrants!
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 02:32 PM	That being said, you did a great job of recoving from it, and now the players have something that will imerse them in your world even more. Sorry... but I have to STRONGLY disagree. The way you went about it was complete METAGAMING. It was only slightly better than the old ZEUS APPEARS, RESURRECTS YOU AND CAST GEAS ON YOU method. Let's face it... that's an even WORSE precedent to set, because you're telling the players "the DM will bail you out". Whereas, if you re-run the encounter and they die... you and they will both feel like the did their best by the rules... I've had characters die for numerous reasons... most I've felt good about, because I knew I had done my best and either I flubbed up or made a bad call or I died to let someone else in the party live. The ones I really recall with some bitterness are the ones in which the DM was a complete *ss and did something totally idiotic... because either he was stupid and thought throwing a werewolf against a group of 4 first level characters would be "fun" or because he personally associated with the BBEG and gave him all kinds of whacked out powers and immunities.
Kruxx06 09-13-04, 02:47 PM	The party is in debt - The party is in debt because you metagamed and allowed them to convince a temple to spend THOUSANDS of gold worth of spells on a group of unlucky adventurers. THINK ABOUT THAT. If the temple does that for a group of no name adventure want-to-be's, do they ressurect EVERYONE? Every commoner? Local official? Little child? If so, you've taken away the fear of death. Why would anyone be afraid of dying if they can just run down to the local temple and get ressurected. Metagaming is a LOUSY way to compensate for a bad call. It's sets a REALLY bad precedent that the DM will bail them out. That's the way to become a DM... not a GOOD DM though. Playing and dealing with the players fairly and honestly is the way to becoming a GOOD DM. So decide what type of DM you want to be... the evil overlord... or the beloved benefactor. Death to Tyrants! Perhaps the temple reserected the adventures because they too need something. They owe the temple a favor. One thing you are forgetting is a lvl 1 adventurer is above the average person. Even at lvl one, they are far above a commoner. So they got in a bad situation, and got owned. It happens. I don't believe it was metagaming, so long as the temple does collect upon that debt. The idea that because a few rules were overlooked, (There's a difference between misunderstanding rules, and intentionally breaking them) requires the encounter to be replayed is ludacris. No one has crystal clear knowlage of the rules, espcually people who haven't been playing forever. The important part it to address the misunderstood rules, and use them corrected (Or just houserule it) in the future. Going back and replaying the ecounter is the worst thing you can possibly do. BTW: Instead of making tons of replys in multiple posts -ON THE SAME TOPIC- how about just making one post?
PaladinKD 09-13-04, 02:53 PM	As for "immersing them even more," I'm honestly not that excited about them owing a temple of Waukeen thousands of gold right off the bat for raising them. Then again, even if the lighting and listen checks were done correctly, they could have been killed anyway, producing a similar result: one of them narrowly escapes, gets help, and convinces the local temple to bring his dead adventuring friends back. In my experience Temples often find better ways for adventurers to pay off debts than gold. :devil:
Karelzarath 09-13-04, 03:19 PM	You may have a false sense of balance since you let the PCs get slaughtered. Remember, CRs are based on all things being equal. If the PCs wander into a monster camp and all the monsters are asleep, the CR MUST be reduced to reflect the lesser challenge. Conversely, when the monsters wander into camp, the CR should be increased to reflect that the PCs are not ready and this represents a GREATER challenge. You are conflating Challenge Rating (CR) and Encounter Level (EL). CRs never change and are based on the average party encountering the monster in reasonable circumstances. EL takes into account number of monsters, environmental circumstances, party strength, etc. The EL gives you a gut-level idea of how overmatched the party will be, and I use it to alter the amount of experience and treasure I give out. It's in the DMG somewhere, but I can't find it in the SRD. Maybe I'm just blind?
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 03:48 PM	In my experience Temples often find better ways for adventurers to pay off debts than gold. :devil: True... but realistically.... temples don't just go around handing out THOUSANDS of gold worth of raise dead... which would drop them a level or reduce their CON by 2 if they're first level. The base price for a Raise Dead is 450gp plus 5000gp in diamonds. So that's roughly 15,000gp worth of diamonds the temple used. On what.... a few dispatched adventurers... which are a dime a dozen in a world where they can throw around 15,000gp without blinking an eye. You can rationalize it all you want, but realistically... it's NOT going to happen... even in a HIGH magic campaign because of the cost of the diamonds. How many years of tithes is that? How many temples could they build with that and spread the word of their god? In exchange for what? A few LOW level adventurers? It's metagaming... plain in simple...
