Beyond Combat; It's a Trap!
- Thread starter Family
- Start date
ValhallaGH
First Post
Gulla
Adventurer
One trick I've been exposed to which turned the ordinary pit trap and arrow traps much more interesting was to turn them around. We thought we were going in (defeating the traps) but actually we were going out, so when the trap triggered, it target the rear of the party. The ones who looked for (and triggered 
) the trap were already past it, and the heavy infantry and mage fell into the pit.
Also cause for one of our longest living quotes: "Did you say 'click'?" (From one front-liner to the other as the paladin and sorcerer plummeted down the pit behind them.)
) the trap were already past it, and the heavy infantry and mage fell into the pit.Also cause for one of our longest living quotes: "Did you say 'click'?" (From one front-liner to the other as the paladin and sorcerer plummeted down the pit behind them.)
The Gas Tube - this is a simple hole in the roof of a room or hallway, with a latter leading up into darkness. What it does is captures methane gas, players start up and two things can happen; 1) if carrying a torch...BOOM, they just become a bullet back down the tube or 2) if not carring a torch...nighty-night, players blackout and then fall back down the tube.
The Convebelt Hall - Players enter a room that is a convebelt, moving at walking pace about 3 mph or less. The players have to move faster than the belt to move forward. Just stop it and see the players crash into each other or go running into the pit at the end. You can add to the fun by dropping things on to the convebelt, like balls of fire, slimes and cubes.
The Ground Hog Tavern, sometimes call the Hotel California - once you enter, you just can never leave.
The Convebelt Hall - Players enter a room that is a convebelt, moving at walking pace about 3 mph or less. The players have to move faster than the belt to move forward. Just stop it and see the players crash into each other or go running into the pit at the end. You can add to the fun by dropping things on to the convebelt, like balls of fire, slimes and cubes.
The Ground Hog Tavern, sometimes call the Hotel California - once you enter, you just can never leave.
Celebrim
Legend
Before I get into the core of this discussion, there are two rules to trap design that are absolutely essential.
1) Mark your traps: As a DM, you have to pretty much put up a neon sign that says, "There is a trap around here somewhere.", any time that the PC's entire into a region containing traps. Your traps have to make logical sense. It has to be believable that someone took the time and effort to build a death trap here, and that the trap exists in a place where the inhabitants of the dungeon can live with the trap. Contact poison on a door knob might seem cute, but it raises the serious question of how anyone opens the door. Which brings me to the next point...
2) Traps as challenges: Simply put, your traps should be poorly designed. As a DM, you have unlimited resources. It's quite easy to design undetectable and unavoidable death traps. But this is wholly uninteresting and to be avoided. Whenever you as a DM get invested in the notion of the trap going off, and are very disappointed when it doesn't, you are on the dark side of the screen. That the PC's defeat the trap using the tools provided to them should be the expected and desired outcome. No matter how clever the PC's are, you'll get them eventually, so don't sweat it at all if they disarm or avoid 75% or 90% of your traps (depending on their skill as players). The goal therefore is both to make the trap fun, and the process of avoiding the traps fun. If the process of avoiding the traps isn't fun, then you are either over using traps or not spending enough time designing the challenge of avoiding them.
Ok, good traps in the sense of traps that are both threatening and exciting do the following:
a) Isolate their victims, forcing the rest of the party to try to rescue them. How much isolation is necessary depends on the level of the party, but the goal is to keep them able to interact (hear or see each other) but make actual rescue difficult given the character's current resources. At low levels, the simple pit trap can do this. At higher levels you'll need porticulli, harpoon traps, water traps, walls of force, antigravity traps, wind traps, vacuum traps and so forth.
As an aside, Ravenloft (I6) doesn't get the same level of fame as Tomb of Horrors (S1) for trap induced death, but it is filled with traps that serve this purpose. The I6 traps are actually in many ways just as deadly as those in S1 despite the fact that none of them are 'death traps', because they are all 'split the party' traps under conditions where splitting the party often means a TPK when facing a DM willing to use Strahd's full resources against the PC's. Try to avoid this degree of isolation in most of your trap design because split parties are difficult to run, but do take inspiration from it. The trap doesn't have to do alot of damage to be interesting.
