In fact, when it comes to traps, there are often these two controversial topics to address:
- Finding a trap: is it a roll? is it restricted to thieves? can it be done "in fiction" by just talking with the GM? does it require just asking for something odd or looking for specific clues?
- Disarming a trap: is it a roll? is it restricted to thieves? can it be done "in fiction" by just talking with the GM? does it require just some generic ideas or a precise understanding of the mechanism?
I think the above could be broken down into:
Finding a trap
1. Is it hidden? (totally hidden or it can be seen but just when paying attention?)
2. Is it partially visible? (perhaps there are more or less obvious clues, or at least something odd about it)
3. Is it plainly visible? (in this case the challenge becomes disarming it, or bypassing it in some way, or even deciding if to give up...)
Disarming a trap
1. Is it impossible to determine how it works? (totally hidden mechanism or too small or concealed for example behind a wall?)
2. Is it partially understandable? (some pieces of the mechanism may be visible, or it might be possible to try to disarm it or at least jam its mechanism?)
3. Is it clear how it works? (in this case the challenge might be that the mechanism requires something special to be disarmed, something huge or something very precise or someone with a very precise set of skills...)
How do you rule all of the above? Do you use a skill? (and is it restricted to a single class?)
Or do you use only the conversation between players and GM?
Or do you use both, with the conversation between players and GM taking precedence over the skill roll? (this seems to be somehow the best practice, nowadays, especially with visible traps)
2. Is it partially understandable? (some pieces of the mechanism may be visible, or it might be possible to try to disarm it or at least jam its mechanism?)
3. Is it clear how it works? (in this case the challenge might be that the mechanism requires something special to be disarmed, something huge or something very precise or someone with a very precise set of skills...)
How do you rule all of the above? Do you use a skill? (and is it restricted to a single class?)
Or do you use only the conversation between players and GM?
Or do you use both, with the conversation between players and GM taking precedence over the skill roll? (this seems to be somehow the best practice, nowadays, especially with visible traps)
A lot of the above topics are presented nicely also in the following post, which seems to favor a mixed approach: descriptive (and open to all classes) for visible/simpler traps, while rolling (skill roll and restricted to specialists/thieves) for small, delicate or complicate hidden traps.
[...] I come now to Find and Remove Traps, and find myself in a bit of a quandary.
In the first place, I really, really like the idea of player agency in finding traps. [...] It's much more interesting and provides greater immersion for the players to use the DM's descriptions to find traps. [...] Consider:
DM: Just ahead, on the left side of the corridor a skeleton is slumped against the wall.
Thief: I check for traps.
DM: (rolling) You don't find anything.
or
DM: Just ahead, on the left side of the corridor a skeleton is slumped against the wall.
Thief: Without getting too close, I look at the walls and ceiling in that section of the corridor.
DM: You see a pattern of holes in the right wall, and a set of shallow gouges in the left wall that seem to match. There's nothing unusual about the ceiling.
Thief: I examine the floor, looking for a trip wire or pressure plate.
DM: One of the floor blocks is very slightly elevated above the level of the rest of the floor.
In my opinion, the second scenario is far more fun and interesting. The "problem," if it can be called such, is that it renders the thief's Find Traps and Remove Traps skills irrelevant (or at least less relevant,) because it relies entirely on player (and DM) skill.
[...]
What good, then, are the Find and Remove Traps abilities? Should they be dropped entirely, or is there still a unique niche for the thief as trap finder? I can see a strong argument in favor of keeping and using them in certain circumstances.
Dealing with traps as in the second example above requires that the DM be able to visualize the trap (else how could he describe it?) and have a basic understanding of its component parts and how it works. It requires also that some aspects of the trap are visible to the player characters and discernible as something potentially hazardous. Those conditions lend themselves best to area traps - those that affect a room or a stretch of corridor, for example - as opposed to item traps, such as a poison needle in the latch of a chest.
[...]