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 03:49 PM	You are conflating Challenge Rating (CR) and Encounter Level (EL). CRs never change and are based on the average party encountering the monster in reasonable circumstances. EL takes into account number of monsters, environmental circumstances, party strength, etc. The EL gives you a gut-level idea of how overmatched the party will be, and I use it to alter the amount of experience and treasure I give out. It's in the DMG somewhere, but I can't find it in the SRD. Maybe I'm just blind? Oops... my bad. You're right... the CR was the same... but the EL was WAY up...
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 04:01 PM	Perhaps the temple reserected the adventures because they too need something. They owe the temple a favor. One thing you are forgetting is a lvl 1 adventurer is above the average person. Even at lvl one, they are far above a commoner. So they got in a bad situation, and got owned. It happens. I don't believe it was metagaming, so long as the temple does collect upon that debt. The idea that because a few rules were overlooked, (There's a difference between misunderstanding rules, and intentionally breaking them) requires the encounter to be replayed is ludacris. No one has crystal clear knowlage of the rules, espcually people who haven't been playing forever. The important part it to address the misunderstood rules, and use them corrected (Or just houserule it) in the future. Going back and replaying the ecounter is the worst thing you can possibly do. BTW: Instead of making tons of replys in multiple posts -ON THE SAME TOPIC- how about just making one post? No offense, but the average mercenary cost 2sp per day (per DMG) to hire. That means for 15,000 gp, you could hire 200 mercenars (7200gp), 100 cavalry mercenaries (7200gp) and 2 mercenary leaders (216gp) for a half a year. Let's be realistic... the temple isn't going do that. It's a waste of resources and is only done because they ARE players... which is metagaming.
Phrennzy 09-13-04, 04:21 PM	I hear what you're saying, Dragonsart, and you are right, it is metagaming. But personally, I would rather metagame than "do-over", just from a plot/roleplay point of view. Sure, it's unlikely that the Temple Raises us, but then we are in their back pocket until the debt is paid. I'd rather have that than the DM saying, okay, let's try this again. Rather than a do-over or metagame the temple, there is this. It never happened. No redo, no nothing. Everyone sets their character back to how it was when the fight with the blood orcs happened, and then they wake up refreshed and its the next day. The fight did not happen, no one died, etc. I as a player would rather have a "never happened" than a "redo".
PaladinKD 09-13-04, 04:32 PM	Let's be realistic... the temple isn't going do that. It's a waste of resources and is only done because they ARE players... which is metagaming. There's a fine line between Meta-gaming and plot development. I could turn this into a perfectly good storyline. The High Priest of the Temple is set to turn them away, after all, he could build a new wing on the temple for the cost of raising these insignificant adventurers. BUT, as he's about to give the gnome a polite but firm no, he remembers something. He asks, "What did you say this adventurers name was?" as he points at one of the deceased. The gnome tells him the name. He frowns, "It can't be, but yet... it must be." He seems excited now, "Was this man of the (Insert Family name here) family?" It turns out that the deceased has the bloodline necessary to retrieve the Holy Soup Ladle of Waukeen :D . A distant ancestor of his was a cook in the Grand Temple. He stole and hid the item in the caverns below the mountains of Thesk. Only a descendent of this man can retrieve it. The High Priest now has reason to raise the man (and his party if the man is smart and demands it.) Perhaps he sends with them a Priest of Waukeen (or some helpful magic) to assure that they return with the most holy soup ladle. Since the DM accidently helped to kill most of the party, this 1. makes up for it, 2. gives them some future help, and 3. helps to immerse them further into the story. AND, he didn't have to make a do-over, which I agree only makes it easier to do in the future and undermines the game. There is no reason the players should expect to be raised in the future, since they know this was a special circumstance - where the player was needed by the temple in question.