b) Kill their victims somewhat slowly. Instant death traps don't provide alot of drama. You want traps that do damage over time. This doesn't necessarily just mean the familiar room with slowly closing walls or that fills up with water or some more lethal fluid (sand, acid, poisonous insects) although it can. For example, a barrage of arrows is fun. A barrage of arrows that continues for several rounds however is a better distribution of your trap resources. (Remeber, good traps are badly designed!). At low levels this can just be a 'get out of the corridor' challenge which you can make as easy as taking cover behind some dungeon feature and as hard as a long corridor with door that has to be forced or unlocked. At high levels, this should drive the party from one challenge to another and include the risk of adding new traps to the fun. Likewise, have fun with projectiles that imbed themselves in the target (doing damage when removed without a heal check), jaws that grapple the party members and do damage over time, sticky flammable substances, acid, smoke, and so forth which are lethal only provided that damage accumulates unchecked. Good traps don't necessarily do alot of damage, but they just keep going and going with each new iteration just making the problem worse.
c) Go off at the worst possible moment: You don't always want to put traps in a place where they become a part of a larger encounter, but its always something you should be thinking about. Adding alarm bells or ringing gongs to a trap can increase the fun, especially if you adhered to the ideas in 'a' and 'b'. Please do keep in mind the real challenge you are providing here. The monster that provides real challenge to the PC's at full strength is probably overly lethal if it arrives when the party is split, wounded, and partially incapacitated. More fun are monsters that would not represent any challenge in the best of circumstances arriving when the party is in the worst of circumstances. The utility of a horde of goblins or skeletons pouring into a room is extended into higher levels if this occurs when the party is trying to figure out how to get the cleric out of the pit with the locking iron grill that is filling with water while the rogue is dangling from the ceiling with his foot in a snare. More challenging still are monsters that are immune to the effects of the trap: the trap 'puts out lights' rendering it difficult or impossible to see but the monsters have tremorsense, the room fills with burning oil but the monsters are immune to fire, the room fills with poisonous gas but the skeletons don't have to breathe. This scales up almost infinitely, so that at high levels you have, "The trap sucks the air out of the room and creates a negative energy field while summoning incorporael undead out of the walls." This is just simple variation on the theme; once you know the theme its easy to create infinite variations.
d) Debuff the party. It's easy to miss this point, but the whole purpose of a trap beyond the short term thinking challenge it provides is to get the party to use resources. If you miss that point, you might think that the purpose of the trap is to damage the players, but hit point loss is only one type of resource. Forcing the party to use consumables or spells is equally 'useful' in your dungeon design. So, for example, you can have traps that shatter all glass in the room (everything fragile must save or break) covering the party in their own potions/burning oil/acid/whiskey/green slime/etc. One of the most common simple traps I utilize is a dispel magic trap either alone or in combination with some other hazard that playes would normally buff themselves for. You can also have traps that release 'harmless' pests that infest and eat food stuffs. Or the trap can directly debuff the party so that a normally easy fight is rendered more difficult. A 'goo trap' that makes movement hard and lowers dexterity, makes a fight with low level archers much more interesting. Again, this scales up almost infinitely. At higher levels, the floor might turn suddenly into quicksand and a number of mephits may fly into the room. A fight with low level brutes (ogres for example) is more interesting if the wizard has just been feebleminded, or everyone in the party has just been hit by a ray of enfeeblement. Be careful that you don't make the 'save or suck' suck too much, but generally, this can be a much better alternative than just knocking off chunks of hit points.
1) Mark your traps: As a DM, you have to pretty much put up a neon sign that says, "There is a trap around here somewhere.", any time that the PC's entire into a region containing traps. Your traps have to make logical sense. It has to be believable that someone took the time and effort to build a death trap here, and that the trap exists in a place where the inhabitants of the dungeon can live with the trap. Contact poison on a door knob might seem cute, but it raises the serious question of how anyone opens the door. Which brings me to the next point...
2) Traps as challenges: Simply put, your traps should be poorly designed. As a DM, you have unlimited resources. It's quite easy to design undetectable and unavoidable death traps. But this is wholly uninteresting and to be avoided. Whenever you as a DM get invested in the notion of the trap going off, and are very disappointed when it doesn't, you are on the dark side of the screen. That the PC's defeat the trap using the tools provided to them should be the expected and desired outcome. No matter how clever the PC's are, you'll get them eventually, so don't sweat it at all if they disarm or avoid 75% or 90% of your traps (depending on their skill as players). The goal therefore is both to make the trap fun, and the process of avoiding the traps fun. If the process of avoiding the traps isn't fun, then you are either over using traps or not spending enough time designing the challenge of avoiding them.
