D&D General No Fixed Location -- dynamically rearranging items, monsters, and other game elements in the interests of storytelling

[Fenris-77]

Exactly. If it's thematic, okay yeah....but their abundance in a lot of the old modules is just ridiculous.

OMG yeah. Secret doors everywhere. Mind you, that all started when an Elf could just walk past a secret door and notice it 33% of the time.

 

[prabe]

I believe the only secret door I've placed in 5E has been one in an evil wizard's lair, behind which he kept the vat with his clone in it, his complete notes (edited notes were outside this space) and some treasure he could use to plant seeds to resume his activities. I don't do a lot of location adventures, but occasionally the stories the players/characters pursue lead to a place that needs mapped, and I try to make the places make sense. Random unnecessary secret doors don't make sense (to me).

 

[iserith]

Speaking of secret doors......I almost never use them. I just find them annoying. This is one area where I may add a secret room if my players have latched onto some detail in a room description and are adamant about searching. It's like, wow you really think there's something here....hey, guess what, there is! This seems very much in line with what was mentioned in the OP.

Aside from that, I rarely use them. I think they add very little to the game, but can potentially take a lot away.

If there's a non-secret way to get to the other side, then that's one thing, but areas of dungeons that are only accessible through a secret door? Blech.

I use secret doors regularly and they are typically ways to find short cuts around dangerous areas such as complex traps, safe places to rest, or they lead to treasure. (I do not usually offer treasure as a result of combat.)

A general search of an area takes 10 minutes which may call for a wandering monster check. If the attempt to find secret doors has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence of failure, then it's a Wisdom (Perception) check to find it. Once it is found, it takes some effort and time (another 10 minutes) to figure out their working, often calling for an Intelligence (Investigation) check.

This does a few things for the game. First, it incentivizes engagement with the exploration pillar. This approach offers meaningful trade-offs between trying to gain an advantage at the risk of wandering monsters. It also encourages players not to dump Intelligence. If finding a secret door is always beneficial, what I've found is players are really pumped to find them.

 

[Arilyn]

I'm not fond of them either. Also dislike those elaborate dungeons with whole rooms shifting and turning. Who would build something like that?

I usually turn secret doors into normal doors in published modules, unless they make thematic sense.

 

[Fenris-77]

Folding the finding of secret doors into a more generalized search of the area removes a lot of the issues. The point above about incentivizing the exploration pillar is a good one.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I use secret doors regularly and they are typically ways to find short cuts around dangerous areas such as complex traps, safe places to rest, or they lead to treasure. (I do not usually offer treasure as a result of combat.)

A general search of an area takes 10 minutes which may call for a wandering monster check. If the attempt to find secret doors has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence of failure, then it's a Wisdom (Perception) check to find it. Once it is found, it takes some effort and time (another 10 minutes) to figure out their working, often calling for an Intelligence (Investigation) check.

This does a few things for the game. First, it incentivizes engagement with the exploration pillar. This approach offers meaningful trade-offs between trying to gain an advantage at the risk of wandering monsters. It also encourages players not to dump Intelligence. If finding a secret door is always beneficial, what I've found is players are really pumped to find them.

That's a solid way to use them, for sure. I don't think my style really meshes with it, but if I was going to use them, I'd hope it was as you describe.

 

[Oofta]

Secret doors occasionally make sense. Back door to a thieves guild, door into an illegal gambling parlor and so on.

In addition, servant's doors were often concealed and not obvious. But I just use passive checks for those, or maybe an intelligence/investigation check for noticing that the rooms aren't laid out right. Advantage if you have architecture, stone mason or similar as a background.

Finding them will be a slight aid, there will always be another way around. If you check out the servant's area you'll also find them.

 

[iserith]

Folding the finding of secret doors into a more generalized search of the area removes a lot of the issues. The point above about incentivizing the exploration pillar is a good one.

The way it works in practice is the players decide they want to spend time poking around an area, which is about 1000 square feet in size over the course of 10 minutes. We drop a marker on the map that covers the search area. Then each player says what they want to do for the next 10 minutes - keep watch for danger, check for traps and hazards, cast a ritual, forage or loot, pick a lock, search for clues, search for secret doors, etc. Once everything's established, I resolve each action one by one, then make a wandering monster check. They can continue spending time in the area doing tasks if they want or they can continue on from there. It's an easy process that knocks it out quickly while offering meaningful choices.

 

[Lanefan]

But nor would it be particularly fun. What's the point of playing out scenarios when the outcome has almost no doubt? It'd be pretty tedious.

The players, however, have no way of knowing whether any given encounter is going to be easy, hard, or anything else before it's been played through; and appearances can be deceiving. Sure I-as-DM might know, but that's information I have to keep to myself.

I'd either narrate the results and move on, or change things up so that the remaining encounters are worthwhile.

I'll never just 'narrate" something like that, for two reasons: one, narration precludes anythng dramatic occurring due to dice rolling; and two, narration assumes the players/PCs' approach which IME can unexpectedly change on a dime.

For example, they get two rooms onto a six-room dungeon and realize the place seems to be entirely populated by Goblins, which at the PCs' level are a pushover. Now sure, they might just plow through and kill everything in the place...or they might decide to take prisoners and-or release the Goblins into the wild...or (and this has happened IME) they might decide on a whim to take the place over and hire the remaining Goblins as staff!

No way of knowing unless you play it through; and sometimes it's nice to throw a too-easy curveball at them to mirror the too-hard ones I throw 'em at other times - in either case whether intentionally or not.

Adhering to the script, for me, isn't a justifiable excuse for a boring session.

It's only as boring as you and the players make it. (of course, if the system you're playing is one that tends to make any combat drag out then that's different - can't help you there )

 

[Lanefan]

Exactly. If it's thematic, okay yeah....but their abundance in a lot of the old modules is just ridiculous.

Not as much as you might think. To the original dungeon occupants they'd have just been ordinary doors - they're only a problem for silly adventurers who can't find them later.

That, and they play right into the exploration side of things.

Not saying you specifically do this, but it's interesting that people don't like secret doors, don't like mapping, don't like frustration in general - and then complain the exploration pillar has nothing in it.