DragonsArt 09-13-04, 05:34 PM	There's a fine line between Meta-gaming and plot development. I could turn this into a perfectly good storyline. The High Priest of the Temple is set to turn them away, after all, he could build a new wing on the temple for the cost of raising these insignificant adventurers. BUT, as he's about to give the gnome a polite but firm no, he remembers something. He asks, "What did you say this adventurers name was?" as he points at one of the deceased. The gnome tells him the name. He frowns, "It can't be, but yet... it must be." He seems excited now, "Was this man of the (Insert Family name here) family?" It turns out that the deceased has the bloodline necessary to retrieve the Holy Soup Ladle of Waukeen :D . A distant ancestor of his was a cook in the Grand Temple. He stole and hid the item in the caverns below the mountains of Thesk. Only a descendent of this man can retrieve it. The High Priest now has reason to raise the man (and his party if the man is smart and demands it.) Perhaps he sends with them a Priest of Waukeen (or some helpful magic) to assure that they return with the most holy soup ladle. Since the DM accidently helped to kill most of the party, this 1. makes up for it, 2. gives them some future help, and 3. helps to immerse them further into the story. AND, he didn't have to make a do-over, which I agree only makes it easier to do in the future and undermines the game. There is no reason the players should expect to be raised in the future, since they know this was a special circumstance - where the player was needed by the temple in question. Sure... we can go with the ole "the character is part of a prophecy" deal... that ALWAYS works. Go ahead.... do it. Of course... that means, for the rest of the campaign (or that plotline)... you have to keep that character alive. Been there, done that. It can backfire. I don't recommend it. You know what... do whatever you want. Make it work... force it... stuff the square into the round hole and pretend it went there. It's your decision. My personal preference is not to have the world cater to the PCs. Especially at low levels. That's exactly what you're doing by raising them. You're having a temple expend over 15,000 gp on a few no name adventurers. And next time... they'll expect the DM to bail them out again. Only next time... they'll probably be higher level and it will hurt more. Or you can just have temples ressurrect them wherever they go. That's fine too. You're a new DM and monty haul adventures are going to happen. Soon, you'll be DMing a game where the players become gods and destroy the pantheons while keeping aphrodite as a love slave. Yup... been there, done that. Psionic combat as messed up in the early editions.
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-13-04, 07:02 PM	I don't have a problem "re-running" the encounter, either with the dream sequence, or without it. I also could just keep going with what happened. But part of me just wouldn't feel very good about myself knowing the mistakes I made as DM concerning the rules of the game. So I guess the argument is story continuity vs. rules integrity. And that's where I am right now. I didn't mean to mess up like I did, and there could still be PC deaths the second time around. But even if the new result was worse - a TPK - well, I'd feel bad for the PCs, but I'd be a lot more okay with it than I am now bc I'd have all the listen, lighting and sleeping rules run correctly. As for "why would the temple raise dead them?" question, it depends on circumstances. In this case, I thought it was reasonable bc the party's benefactor was actually a gnome merchant himself - in fact, a member of the Phent merchant council who told the PCs about the place in the mountains of Thesk he wanted cleared out. He and the gnome ill/rog got along well early in the adventure, and between the gnome merchant's pull and the party's gnome ill/rog's diplomacy checks, that's how the raisings were worked out. Plus the party is adventuring in Thesk, a highly commerce-driven area of Faerun - everyone's out to make money and most especially, sell their services, in Thesk. In fact, in Two Stars, one of Thesk's cities, there's an adventuring party that does just that very profitably - they sell their high-level spells out to merchants and adventurers alike. And so I don't think the raisings were all that unreasonable given the circumstances of the party and the setting.
PaladinKD 09-13-04, 07:21 PM	Sure... we can go with the ole "the character is part of a prophecy" deal... that ALWAYS works. Go ahead.... do it. Of course... that means, for the rest of the campaign (or that plotline)... you have to keep that character alive. Been there, done that. It can backfire. I don't recommend it. It means no such thing. If the character later dies due to their own errors or simple bad luck. There is no reason to continue that side quest. On to the next adventure. I do not coddle my players when it comes to death. My personal preference is not to have the world cater to the PCs. Especially at low levels. That's exactly what you're doing by raising them. You're having a temple expend over 15,000 gp on a few no name adventurers. Actually, what he'd be doing is correcting a DM error without needing to erase part of the story in the minds of the players. And next time... they'll expect the DM to bail them out again. Only next time... they'll probably be higher level and it will hurt more. They should expect no such thing, because everybody will be clear as to the reason for the first "bail out," Gross DM error. And if there is another Gross DM error, there should be a bail out. As for the rest of your 'Monty Haul" quotes, nothing in my suggestion should lead to that. Though of any campaign world, FR is the place for characters to overthrow Gods. I believe it's already happened once or twice. :D In any case, it sounds like KoS has determined his course. So I wish him the best of journeys. :)
Supercilious 09-14-04, 12:19 AM	Ok, so here we are, trying to decide whether to redo it (lose ALL credibility). OR you can play it out like you did, which is one of the best ways to do it IMHO, as you maintain credibility and yet the PC's manage to survive. However, if you want to make the temple seem worthwhile, how about they inscribed runes of controlling on the back of the characters necks, and now they are slaves to what they THOUGHT was a temple of pelor, actually Wee Jas' lackies posturing to do just this, control adventurers. Sounds like an insanely good plot hook, as the characters go about normally, until you reveal the sudden treachery and force them to slay a village of innocents and steal a powerful artifact etc. So they are forced to go on and prove their innocence, all the while removing the runes of controlling and rooting out the false worshippers of Pelor. Sounds like a excellent campaign idea to me...