Ok, good traps in the sense of traps that are both threatening and exciting do the following:
a) Isolate their victims, forcing the rest of the party to try to rescue them. How much isolation is necessary depends on the level of the party, but the goal is to keep them able to interact (hear or see each other) but make actual rescue difficult given the character's current resources. At low levels, the simple pit trap can do this. At higher levels you'll need porticulli, harpoon traps, water traps, walls of force, antigravity traps, wind traps, vacuum traps and so forth.
As an aside, Ravenloft (I6) doesn't get the same level of fame as Tomb of Horrors (S1) for trap induced death, but it is filled with traps that serve this purpose. The I6 traps are actually in many ways just as deadly as those in S1 despite the fact that none of them are 'death traps', because they are all 'split the party' traps under conditions where splitting the party often means a TPK when facing a DM willing to use Strahd's full resources against the PC's. Try to avoid this degree of isolation in most of your trap design because split parties are difficult to run, but do take inspiration from it. The trap doesn't have to do alot of damage to be interesting.
b) Kill their victims somewhat slowly. Instant death traps don't provide alot of drama. You want traps that do damage over time. This doesn't necessarily just mean the familiar room with slowly closing walls or that fills up with water or some more lethal fluid (sand, acid, poisonous insects) although it can. For example, a barrage of arrows is fun. A barrage of arrows that continues for several rounds however is a better distribution of your trap resources. (Remeber, good traps are badly designed!). At low levels this can just be a 'get out of the corridor' challenge which you can make as easy as taking cover behind some dungeon feature and as hard as a long corridor with door that has to be forced or unlocked. At high levels, this should drive the party from one challenge to another and include the risk of adding new traps to the fun. Likewise, have fun with projectiles that imbed themselves in the target (doing damage when removed without a heal check), jaws that grapple the party members and do damage over time, sticky flammable substances, acid, smoke, and so forth which are lethal only provided that damage accumulates unchecked. Good traps don't necessarily do alot of damage, but they just keep going and going with each new iteration just making the problem worse.
c) Go off at the worst possible moment: You don't always want to put traps in a place where they become a part of a larger encounter, but its always something you should be thinking about. Adding alarm bells or ringing gongs to a trap can increase the fun, especially if you adhered to the ideas in 'a' and 'b'. Please do keep in mind the real challenge you are providing here. The monster that provides real challenge to the PC's at full strength is probably overly lethal if it arrives when the party is split, wounded, and partially incapacitated. More fun are monsters that would not represent any challenge in the best of circumstances arriving when the party is in the worst of circumstances. The utility of a horde of goblins or skeletons pouring into a room is extended into higher levels if this occurs when the party is trying to figure out how to get the cleric out of the pit with the locking iron grill that is filling with water while the rogue is dangling from the ceiling with his foot in a snare. More challenging still are monsters that are immune to the effects of the trap: the trap 'puts out lights' rendering it difficult or impossible to see but the monsters have tremorsense, the room fills with burning oil but the monsters are immune to fire, the room fills with poisonous gas but the skeletons don't have to breathe. This scales up almost infinitely, so that at high levels you have, "The trap sucks the air out of the room and creates a negative energy field while summoning incorporael undead out of the walls." This is just simple variation on the theme; once you know the theme its easy to create infinite variations.
d) Debuff the party. It's easy to miss this point, but the whole purpose of a trap beyond the short term thinking challenge it provides is to get the party to use resources. If you miss that point, you might think that the purpose of the trap is to damage the players, but hit point loss is only one type of resource. Forcing the party to use consumables or spells is equally 'useful' in your dungeon design. So, for example, you can have traps that shatter all glass in the room (everything fragile must save or break) covering the party in their own potions/burning oil/acid/whiskey/green slime/etc. One of the most common simple traps I utilize is a dispel magic trap either alone or in combination with some other hazard that playes would normally buff themselves for. You can also have traps that release 'harmless' pests that infest and eat food stuffs. Or the trap can directly debuff the party so that a normally easy fight is rendered more difficult. A 'goo trap' that makes movement hard and lowers dexterity, makes a fight with low level archers much more interesting. Again, this scales up almost infinitely. At higher levels, the floor might turn suddenly into quicksand and a number of mephits may fly into the room. A fight with low level brutes (ogres for example) is more interesting if the wizard has just been feebleminded, or everyone in the party has just been hit by a ray of enfeeblement. Be careful that you don't make the 'save or suck' suck too much, but generally, this can be a much better alternative than just knocking off chunks of hit points.
