Never Script A Combat Encounter
Some game masters have very intricate plans for when a combat encounter occurs. The bad guys will start a chase, the orcs will drive the PCs towards the cliff’s edge, the aliens will detonate a neutronic cluster bomb, and so on, and so on. It makes sense, right? After all, role playing games are stories and a good GM should know how the story ends, right?
No. RPGs do tell stories, but the author of these stories is not the GM. The author of the story is the group, and it is through a collective effort that the tale is revealed. For this very reason it is best not to focus on what will happen during an encounter but what tactics the combatants will use.
If the bad guys ride motorcycles and tend to attack at high speeds, then maybe a chase will occur. If the orcs form a shield wall and march forward, then maybe the PCs will be forced towards the cliff’s edge. If the aliens have a force field that protects them from neutronic cluster bombs, then maybe they will use it in the middle of a battle.
Or maybe the PCs will drop spikes onto the road that blow out the motorcycle tires used by the bad guys. Or maybe the PCs will create an illusion that causes some of the orcs to break rank thus rendering the shield wall useless. Or maybe the PCs will jam the aliens’ force fields and put up their own as a clever double cross once the neutronic cluster bomb is launched but before it is detonated.
The point is that you do not know what will happen during your game, nor should you want to. Let the story unfold through a series of contributions, some yours and some from the players. Nothing is wrong with knowing what kinds of tactics the NPCs will most likely use, but trying to force the outcome via those tactics is a mistake.
Agree? Disagree? Leave a comment below and share your opinion with the rest of us!
I agree with never scripting, but I will write myself some notes on the oppositions basic tactics: they like to fight up close with pipes, they have a sniper on the roof who will go after the point man, etc.
I have found that in the heat of combat, that sometimes coming up with some cool tactic leaves my head, so I combat (pun intended) by writing down a few IF…THEN statements. That give me a short list of options. Example:
If the players get close to the cliff, then form a shield wall and try to push them off.
I find that having some basic tactics give me the general feel of the opposition and some IF..THEN’s give me some options, without scripting anything.
@dnaphil: I don’ t know if that is the best way to plane the encounters though. For one, the GM has an unfair advantage in some regards. That sniper for instance – how does he know where to look? How will he recognize the point person? What if the PCs are in disguise? What if they show up via helicopter?
If the enemy combatants are on their home turf I am more accepting of tactics as being a part of their procedures for defending themselves.
This is one of those topics though where no one can be 100% right or wrong with either approach. I just think that it is important for GMs to think critically about these sorts of things.