Aluroon 09-14-04, 05:27 PM	Personally I think you should just redo the encounter, doing the whole dream thing if you want, although it is not nessessary. Considering the conflicting openions on these boards, why dont you just ask your players. Tell them you made a few mistakes (no one can really blame you, your only human), and ask if they want to continue as is, or redo the encounter. I think asking them will quence some of your worries about them being disastified. I personally know that its alittle dishearting the get crushed on your character's second encounter. So, again, I think you should ask your players what they want. Tell them you bloched it, and see how they feel. I find a dm who wont admit his mistakes to be less crediable then one who admits it and lets you do it over. Aluroon
Supercilious 09-14-04, 05:43 PM	NOW DM: Should we do it over? Players: Yeah!!! A SESSION LATER DM: Ok, this time you died fair and square Players: No way! How come we got a redo last time and not this time? This is just cus you like their characters more!!!
Cathon 09-14-04, 05:44 PM	I won't add much to the suggestions given so far, but I will pipe up that no gnome should be stuck in the dark while they still have a use of dancing lights available for that day. Worth reminding the gnome player of, one often forgets racial abilities.
Aluroon 09-14-04, 06:22 PM	NOW DM: Should we do it over? Players: Yeah!!! A SESSION LATER DM: Ok, this time you died fair and square Players: No way! How come we got a redo last time and not this time? This is just cus you like their characters more!!! In my experance this has never happened. If the dm fugges up and gets the party butchered, then lets you do it over, saving you the level lose, ect dont try and abuse it. You'll just end up pissen off the dm and having to find a new one. Besides, one of the great aspects of this game is the constant risk of losing a character. This breeds caution. In this case, the characters did have a watch, they were using intelegent measures setting up there camp, and a misunderstanding of the rules resulted in a near tpk. Aluroon
Finarin Panjoro 09-14-04, 06:24 PM	I too would caution against the do over. Instead come up with a game related reason for why the orcs were so "unnaturally" stealthy. Perhaps they were on a mission for their shadow god who granted them near invisibility in moonlight, perhaps they had cloaks of elvenkind from the elven village they just plundered, perhaps they weren't actually orcs but something more sinister. Explain the "mistakes" you made within the world and make it so that they aren't mistakes anymore. Use explaining what happened as a chance to enhance your story and expand your world.
Aluroon 09-14-04, 06:52 PM	I too would caution against the do over. Instead come up with a game related reason for why the orcs were so "unnaturally" stealthy. Perhaps they were on a mission for their shadow god who granted them near invisibility in moonlight, perhaps they had cloaks of elvenkind from the elven village they just plundered, perhaps they weren't actually orcs but something more sinister. Explain the "mistakes" you made within the world and make it so that they aren't mistakes anymore. Use explaining what happened as a chance to enhance your story and expand your world. No offense, well actually a little offence, but I think this is a terrible idea. You should not cover up for your mistakes by simply justifying them with some outlandish story. Aluroon
Supercilious 09-14-04, 07:05 PM	I stand by my dark conspiracy plan, although maybe I should not have read the entire Book of Vile Deeds last night before posting... Oh well, geas away!
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-15-04, 11:58 AM	Well, I consider edthe pros and cons of a true do-over, dream sequence do-over, and simply continuing the story. Everyone here offered a lot of food for thought. Still unsure what to do, I did what I've learned works extremely well - I talked candidly to my players about the situation, what happened (several important rules were missed or mis-run, like low-light vision and listen), what I wasn't happy about (the fact that the DM should know these things and I didn't it), and asked what their thoughts were and how they would handle it. I made it clear I would be ok with any way of addressing the poorly run encounter in any way - a do-over or continuing the story as is. Like I came to the conclusion here, it was an issue of game rules integrity vs. story continuity to me. Well, I have to say I was a little surprised by their response at first, but after some thought, I'm happy they told me what they did. Most of all, I felt "absolved" of my crimes as DM... :) So my players started by telling me that they'd rather the story continue the way it had happened. They said we all make mistakes, and that they made some that could have changed the encounter as well. Typically, we play by a "if you make mistake and later learn the right way of doing something, do it right the next time" rule, too. The gnome ill/rog player said that if he had taken the time to figure out exactly how his one million gnome abilities work, including low-light vision, then he could have said something then and there about not seeing the orcs earlier under moonlight. He also mentioned how he forgot to do his arcane spell failure roll all session, bc he was wearing leather armor. And I too, not used to multiclass wizards, forgot about the 10% spell failure as well. But like we agreed, we weren't going to rerun every encounter or round bc of that miss on both our parts. We would just correct it for next time - that very night (last night) at Session #2. Everyone also agreed we were all rusty. We hadn't played D&D 3.x in about six months, and each of us had only one full 3.x campaign under our belts. In fact, the gnome ill/rog player had never had a chance to try 3.5 until now, and found a list of small changes on how things worked - like skill changes to alchemy and read lips, for example. And like I said earlier, they realized they could have used some smarter tactics and strategies as well to get their destination - faster tansportation by horse and pony being the #1 thing. We also agreed that even thought it was unlikely, it wouldn't be too big a stretch to assume the party had somehow missed the orcs moving up on them. Maybe they were moving silently and hiding and/or maybe their Listen and Spot checks were poor. Althought very unlikely, possible with some bad rolls. The human rogue player was disappointed by losing most of her gear, looted by the blood orcs, but she was okay with it, and even mentioned there'd be opportunities to get it back - even, if I wanted to as DM, to upgrade some of the treasure found here and there for the next few encounters to compensate. That part was metagame talk - but also a suggestion of a few people on these boards, too, which I found interesting. In fact, last night's session was a lot less rusty for all of us, and was actually a blast. The first was fun, but very rusty, and Session #2 was even more fun. The players and DM were sharper on their rules, especially what do and what they could do in a round, vision and lighting, and skills. Combat was crisper. Other rules were "tested," used and understood by players and DM - even item creation (scribe scroll) during the week, and craft(alchemy) as well. Roleplaying was awesome for the second session in a row, both in the town of Phent, and on the way to their destination. I'm fortunate to have players who enjoy that aspect of D&D. In fact, a few of them I'm especially proud of having bc I've seen their RP skill and courage grow over the years since we played 2e. One of them is even playing a female human rogue, and though he struggles with the voice, he's enjoying it a lot. All very cool. The spent a tenday in Phent recovering, researching spells, and gathering information. Towards the end of that week, the party now had one new member: a female human ranger, "tagging" in for the half-orc barbarian NPC who could not be convinced via Diplomacy to head out again on with the rest of the party. The party spotted an "encounter" in the middle of the day (early autumn, not warm, not cold, clear skies, plains, excellent visibility) from a few hundred feet away, but chose to avoid the six vaguely humanoid shapes that were camping. The second encounter came about an hour till dusk, and they were now in hilly terrain. It was more of a flavor encounter - they spotted a copper dragon in the distance, past the hills, and up against the high mountains of Thesk upon the horizon. The copper dragons of Thesk are well known, though most of them are in a mountain range due southwest, they can be found anywhere - including the Thesk mountains, where the random encounter chart had them listed. They reached their destination successfully this time - just oustide an enchanted and guarded Rashemi bersker lodge in the hills of the western Thesk Mountains, just a day's ride due east from Phent. They had to go at mounted Pony speed due to the two gnomes which meant arriving there just after dusk (a full day's travel). They actually hobbled their horses in a small clearing among the hills when they thought they were generally close to the lodge, and then starting scouting the surrounding terrain together. Visibility was good for the gnomes (moonlight plus low-light vision), but poor for the two humans (I ruled they only had half-torch strength vision, bc the rules were very unclear how far a character without low-light vision or darkvision could see under moonlight). A few minutes later, the gnomes made easy spot checks with their excellent eyesight and saw two ice trolls on either side of a large wooden lodge, nestled in between two hills about forty feet high and nearly three times that long. Ice trolls (found in the FR UE book) are a slightly more civilized troll, not quite as strong as a normal troll, but still deadly and quick in battle. They also often use weapons and more - these had large warhammers and wore scale mail, which is typical for their kind. The ice trolls were a tailored encounter, the guards of the berserker lodge, and were actually 3HD and 3 CR or "lesser ice trolls" which I had created. So the good news was the party was at full strength, but the bad news was that this was an EL 5 encounter, meaning it fell into the "Very Difficult" encounter category, since the party was EL 2. So it'd be a hard fought battle, with much of the party's resources expended, and at least one adventurer very likely to die. Fortunately, the gnomes' ability to spot the ice trolls from far away gave the party time to talk about and formulate a plan. The roleplaying here was great as they whispered a lot about how important it would be to distract one troll and lure it away so they could fight them one at a time if at all possible. So I gave them a few rounds of actions to drink their potions of bull's strength and cat's grace as well, and to move into the positions on the battlegrid they wanted before "launching their surprise attack." The gnome rog/ill used ghost sound and silent image to buy time on one troll so his friends could move and concentrate towards the other. The plan worked well as one ice troll went to investigate the sounds of four approaching humans (ghost sound), and