I, for one, am hard-pressed to describe just what the trigger for a poison needle or a gas trap protecting a treasure chest would look like. Besides making it difficult to describe such a thing, that also makes me skeptical of the ability of a cautious but untrained person to notice it.[...]
You can probably assume that the designer of the trap has taken great pains to make the external trigger of the trap both as small and as indistinguishable from the rest of the item as possible. A specialist, someone who knows what he's looking for, has a chance to see it for what it is, but anyone else won't. It's probably also a safe bet that most of the trap mechanism is housed within the chest, out of sight and out of reach, thus making disarming it difficult and delicate work. [...]
If you want a little more about this approach, with a distinction between small traps and the rest, see also this post by Brendan.
Find Traps as Saving Throw
by Brendan
I was reading about traps over at The Dragon’s Flagon, and that got me to thinking about find traps as a saving throw, which is an idea I first came across over at Courtney’s blog (see his set of answers to the 20 quick rules questions). To quote:
Finding traps is a saving throw, and works as such.
Thus, anyone can interact with the fictional world and discover or avoid traps purely by investigation and reason. Note that this doesn’t necessarily require any particular mechanical knowledge on the part of the referee or players (though you can go there if you want), it just requires determining trigger mechanism, effect, and clues. Remember, traps don’t need to be mechanical, or even explainable. Traps can be driven by magic, ancient technology, or incomprehensible clockwork.
[...]
In this third post, we see a more mechanical analysis, with some other useful inputs.
For example, when designing (and playing in-game) with traps, there is a clear distinction between trigger and effect.
Note also that sometimes searching for a trap might trigger it (or cause some other effect) and likewise, trying to disarm or avoid the trap might still result in some effect.
by Talysman
There's a thread on Dragonsfoot about using the old school approach to detecting and disabling traps; in other words, having players describe how they search for traps and what they do to disable or avoid triggering the trap. The person who started the thread wasn't sure how to handle this: what possible ways could a player use to search? How do you enable people with no special knowledge of traps in the real world to role-play a knowledgeable character in a fantasy world? What if the player just creates a huge list of actions to search for traps and says "I do all this" every time? [...]
The important things to remember are:
- A trap has two parts: the trigger and the result.
- Each part must be detected separately, and may require different search methods.
- Search order is important; one method may find a trigger, another method may trigger it.
[...]
Results can be pretty varied, but they can all be simplified to an action delivered along a particular path, from Origin Point A to Target Point B. A character standing at the target point or along the path between the origin and the target is in danger of being caught in the trap. Examining Point A may locate a trap, but not its trigger; examining Point B may offer clues to what kind of result to expect (scorch marks on a wall are a clue to a flame thrower trap, debris on the floor may be a clue to a deadfall.)
Some results, like releasing a gas, might not be obvious from any kind of clue.
When constructing a trap, you should consider both obvious actions (walking over a trapped floor, opening a trapped door) and search methods (touching or moving a trapped chest.) Sometimes, a particular search method will trigger the trap, which might not be a good idea based on whether you are standing in the path of the result or not.
[...]
From the same author, let's look at some additional input about the first part of the topic: finding/detecting a trap.
by Talysman
[...] I don't like the idea of a simple skill roll to search for traps, but that doesn't mean I like or use the extreme pixel-bitching approach to traps, either. I'm probably just a little more detailed than Brendan describes for his own technique. If someone says "I search the room", I ask "how", but all I'm expecting is general details: Do you enter the room, or stay outside? If you enter the room, do you just blunder on in, walk normally, or creep along slowly? Are you just searching visually, or are you touching things (with or without a 10-foot pole?) And if you're touching things, are you actually tapping or knocking, or are you moving things around?
So, basically, it breaks down to speed and direction, stance, senses and tools used, and any changes to the environment made. I assume, unless told, that you do everything that could be included in the general description of what you tell me, without going too far. You stand in the doorway and do a visual search? Then anything that *could* be seen from where you are standing is seen, no roll necessary, and no weaseling out by saying "you didn't say you were also looking at the ceiling". I figure that these are the basic search procedures:
- Blundering In: You enter the room without searching. This always applies for those fleeing monsters, unless you say otherwise.