ExploderWizard
Hero
Isn't that what PC's do for a living- avoid the unavoidable death trap?
" You BYPASSED my UNAVOIDABLE death trap!!! Inconceivable!!"
Celebrim
Legend
Isn't that what PC's do for a living- avoid the unavoidable death trap?
" You BYPASSED my UNAVOIDABLE death trap!!! Inconceivable!!"
There are essentially two sorts of villains.
The first sort is the type of monologuing megalomaniac your describe who thinks that the party who just made short work of his hordes of minions and unavoidable death traps has only earned the right to be painfully killed by the villain in person. These sorts can be fun.
But the other sort is the villain who realizes that the main point of having minions and death traps is not to kill the heroes (because it's probably not going to work), but to give the villain time to escape. These sorts are much more likely to garner long term player respect.
had to put that one in there...
But, it depends what you want to accomplish with the trap. Do you want a life or death type of trap, or maybe one that separates the party, or do you want something that will just use up their resources?
Think cinematic, though not the Admiral Ackbar trap. More like Raiders of the Lost Ark, Temple of Doom, Last Crusade, etc.
The rolling ball o' death is one, as are the arrows in the floor. A great one is the rope bridge from the end of Temple of Doom - have it rigged so if more than one PC crosses the bridge, it collapses. They can save to hang on to the remaining side, but still have to slowly shimmy over. Then, you can send other threats at the divided party.
Celebrim
Legend
Funny. But honestly, if you try either of those things with an experienced party you'll find that you've just given them a large amount of readily convertable wealth and a new transcollosal magical 'pet' to play with. I wouldn't recommend it to someone feeling that things are already out of control.
grodog
Hero
Some excellent traps and tricks advice/ideas are listed by Gary in the "Successful Adventures" section of the 1e PHB: as a DM, all you have to do is reverse-engineer the advice Gary is giving to the players and you're good-to-go!:
You can go read about the Encounters comments yourself, if you're still curious
Gary Gygax on page 103 of the PHB said:
You can go read about the Encounters comments yourself, if you're still curious
R-Hero
Explorer
You could always go for the trap that isn't.
A group that I gamed with refered to one of the DMs more evil waste of resources.
A stick in the dirt.
The party attacked, observed, and burned up magic and time trying to figure out what the mound of dirt with a stick plunged into it. Thats all it was.
Kinda like Eric and the gazeebo...
A group that I gamed with refered to one of the DMs more evil waste of resources.
A stick in the dirt.
The party attacked, observed, and burned up magic and time trying to figure out what the mound of dirt with a stick plunged into it. Thats all it was.
Kinda like Eric and the gazeebo...
Cor_Malek
First Post
Um, call me crazy and presumptuous, but to me it looks like DM's cock-up. If we're too devoted to Chekhov gun philosophy, then whenever anything is mentioned, players expect it to be relevant. Did the DM describe every twig the characters saw, ever? If not, why did he choose to describe this one?
If he did that on purpose (knowing that everything he mentions is relevant and players are expected to, and do respond to it), it might just go into history as the worse attempt at lamp shading, ever.
As to traps: I like my RPG conversion of spike trap. The trap itself looks like that (if you pardon my ASCII):
|
How I do it in DnD is:
- grant spot attempt
- character that sprung it get's a reflex check to jump in some other direction, it has high DC
- if given PC has points in traps*, he's granted a secondary reflex check (lower than above) to fall down. How much he botches this roll, signifies how deep his leg falls in.
- Um, nothing happens. There are two possibilities, depending on players reaction: a) he's calm and tries to asses his situation, I describe spikes at downward angle pressing on his leg or b) he tries to get out immediately, and the spikes dig into his body, dealing damage. Mounts don't get to do b).
