Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Psikerlord#" data-source="post: 6867033" data-attributes="member: 93321">I think this thread demonstrates that traps are one of the hardest areas of the game to have fun with. There's been threads on traps before and no consensus has emerged, from what I remember. I some ways I like the OSR approach to traps before thieves existed at all - everyone just says what they do, and tries to navigate past the trap. It's probably the most interesting approach. For a long time however, we have had the thief class, and I guess you don't want to devalue that aspect of the thief too much. Perhaps the thief should be remodeled from &quot;good at disarming traps&quot; to &quot;good at resisting trap effects&quot; instead (of course, a player could still choose options to make the thief good at disarming, too, but don't make it the default). Keep everyone on the same page disarm wise, so everyone is encouraged to participate. But if it all goes horribly wrong, the thief is most likely to come out unscathed (like the 5e trap feat, forget the name now). In my experience you use traps when it makes sense, and either for (i) simple resource attrition (not a big thing, simple trap, a few dice rolls/fluff sorts it - this would work particularly well with a &quot;trap resistant&quot; thief class/feat) or (ii) a set piece thinking trap, like a Grimtooths, this is a proper encounter type of trap. For a set piece trap, there is either (a) some kind of telegraph or (b) setting the trap off is only stage one of a two stage (or more) trap. And the whole party needs to be engaged to bypass it/navigate through it/disarm it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Psikerlord#, post: 6867033, member: 93321"] I think this thread demonstrates that traps are one of the hardest areas of the game to have fun with. There's been threads on traps before and no consensus has emerged, from what I remember. I some ways I like the OSR approach to traps before thieves existed at all - everyone just says what they do, and tries to navigate past the trap. It's probably the most interesting approach. For a long time however, we have had the thief class, and I guess you don't want to devalue that aspect of the thief too much. Perhaps the thief should be remodeled from "good at disarming traps" to "good at resisting trap effects" instead (of course, a player could still choose options to make the thief good at disarming, too, but don't make it the default). Keep everyone on the same page disarm wise, so everyone is encouraged to participate. But if it all goes horribly wrong, the thief is most likely to come out unscathed (like the 5e trap feat, forget the name now). In my experience you use traps when it makes sense, and either for (i) simple resource attrition (not a big thing, simple trap, a few dice rolls/fluff sorts it - this would work particularly well with a "trap resistant" thief class/feat) or (ii) a set piece thinking trap, like a Grimtooths, this is a proper encounter type of trap. For a set piece trap, there is either (a) some kind of telegraph or (b) setting the trap off is only stage one of a two stage (or more) trap. And the whole party needs to be engaged to bypass it/navigate through it/disarm it. [/QUOTE]

Verification