- Careful Entrance: You enter, but not necessarily quickly, and look at stuff as you enter. This action stops as soon as you spot anything out of the ordinary (no roll needed, as long as it's visible and not hidden.)
- Stop, Look and Listen: You don't enter the room, so no traps triggered by movement or pressure will go off. Anything visible or audible -- or smellable, or detectable by any other sense that works over distance -- is automatically detected.
- Cautious Test: You use a ten-foot pole or similar technique to test from a distance. Discovers a few things you'd miss by the previous techniques. If you also add tapping with the pole, you discover hollow spaces as well.
- Thorough Test: You touch what you're searching, everywhere. Discovers hidden catches, buttons, and the like.
All of these assume you are standing up, bending and crouching only as needed, and make no changes (nothing is moved or opened.) A careful entrance assumes you look under things, on top of anything you can see the top of, behind anything you can see behind, and around every corner you can look around. The first time you would notice something out of place or out of the ordinary, I describe that, and assume you stop until you tell me what you do next. If you have to move something or open something to continue a search, I ask if that's what you want to do. [...]
Note that we can desume a method from the list above, which presents 5 different approaches from the characters to an environment/object:
- Careless: enter without searching, run through an area, open a door or chest
- Careful: enter and see the obvious, pass through an area, slowly open a door or chest (anything obvious and out of the ordinary should be revealed and stop the character before anything triggers; I would add also that something carefully hidden or concealed would instead trigger in this case)
- Very Careful: do not enter, do not pass, do not open, but check with your senses (reveal anything out of the ordinary even if not obvious, nothing triggers because nothing is touched; I would add that this takes time)
- Cautious: keep a distance and check with tools or skills (reveal anything even if out of sight but not really "secret"; I would add that this process though involves touching and prodding so something might trigger, although probably there is a certain safety in distance)
- Very Cautious: first keep a distance and if nothing happens, move closer and inspect more carefully so that everything is revealed, even secrets
The important thing, to me, seems to be the time that it takes to perform such actions. For example, if you are running you are always careless, but if you are not saying anything else, you are just careful (reveal anything which is in plain sight).
If the group wants to be very careful, I would say it takes less than a turn for a small area, but a turn for a large room or a long corridor (so, encounter check?).
If instead you go up to cautious it must take a turn (encounter check at the end), and I would say an additional turn for very cautious (it can be a second turn after a cautious approach - like saying "I search more carefully").
In other words, the more careful you are with your exploration (so more likely to detect and avoid traps, and discover secrets), the greater the chances for an encounter.
- Careless: enter without searching, run through an area, open a door or chest
- Careful: enter and see the obvious, pass through an area, slowly open a door or chest (anything obvious and out of the ordinary should be revealed and stop the character before anything triggers; I would add also that something carefully hidden or concealed would instead trigger in this case)
- Very Careful: do not enter, do not pass, do not open, but check with your senses (reveal anything out of the ordinary even if not obvious, nothing triggers because nothing is touched; I would add that this takes time)
- Cautious: keep a distance and check with tools or skills (reveal anything even if out of sight but not really "secret"; I would add that this process though involves touching and prodding so something might trigger, although probably there is a certain safety in distance)
- Very Cautious: first keep a distance and if nothing happens, move closer and inspect more carefully so that everything is revealed, even secrets
The important thing, to me, seems to be the time that it takes to perform such actions. For example, if you are running you are always careless, but if you are not saying anything else, you are just careful (reveal anything which is in plain sight).
If the group wants to be very careful, I would say it takes less than a turn for a small area, but a turn for a large room or a long corridor (so, encounter check?).
If instead you go up to cautious it must take a turn (encounter check at the end), and I would say an additional turn for very cautious (it can be a second turn after a cautious approach - like saying "I search more carefully").
In other words, the more careful you are with your exploration (so more likely to detect and avoid traps, and discover secrets), the greater the chances for an encounter.
No comments:
Post a Comment