Can PCs avoid random wilderness lairs?

[delta]

Here's another poll question on the use of the % In Lair monster statistic, presuming its use in random wilderness encounters to determine if a given encounter is in a lair or not.

Are PCs free to avoid a random encounter that's determined to be in-lair? Or else: Must they always contend/fight with the encounter, or use normal evasion rules, regardless?

Here's the play dynamic from my last campaign that inspires the question: My players would be traveling through the wilderness. I'd roll an encounter, and then roll positively for the % In Lair chance. I would describe the outside of a lair to my players: Often they would see a cave entrance, or else a large artificial mound or fort, or possibly a huge bluff with a yawning open dragons-head rock formation at the top.

Now, in every case, the PCs always bypassed the lair and declined to go in. Once or twice they said, "we can come back later", but they never did. No wilderness treasure was ever retrieved because they declined to go in any of the lairs.

This might seem counter to the book incentives or expectations in OD&D, but on the other hand, they were always traveling someplace with some other goal in mind, and so in that sense they're in synch with Gygax's suggestions at the end of the AD&D PHB, on "Successful Adventures":

Avoid unnecessary encounters. This advice usually means the difference between success and failure when it is followed intelligently. Your party has an objective, and wondering monsters are something which stand between them and it. The easiest way to overcome such difficulties is to avoid the interposing or trailing creature if at all possible... Do not get sidetracked.

Now, when I've run freeform convention games on the Outdoor Survival map, I think that players were more willing to dive into random lairs. (Not full recollection, because I made the ponds known lairs/caves, so they were mostly focused on those points.) But in the campaign situation my players treated them as distractions to be avoided. And that adds to my prospective aggravation at having to log, look up, and modify encounter chances in any hex every time a lair is determined on an ongoing basis, to no good effect. Perhaps what I'm doing is unusual: Do you let PCs freely bypass lairs like I did, or do they automatically need to confront the encounter anyway?

Related: Is there a possibility that the % In Lair rule only functions well in the context of "OUTDOOR SURVIVAL" general adventures (with no pre-placed lairs on the map), and not so much in "REFEREE'S MAP" style play?

[tetramorph]

delta, this is a good continuation of this multithread conversation.

I also describe the discovery of a lair. I also would grant agency to the PCs -- they do not have to do anything with regards to the lair, if they so choose.

Lairs are so lucrative, however, that I cannot imagine my player not exploring one, or forgetting to go back if they find a need for delay.

That said, why not use the rules of evasion or for castle encounters for this?

The PCs decide to move on, but perhaps the denizens choose to pursue, anyhow?

Your point about the difference between OS and Ref map is worth pondering. My current campaign combines the two. The campaign map is the OS board, I've predetermine all settlements. I predetermine strongholds when PCs are within, say, 10 miles. I predetermine lairs when PCs are within a hex or two of them. Then I imagine connections with the already determined world. It has been working for me -- and it makes for a fun game for me as well.

[linebeck]

In the Outdoor Spoliation game, the purpose is to gather as much treasure in a set amount of time. So you want to make a beeline for any known lairs and avoid all random encounters, which will burn resources and not give you any treasure.

At the same time, obviously a player would want to pull back and make a determination as to what is the best of approaching the lair (ie reconnaissance).

[Porphyre]

Still have to roll for surprise: if so, players will have to confront the monsters bursting out of the lair or coming back home from their last rampage.

[linebeck]

Aug 2, 2020 15:27:09 GMT -6 Porphyre said:

Still have to roll for surprise: if so, players will have to confront the monsters bursting out of the lair or coming back home from their last rampage.

A similar rule is reflected on page 183 of the DMG vis a vis fortresses: check to see if adventurers are surprised; if surprise “is greater than 2” (whatever that means) the occupants are outside the place and within normal surprise distance. It follows that if surprise is less than two, the occupants are aware and may come out. Otherwise adventures may opt to pass by or investigate. Seems like a gloss on the rules regarding whether occupants of a castle will come out of a tower.

[tetramorph]

Aug 2, 2020 15:27:09 GMT -6 Porphyre said:

Still have to roll for surprise: if so, players will have to confront the monsters bursting out of the lair or coming back home from their last rampage.

Yes, the above.

The other encounter mechanics, when applied, can answer a lot of those questions.