then suddenly saw an ogre around the edge of the hill that was ready to fight (the silent image). Meanwhile, the other gnome, the bard, moved up and directed the human ranger and rogue to where the other troll was. Being humans, they would only suddenly see the ice troll emerge from the darkness when it was almost right upon them. The gnome bard would start singing a song to Inspire Courage in his allies, and soon after he lit a torch to help the humans see more clearly. The ranger circled around the ice troll to flank it and help the rogue sneak attack it. The three were able to fell the ice troll working together, and the gnome bard quickly set to lighting the regenerating creature on fire while it lay in its blue-red blood against the lodge. The humans started moving towards the other gnome now, whose spells no longer fooled the troll he had distracted. The gnome bard gave the humans some basic direction of where the gnome rog/ill and other troll were. Meanwhile, the gnome/rog ill had used a spell to help keep his distance - expeditious retreat. His human friends arrived right on time, and quickly moved to flank the last warhammer-wielding ice troll. This troll took everyone except the gnome bard down once, as I rolled maximum damage, not once, twice, but three times! The gnome bard spent much of his time getting the others conscious with potions of cure wounds, keeping hope alive. The gnome rog/ill kept blasting the troll with scrolls of magic missiles he was very thankful to have spent time making over the last tenday, and also offered up another silent image of a massive, raging, unarmored barbarian orc to hopefully trick the troll. The human rogue used total defense to keep the troll busy, as she was very quick and had high AC, and later used aid another to distract the troll to help the ranger finish the troll off. The troll spent only one round in vain on the orc barbarian, and was also dazed by the gnome bard's scroll of daze - two lost opportunities for the troll, but enough time bought for the party. With one final flanked, and aid another-boosted attack, the ranger ran through the ice troll with her bastard sword and the beast fell over dead. The battle was over, and the party was victorious! And that's how we ended the session. Everyone was badly wounded, but energized by the victory over the ice trolls. I ended the session with a few ominous words about how it seemed a bit strange or surprising that no one or no thing stirred or emerged from the lodge throughout the entire battle... We wrapped it up and I handed out XP awards. Everyone said they had a great time. And well, in the end, that's what matters most :) Once again, thanks to everyone here for their civil feedback, I and my players appreciated it very much. We're well on our way to "mastering" the 3.5 rules... heh... well that will take some time, but we're getting better by the session.
Aluroon 09-15-04, 03:10 PM	I wish my group was more like urs... oh well, I just have to keep teaching them. Glad you all had fun, it sounds like a very intesting campain. Aluroon
Steelwill 09-15-04, 04:27 PM	My words listed below will appear in Bold and Italics to stand apart from quoted material. I hope they are helpful. Camping for the night and surviving the night is as classic as D&D gets, especially at lower levels. But I want to make sure I ran it right! I also want to make sure the PCs can benefit from your tips, something along the lines of "Camping for the Night: An adventurer's checklist for making it through the night." I plan to have NPCs provide some of these tips, or if there are a LOT of mistakes in running the encounter below, I will most likely want to "rewind" and re-run the encounter so that it's totally fair. So please (civilly) critique the orc encounter below - what did the DM do incorrectly or could do better or simply missed, and what could the characters have done differently as well. Thanks very much in advance. *Very quick two-paragraph background...* Last night, we played the first session of a new Realms campaign set in Thesk in the Unapproachable East. The party (starting at 2nd level) left the safety of Phent, a large town, headed for the Thesk Mountains in search of adventure, specifically a somewhat displaced and supposedly enchanted Rashemi berserker lodge they heard about that caught their interest. They left Phent shortly after dusk, and for the night, I rolled a "hit" encounter chance under "settled" column since they would still close to Phent. An ogre came up on the Thesk chart in the UE book (EL 1-5), and with almost one casualty, they took the ogre down. Which made sense, since it counted as a very difficult encounter (CR 3 creature vs. EL 2 party = Very Difficult encounter = 1-4 EL higher than the party's EL, per the DMG). *And now on to the encounter...* The terrain on the way to the Thesk mountains from Phent is mostly open: somewhat uneven plains, short grasses, hard and rocky dirt, with an occasional boulder or tree. So, cover and shelter are rare, although movement speed is otherwise unhindered. Soon after their fight with the ogre, it was time to set up camp, so the party paired up for watches. The gnome bard and the gnome rogue/illusionist and his owl familiar decided to take first watch. The half-orc barbarian and human rogue would take second. The gnome bard decided to douse his torch - which he had lit to guide them since leaving Phent - when they finished setting up camp and the half-orc and human went to sleep. Full moon, weather was cool, calm, and clear - it was the first day of Eleint (~1st day of September). During the first gnome watch, I rolled up another encounter "hit." It