tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7978585450395254487.post351524090095940178..comments2024-03-15T06:32:11.237-06:00Comments on Gundobad Games: What If (All?) Secret Doors Were (Obviously) Trapped?!?Gundobadhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14335443896772607081noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7978585450395254487.post-70885755587974629682021-12-28T18:16:21.438-07:002021-12-28T18:16:21.438-07:00Hi! Thanks for the detailed thoughts. Sorry for a ...Hi! Thanks for the detailed thoughts. Sorry for a slow response over the holiday. My 'trapped secret doors' post was sort of a roughed-out idea suggested on the fly, and you've done a good job of articulating some of its limits. :-) Actually, I think this would be most useful as a way to design *a particular* dungeon, and probably less useful as a standard approach for all dungeons. For one thing, as you note, this would add work when converting modules or published content. (My original post on secret doors, linked in the post above, has better tools for running secret doors in published content). <br /><br />I will say that my intent was absolutely to present traps here as obstacles to be solved, not (the usual) surprises to be sprung. In my earlier post about secret doors, I considered the question, "what if PCs with adequate time will always find the secret door, but taking the time to figure out how to open it requires a security gamble?" This latter post changes the question, to: "what if PCs will always find the secret door, but exploiting it usually/always requires negotiating their way past a dangerous hazard?" The first approach is probably much better in general, but the second, I'll maintain, would make for some interesting occasional challenges. Gundobadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14335443896772607081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7978585450395254487.post-14050926038215238352021-12-24T23:41:37.672-07:002021-12-24T23:41:37.672-07:00I'm all for relevant details about door and tr...I'm all for relevant details about door and trap mechanisms.<br /><br />I'm not sure how the approach helps you with a published adventure that lacks details needed to run the door/ trap (you still have to add them). <br /><br />But automatic detection probably speeds play, and will certainly reduce the likelihood of players missing whatever is beyond the door. So it's a way of highlighting or distinguishing (or making more enticing?) one of the paths the adventurers can choose. <br /><br />If the door is, in fact, truly secret (i.e. from anyone other than PCs) then its 'secrecy' also explains why no-one else has already sprung the trap, looted the room beyond, or taken account of the existence of the secret way past their guard post.<br /> <br />Traps that characters can figure out for themselves, once they've spotted them, are commonsense as far as I'm concerned. <br /><br />If the characters have to search to find the secret door, then you still have an important chance that your content might be missed. But it's still better than the chances if they have to search AND roll the die. <br /><br />I guess I tend to play that if the character performs a test that would obviously give away the presence of the door, then the player doesn't have to roll. <br /><br />Once you get into 'secret' doors that can automatically be spotted without a search, it's no longer really a secret door. And a trap that characters can automatically spot is more of a hazard or obstacle than a trap. <br /><br />From the trap setter's point of view (assuming the trap setter knows that PCs can always spot traps... ) it's a deterrent to movement (or an invitation to go that way...) rather than being useful to hurt or trap enemies.<br /><br />It's possible to put a dangerous mechanism in plain view in an ominous or impressive passage without having any special concepts called 'secret doors' or 'trapped secret doors'. The 'obviously trapped treasure' is also a well established D&D trope.<br /><br />So you're really talking about taking out the idea of 'secret' elements from the game, or playing with the mechanics for detecting 'secret' elements. That's fine. It's certainly true you can entirely replace them with other fun elements (puzzles, interactions, push your luck or gambling mechanics).<br /><br />So it's a question of the pros and cons of what certain elements add to play:<br />a) the possibility of not finding some pathway or object placed in the adventure; or <br />b) the possibility of not finding those things as the result of a die roll outside the players' control<br />c) the possibility of taking damage (broadly defined) from an action that doesn't normally involve damage, but might, given the characteristics of the fictional environment, carry that hidden risk.<br /><br />I think there's pros and cons to all of those. It's one of the (many) areas where you can adjust the way you play (or the mechanics you use) to create different kinds of experiences.<br /><br />I think you have an interesting idea about an elevated likelihood that a secret door has a trap attached to it. But it makes a bit less intuitive sense than e.g. a treasure chest having a trap attached. Presumably the secrecy of the door is already some protection against unauthorised use.kenconoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7978585450395254487.post-88992466377516498452021-12-20T21:29:29.277-07:002021-12-20T21:29:29.277-07:00Allow meself to defend meself proactively.
Yes, I...Allow meself to defend meself proactively.<br /><br />Yes, I really do understand that there are lots of good reasons to put traps in other places, too, and that there are lots of good reasons to like the normal B/X rules for finding traps or secret doors. I still like some of the implications of my proposal (whether I'll ever implement it in play ... less sure). <br />Gundobadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14335443896772607081noreply@blogger.com