Continuous attempts to pull the leg out will just deal more and more damage. x2 in fact, half of which is non-lethal (the idea here is that he'd rather pass out than kill himself with it. If he doesn't pass out, I handwave the non-lethal damage on account of adrenaline rush or something - it's essentially my failsafe as DM).
Either by figuring it out themselves, or by a good trap check, players will know that the only way to get out of the trap is to destroy it (unless they're into field amputation). The HP and hardness will vary from trap to trap, but it takes time, and is almost always very loud. A villain with a lot of low level spell slots to spare might consider putting Alarm spell on bottom of the pit, which will make him know immediately if one is sprung. This is of course on top of the hassle anyone will do when attempting to get out.
Bottom line - it's supposed to create suspension of "what to do" for players. It really doesn't need lethality to be effective. It's goal is to shaken the PC's and provoke them to make enough racket to be noticed. And off to our cunningly improbable escape route!
*It's a design so common that I count it among things players don't have to know, but their characters do.
Last edited:
Oryan77
Adventurer
I think you're saying you didn't like what you quoted from the other poster, but I can't tell.
Can you rewrite that bit and maybe do without all the fancy shmancy catch phrases? It might help dumb people like me understand what you're trying to say.
I thought the stick idea was pretty funny. I'm just wondering if you are warning us not to do it. I think you even explained what is good or bad about doing that, but I can't tell through all the needless jargon.
jonesy
A Wicked Kendragon
Isn't that exactly why it's the perfect trap? The players expect it to be important.
You'll probably only be able to pull one on the same group once, but it seems to me quite enough.
Cor_Malek
First Post
I think you're saying you didn't like what you quoted from the other poster, but I can't tell.
Can you rewrite that bit and maybe do without all the fancy shmancy catch phrases? It might help dumb people like me understand what you're trying to say.
I thought the stick idea was pretty funny. I'm just wondering if you are warning us not to do it. I think you even explained what is good or bad about doing that, but I can't tell through all the needless jargon.
I had hoped that someone will beat me to it, as I'm quite bad at explaining things in detail. That's why I used so many, maybe a bit uncommon phrases - each (well, maybe not "cockup") saved me at least one full paragraph. I'll do my best to explain those terms and therefore previous post, but because I will be doing that, I'll make you pay dearly and forward you to page, where certain people shouldn't be sent to. At least if they value their time.
Home Page - Television Tropes & Idioms
May Yhwh have mercy on my soul.
If you prefer my explanation:
cockup - brit word for botch (ie: I had high hopes for Daikatana, but it was a total cockup. or -How was last session with McBad Geam? -Several cockups leading to TPK, the usual.).
---
Anton Chekhov was a brilliant literate. But among laymen however, he's mostly known for his quote on scene design, which first appeared in his correspondence, then in a journal about theatres. The one I I quote is paraphrase of them from Memoirs of Shchukin:
"If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."
Chekhov's gun in it's wide meaning is technique, or rather type of foreshadowing. Reader knows that any object placed in story is bound to be relevant to the story. Said object/information is called Chekhov's gun. It makes for clear storytelling, but it can often ruin the story for more savvy readers.
Many great authors write with contrary idea - they populate their world so what reader/observer can better empathise with problems the protagonist is facing (instead of just cheering for him "Oh come on! Old lady cat was eating a fish! Of course the killer was the fisherman you meet in the mornings, how can you not see this?!")- for example Thomas Harris "Red Dragon" is full of false leads, objects to which investigators put too much meaning to, etc. Ignoring Chekhov's advice means that the reader is forced to use own brain and think outside the box. He will challenge the plan presented by author. This of course means there's a lot of pressure on storyteller - his tale must actually make sense, because he tries to make reader involved instead of relying on suspense of disbelief (oh so many "genius" plans that had more holes than emmentaler cheese (yeah it's the one with all the holes ;-) )).
Red herring is almost direct contradiction of Chekhov's gun. Players used to DM's and games where everything is relevant will chase first red herring in sight, then possibly slay it and expect GP's and misplaced artefacts to pour out of his stomach.
