Changes needed to make the role model work

[Lonely Tylenol]

Where have the designers have ever stated that "a Fighter, a Warlord, a Ranger and a Warlock will....work just as well as a traditional group consisting of a Fighter, a Cleric, a Rogue and a Wizard".

Traps of the gygaxian "look-before-you-leap" variety will go away. It has been decided that being thoughtful and cautious is boring and slows the game down. Traps will be of the Prince of Persia or Tomb Raider variety--big whirling blades will just come flying right out of nowhere the instant you enter the room.

Actually, it seems more like gygaxian traps are going to make a comeback. Remember all the room traps in Palace of the Silver Princess? Those are encounter traps, similar to the style in Dungeonscape. The traps in 4E are going that way too.

I think what you mean is that the "you missed the poison needle on the lock, save or die" traps of the earlier editions are finally going to disappear in favour of traps that are actually kind of fun to encounter.

 

[Felon]

I think what you mean is that the "you missed the poison needle on the lock, save or die" traps of the earlier editions are finally going to disappear in favour of traps that are actually kind of fun to encounter.

You need to get a lot smarter before you'll be in a position to tell other people what they mean. The Palace of the Silver Princess wasn't gygaxian--Gary had little truck with silver princesses. Tomb of Horrors was gygaxian--a dungeon with a supposedly killer rep, but actually completely survivable if one looks before they leap. If there's a yawning portal of complete darkness, probe it with something other than your body, or anything else equally difficult to replace. If you're at a juncture with a conspicuously long hallway, maybe it's time to look for a less obvious route.

And Dr. A, as much you seem to feel like you should rightfully be the arbiter of what's 'actually kind of fun to encounter" for all gamers, I must regretfully inform you that I and many, many other people enjoyed the heck of diabolical deathtraps that rewarded thoughtfulness.

 

[Remathilis]

You need to get a lot smarter before you'll be in a position to tell other people what they mean.

[quick mod]Hey now, play nice you two.[/quick mod]

The Palace of the Silver Princess wasn't gygaxian--Gary had little truck with silver princesses. Tomb of Horrors was gygaxian--a dungeon with a supposedly killer rep, but actually completely survivable if one looks before they leap. If there's a yawning portal of complete darkness, probe it with something other than your body, or anything else equally difficult to replace. If you're at a juncture with a conspicuously long hallway, maybe it's time to look for a less obvious route.

I think you're getting your wires crossed. Tomb of Horrors and Silver Princess BOTH feature the same kind of traps: elaborate, challenging, and not simply found and defeated by a Find/Remove Traps roll. You can't roll a die and disable a yawning mouth of darkness. You have to think through it, use resources, and eventually disable or bypass the trap. Silver Princess does that to less lethal degree (the traps aren't as deadly since its a lower level module and not the same author, but the feel remains similar).

However, "gotcha" traps: 10' pits in the center of a hall, poison needles on locks, or other simple "roll, disarm or suffer" traps might be going, replaced with more complex, puzzle-like traps and those in Silver Princess (low level) and ToH (higher level).

And Dr. A, as much you seem to feel like you should rightfully be the arbiter of what's 'actually kind of fun to encounter" for all gamers, I must regretfully inform you that I and many, many other people enjoyed the heck of diabolical deathtraps that rewarded thoughtfulness.

Deathtraps will still be possible, just the "you didn't search the 34th square of the hall, roll a reflex save" is probably not going to be so commonplace anymore. And if they are, one class alone will not have dominion over removing them...

 

[Felon]

I think you're getting your wires crossed. Tomb of Horrors and Silver Princess BOTH feature the same kind of traps: elaborate, challenging, and not simply found and defeated by a Find/Remove Traps roll. You can't roll a die and disable a yawning mouth of darkness. You have to think through it, use resources, and eventually disable or bypass the trap. Silver Princess does that to less lethal degree (the traps aren't as deadly since its a lower level module and not the same author, but the feel remains similar).