produced 5 blood orcs - which are very similar to standard orcs except they are LE, use heavy flails typically, and work for Thayan red wizards as loyal bodyguards that the wizards actually "create" by magical baptism. The blood orc warriors in UE are specifically CR 1 each. Surprise Round Anyway, I decided that due to the lack of light source (no more torch), that the blood orcs were spotted by the two gnomes and owl only within 10' - essentially right upon them. Now that both sides were aware of eachother, I decided there was no surprise round. So I had the two gnomes and the blood orcs roll initiatitive. However how quickly could the blood orcs have spotted them? Later you indicate that they can see in the dark, the blood orcs maybe should have had surpise on the PC's here. Also of note, unless Gnomes work differently in FR, they have low-light vision, and it was a clear night with a full moon. Maybe the visual range of the gnome should have been adjusted to 40-60 feet. Because on a clear night with a full moon using myself as an example, a human can see about 20 feet at least. Low light lets Gnomes see twice as far as a human in such conditions. That doesn't even go into the fact that Gnomes have keen hearing and may have heard the Orcs if Listen checks had been called for. Round 1: The PC party decided that top priority was to wake up the half-orc barbarian and human rogue. So, winning initiative, the gnome ill/rog woke up the half-orc, who was now prone, but conscious. I ruled it was a standard action for the gnome to wake up the half-orc. Actually the Gnome can use Aid Another(Combat section, PHB 3.5) to give a +2 on the half-orcs listen check as a standard action, typically by making a similar check against DC 10. A listen check without any other modifiers, to wake up, is made at a -10 (Under the Listen skill description, PHB 3.5). Then the blood orcs went. Three attacked the gnome bard, and hurt him badly. The other two orcs attacked the prone half-orc barbarian, gaining a +4 to their roll since their target was prone. They hurt him enough to send him bleeding into unconsciouness and dying. None of the orcs had problems seeing their enemies, bc they have darkvision, so no reason for them to worry about concealment miss percentages due to lack of light. Above is the darkvision referrance from earlier, otherwise this seems rules accurate. Next, the human rogue tried to "wake up on her own." I ruled she could do this with a Will save vs. DC 15. This part I wasn't sure about, especially since fighting had broken out, so I gave her a +2 circumstance bonus to the save since fighting had started. Unfortunately, she failed, and kept sleeping. Again per the Listen Skill description, to wake up is a check at -10, but to hear a battle is a +10, this would have been a straight listen check against a DM set DC barring any other modifiers to the roll. Finally the gnome bard went, and was threatened by a total of 4 of the 5 orcs. In a tough situation he simply attacked, not having too many advantageous places to step to. He missed. Don't know if the Gnome Bard had invested in Tumble, but it would have been very useful for him to have tried to tumble out of this situation, OR if he could, use the Withdrawal action to try and minimize his disadvantaged position, at worse risking only 1 or 2 attacks of opportunity, instead of 4 full attacks. Round 2: Gnome ill/rog fires his Lantanese pistol at an orc, stepping away, but missing it. Even if he had hit, the orc was 5' away, and the orc would benefit from concealment miss chance, since the gnome couldn't see in the dark. Here again, ESPECIALLY since we are talking only about 5', the Gnomes low-light vision should have been in play, on a full moon clear night. Blood orcs attack. Gnome bard falls. Two characters down now. They move to threaten the gnome ill/rog and prone human rogue. The human rogue rolls a Will save to wake up again. This time I ruled she got a +4 bonus to her save, the +2 circumstance bonus stacking for each additional combat round beyond the first. She woke up, but was prone, and I ruled she could take no other actions since she spent the round "trying to wake up." This is subjective, since I don't recall at the moment if there is an action type that regaining consciousness covers, but I would have as a DM with PC's getting annhialated by a random encounter, allowed the Human to wake up as a free action and take her feet as move action, then use her standard action for whatever. She must have had a spot in the initiative order for when she was making these "wake up" checks. Round 3: Gnome ill/rog decides its time to run, nearly certain it's the only option for the remaining surviving party members now, vowing to come back for them. He risks two AoO's as he runs. Luckily, neither orc catches the gnome rog/ill, and he runs a total of 80' in a straight line way (20' base x4) in one of the few directions that provoke only two AoO's. Again he could have tried to withdrawal, or at least tumble here to minimize his attacks of opportunity. The 5 orcs now descend upon the prone human rogue: five attacks with a +4 bonus since she's prone, and three hit, knocking her out and crushing her dead. Round 4: The gnome ill/rog continues his escapre, running another 80' in the darkness away from the horrible defeat and the certain slaughter. The blood orcs act. I decide that being LE, and serving a Thayan red wizard, they let the gnome go, and decide not to give chase, instead choosing to first make sure the fallen adventures are all dead and then loot them. Not afraid of the fleeing gnome being any threat, they can take their time efficiently finishing off