Ah, and the good old "lamp shading", or "lampshade hanging", or simply "lampshade". Author acknowledges his idea is poor, or maybe that he overused a joke or a trope... He acknowledges this fact, makes his sweetest expression and basicaly says to reader "bare with me on that, it's gonna be cool". So the bad design is the shining lamp, and this act is the lampshade. For example:
"This would work only in a movie!" or by Shakespear himself (Twelfth Night): "If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Those are examples of lampshading in action. But sometimes author will acknowledge that he's been overusing something. It's well known around Discworld thatmilion to one chances work in 9 out of ten situations (is there any book without this sentence?). In one of the books (um, the one where Watch is introduced as more than Nobby and Fred), characters deem hitting a dragon too probable, and add more details like standing on one leg, with hanky in hand - to boost improbability and make it sure shot.
So if GM mentions anything only if it's relevant to the story, for example he never describes small mannerisms of insignificant people, or details of surroundings - anything that he does mention - has to be significant. In such world, it's a scientific fact of quantum physics, that any object or incident that is observed - holds significance to observer.
If GM puts door only to trap it or put monsters behind it, his players will treat any such portal as a threat. Can you imagine taking 20 minutes every time you encounter a door? Some portion of mushrooms is poisonous. If GM puts only poisoned or otherwise threatening fungi around the place - it's no strange thing that PC's could starve in cavern full of nutritious shrooms.
If discoloured plates and misplaced sticks are mentioned only to note a trap - it's not particularly strange that players will take their time over every plate that had to be replaced, and every stick that was dropped. If it signifies anything - it's that DM storytelling tricks are predictable.
However, I'd still give benefit of doubt to the DM - he could be leading a game for new group that has undertaken years of respondent conditioning by some other DM. Or maybe they like their plots only as a premise for killing stuff. I don't judge, but my original reaction to story was that it was sad testimony not to players but to Pavlovian DM who shaped them so.
Yes, if GM indulges certain type of narrative, the players will expect any twig that get's mentioned by GM to be of grave importance. Their characters would not. They see sticks, twigs and number of other forms of long objects all the time(especially since bulk of them are male). Their characters might realize they're bound to encounter people of more power then theirs, and an occasional stick that is just laying there.
Taking over groups from such DM's can be awful for people who prefer to lead games in open worlds. They will attack any villain, they will slay every monster and will expect any threat to be level appropriate. Ugh.
PS.: As you can see, I used those terms not to be pompous, but rather because I'd otherwise have to spend a lot of text explaining ideas behind them, and I'm really terrible at explaining stuff. You know how the old interview cliché goes: "And what's your biggest vice?" "I'm too much of a perfectionist". It aint funny when you actually are
Try drawing a forest when you want to focus on each tree separately.Despite this disability of mine, I do love to explain things, so I consider anyone exposed to be my victim of a crime of passion. When I'm eventually judged for this by the beardy GM in the sky - your name will come up.
Last edited:
jonesy
A Wicked Kendragon
I do rather think that Oryan was being sarcastic, but thanks for the explanations anyway.
Here's one for you:
First Law Of Metafictional Thermodynamics - Television Tropes & Idioms
To keep the flow of the game at a proper pace the GM can't always describe anything and everything that he'd want to. Details that do not matter will therefore always be left out even if the GM might feel that they could have added to the experience. This is so that the players do not feel like they are being spoonfed miles and miles of stuff they do not care, or do not need to care about. The possiblity for injecting a trap of this kind exists because of this.
Celebrim
Legend
I'd like to take old Grimtooth behind the wood shed sometime and have a word with him - designer to designer - about the dysfunctional culture he helped to create around traps.
Only he'd probably realize that it was a trap.
R-Hero
Explorer
I was in a little of a hurry when I posted last week.
The DM in question is known here at EnWorld as Jollydoc. (Read some of his story hours, good read) I wasn't in this particular game but it as told to me around the table while reminiscing about some fun times.
J.D. is by far one of the best DMs I've had the honor to play with. He wouldn't have tried to intentionally fool the players into wasting resources. But, being the cut throat type of Dm he is, he wasn't going to hold the players hand either and stopped them from doing what they wanted to do in game.
Per your example, no he would not describe every twig the charactes saw, PROVIDED they were in a forest or something similar. The group was in a dungeon enviroment and the twig/pitchers-mound looked out of place. (Just like a shiny crystal ball would look out of place in a forest, ergo deserved a description as well)
There was no special emphasis placed but it was the proverbial balloon being floated in front of the guys playing.
Bottom line, we all play to have fun and sometimes the bad guy's win. I don't know of any people that leaves JD.s table and has not have fun.