That is what I was trying to get at in my previous post, but too long winded!

[Deleted]

Aug 2, 2020 15:27:09 GMT -6 Porphyre said:

Still have to roll for surprise: if so, players will have to confront the monsters bursting out of the lair or coming back home from their last rampage.

That's a really good use for the Surprise mechanic. I'm picturing some hapless adventurers peering into a hole in the ground, listening intently, ignoring the shadow creeping up behind them. 

[linebeck]

Here is an attempt to restate the rule mirroring language from the DMG and MM:

• % In Lair indicates the chance of encountering the monster in question where it domiciles and stores its treasure. (MM at 5.)
  
  
  • To determine if the occupants of the lair are aware of the party of adventurers, roll a surprise dice for the latter.
  
  
  • If the party of adventurers is surprised, then the lair occupants know they are there. 
  • If surprise is two or greater, the lair occupants are actually outside the lair and within normal surprise distance of the party of adventurers.
  
  If the adventurers have not been detected, they may opt to pass the lair by or go and investigate. (DMG at 183.)  

[howandwhy99]

Depends on the encounter and how the players game travelling.

[dicebro]

There are evasion rules in the third volume. I use those.

[retrorob]

PC can always try to avoid the random encounter, whether "in lair" or not.

In OD&D lairs can be pre-generated (randomly or not), but they don't have to be. As it's so vaguely, you can have % in lair as a chance for the adventure taking place nearby the lair. On the other hand, it can be % of monsters that are in this lair (so 15% of 30-300 men for example). That's way I love OD&D - do as you like and it will always be OK.

I used a lot of evasion & pursuit rules from vol. III, but switched for Warriors of Mars table for simplicity's sake (one roll to rule Evasion & Surprise).

[Starbeard]

I could almost swear of having used a Judges Guild table that handled this issue, but I could be misremembering. It could just have easily been from another old game, or it could have been from my own imagination.

Typically, my wilderness encounters go like this:

1. Determine monster and whether the lair is present.
- If no lair, then only 1%-100% of the "number appearing" rolled will actually be encountered.

Assuming there is a lair…

2. Party rolls for surprise, modified loosely by circumstances (terrain, lair type, day/night, weather, etc.); if surprised, they do not notice the lair. If not surprised, they notice something: the lair itself, or tracks, etc.

3. Lair rolls for surprise, modified loosely for circumstances (party size & stealth travel, day/night, monster vigilance, etc.); if surprised, they do not notice the party.

- Note that if both sides are surprised, then there simply is no encounter. But assuming there is an encounter…

4. Determine "number appearing." There is a 1:2 chance that 100% if the number rolled will be present, otherwise only 50%-100% will be currently present while the others are out (unless the monster description has other rules for this).

5. Assuming the lair is aware of the party, they make a reaction roll to determine hostility, neutrality (this generally means keeping their heads low and ignoring the party if the party ignores them), or friendliness (again, usually ignoring the party unless the party acts first; perhaps they will hail them with an offer of trade/information).

Only if the lair is hostile of the "immediately attack" variety will I require the party to evade, otherwise they are free to go their merry way.

[Starbeard]

Aug 2, 2020 11:57:02 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

delta, this is a good continuation of this multithread conversation.

I also describe the discovery of a lair. I also would grant agency to the PCs -- they do not have to do anything with regards to the lair, if they so choose.

Lairs are so lucrative, however, that I cannot imagine my player not exploring one, or forgetting to go back if they find a need for delay.

That said, why not use the rules of evasion or for castle encounters for this?

The PCs decide to move on, but perhaps the denizens choose to pursue, anyhow?

Your point about the difference between OS and Ref map is worth pondering. My current campaign combines the two. The campaign map is the OS board, I've predetermine all settlements. I predetermine strongholds when PCs are within, say, 10 miles. I predetermine lairs when PCs are within a hex or two of them. Then I imagine connections with the already determined world. It has been working for me -- and it makes for a fun game for me as well.

Excellent points. The only pause I'd have going into a lair is if the DM is rolling for treasure strictly, without rerolls. It's very possible for there to be no treasure at all in a lair — so again, scouting, minimizing danger, and a learned mastery of the probabilities will go a long way toward determining whether a particular lair was worth the risk.