and looting their enemies. Because armor takes a lot more time to take off, and bc it's usually bulky and/or heavy, those are the only items the blood orcs decide to leave behind on the three corpses. End of Encounter / Fallout The blood orcs move on, having made quite a score for their Thayan master - healing potions, a few hundred platinum and gold coins, and several useful weapons, mundane items, and rations. Painfully ironic, from the adventuring party's perspective. The gnome ill/rog waits a few minutes and then makes his way back to where he ran so furiously from. About 500' away (this is how far he wanted to run), I rule he has a little trouble finding his friends in the darkness (he has no torches or light source). So it takes several minutes longer than it would have in daylight. (I wasn't sure how to rule him possibly getting lost in finding the battle site). When he finds them finally, he moves off about 50 paces and tries to get some sleep. Fortunately, no encounters come up this time on my rolls, and he sleeps. In the morning, he uses his tent to make a makeshift guirne (sp?) and drag along the human rogue back to town - he can't take everyone so he chooses her. I rule he now moves only at 15' while doing so, and it takes him most of the day to get back to Phent. He makes it to the safety of Phent without another coming up, meeting up with a few guards, who he convinces with Diplomacy to help him recover his friends' bodies. They do this, and then the gnome ill/rog then goes to work out a deal using Diplomacy again, at the Temple to Waukeen to bring back his dead friends, and succeeds in doing so. The party is deeply in the temple's debt, and the adventure will continue from here next session. A little harsh but not a bad thing, encounters should have real danger to them. That said I believe a couple of implementations were neglected that could have significantly assisted the party. Don't worry though, you said in your post you are a new DM, and it takes awhile to catch even most of the rules in play, let alone all of them. I have listed above the bits of advice and corrections that I would make, I hope they are helpful, and good luck with your game :D .
Kilsek of Sheverash 09-15-04, 04:50 PM	Thanks Steelwill :) Actually, we've already moved on last night with Session #2, I talk about what we did about the decision of rerunning the encounter vs. continuing, just 3 posts above this one. Still, very specific critiques located within my message is perfect. Your observations, like a lot of folks here, correlate well with what I've learned and read up on since Session #1. In fact, I've found a few things that are unclear in the rules: 1) MOONLIGHT & VISION *How far can someone withOUT low-light vision see with moonlight? *How far can someone with darkvision, but without low-light vision see in moonlight? *Does moonlight count as "darkness" for anyone withOUT low-light vision? *If moonlight counts as darkness for anyone withOUT low-light vision, can a creature with darkvision use darkvision normally? 2) SLEEPING/WAKING *Is there a difference between normal sleep and magical sleep? *What is defined as "normal noise" per the sleep spell description? *According to Listen, you can wake up on your own with a Listen check at a -10 penalty; does that apply for both normal and magical sleep? (If yes, then the sleep spell isn't very useful for buying time - it only essentially buys one round, and that doesn't seem right for "magical sleep.") Thanks again!
Nom 09-15-04, 10:03 PM	In fact, I've found a few things that are unclear in the rules: 1) MOONLIGHT & VISION *How far can someone withOUT low-light vision see with moonlight? *How far can someone with darkvision, but without low-light vision see in moonlight? *Does moonlight count as "darkness" for anyone withOUT low-light vision? *If moonlight counts as darkness for anyone withOUT low-light vision, can a creature with darkvision use darkvision normally?The latter two are covered in the rules. A creature with darkvision can see as well as darkvision allows out to the range of darkvision, regardless of the light levels. Beyond that point, darkvision is ineffective. Low-light vision specifies that "characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day", and that "they can see twice as far as normal in dim light". Moonlight and conventional requires a DM judgement call. My personal experience is that full moonlight allows pretty good shape perception and moderate distance judgement up to about 300 feet, but poor colour and contrast resolution. Something in the open would be easy to spot under this range, but anything making use of natural shadows will have a large bonus to hide checks. Reduce ranges accordingly until you reach 0 at full darkness. 2) SLEEPING/WAKING *Is there a difference between normal sleep and magical sleep? *What is defined as "normal noise" per the sleep spell description? *According to Listen, you can wake up on your own with a Listen check at a -10 penalty; does that apply for both normal and magical sleep? (If yes, then the sleep spell isn't very useful for buying time - it only essentially buys one round, and that doesn't seem right for "magical sleep.")Yes, there are differences between normal and magical sleep. Game mechanics wise, let's focus on this line: "Slapping or wounding awakens an affected creature, but normal noise does not." Notice that it's not "loud noises" that waken a magically sleeping creature, but physical impact. A sleeping creature wouldn't wake up even during a battle, might wake up if you persistently yelled in its ear, and would certainly wake up if a sound burst detonated within range.