However, "gotcha" traps: 10' pits in the center of a hall, poison needles on locks, or other simple "roll, disarm or suffer" traps might be going, replaced with more complex, puzzle-like traps and those in Silver Princess (low level) and ToH (higher level).

The kind of traps that just boil down to a Search and Disable Device check are lame. But those aren't gygaxian or "old-school" traps. Unfortunately, those are at least as prevalent in the current edition, if not moreso, as they ever were. Official 3e adventures, starting with the Sunless Citadel, featured an abundance of lame-o glyphs of warding and arrow traps with zero thought put into them.

There are a couple of different types of traps. There is the kind that is a sort of puzzle that rewards thoughfulness (which we don't get very often anymore), and then some are simply hazards that suddently srping upon you. You're not really meant to find the latter (it's rather anticlimactic for the big ball to NOT come rolling down the hallway...) so there needs to be a way to get players past the notion that they're entitled to find traps--rather, they should take more practical precautions against a sudden trap encounter, like making sure the trap-sense characters are on point.

Personally, I'm a big fan of throwing out Search as a skill. That removes the sense of entitlement right there, as well as the blandisment of traps that results from having one all-purpose blanket mechanic for finding any particular type of trap. Spot checks to find some traps, Listen for others, Open Lock for those pesky needle traps, and for some maybe no skill check at all (they're undetectable until triggered).

 

[Stalker0]

My hope is that everyone can search for traps in 4e.

If the rogue needs something, give him an automatic search roll when he's 10' from a trap. I hate having to sit there and wait for the rogue to search every frikkin square in a dungeon before we can go.

 

[Oldtimer]

Trapfinding: Traps can be found by search-checks ...

I think people are referring to the rogue ability Trapfinding that allows you to use Search for traps where the DC is 21 or higher. In 3.x only rogues can find such traps (without magic).

 

[chitzk0i]

Warlord buffs the group and deals with HP and status effects while occasionally hitting things.

It was my impression that the designers said that you won't have to spend actions that only fulfill your role. For example, in the fight with a dragon article, the cleric healed a party member by scoring a critical hit in melee. Thus, the warlord will probably hit things in order to buff and heal, or will have swift-action role-filling abilities.

 

[Felon]

My hope is that everyone can search for traps in 4e.

If the rogue needs something, give him an automatic search roll when he's 10' from a trap. I hate having to sit there and wait for the rogue to search every frikkin square in a dungeon before we can go.

See my comments above, which cover this sentiment handily. There's something akin to both entitlement and obligation when it comes to looking for traps. If detecting is all the function of one all-purpose skill check, then it's easy to get boxed into performing it ad nauseum, without even having to consider the current environment or circumstances; whether it's a pit trap, an overhead scythe blade, a poison needle in the lock, poison gas in the box, crushing walls, or a big ball coming the hallway, it's all just a perfunctory Search check. That makes the challenge rather dull and unexciting, so it's no wonder a lot of folks now consider them a chore to deal with rather than an emjoyable part of the game.

I think that turning trap detection in a passive check--something the DM initiates--can alleviate certain issues. Nobody walks around making Spot and Listen checks every time they move a square, because they know the DM will tell them when to make a check. Traps could work like that.

But in general I'd rather traps be approached in a reductionist manner, not a unilateral one. From an adventuring standpoints, some traps work best when they aren't found before they spring. OTOH, some work best when players spot them right away and have to figure out how to bypass them. I think the designers should do the same thing with traps that they're doing with monsters: classify them by purpose. I may take a shot at this myself when I have some free time.

 

[Felon]

It was my impression that the designers said that you won't have to spend actions that only fulfill your role. For example, in the fight with a dragon article, the cleric healed a party member by scoring a critical hit in melee. Thus, the warlord will probably hit things in order to buff and heal, or will have swift-action role-filling abilities.

To my knowledge, the only real indication of this is James Wyatt saying in an interview that they'd give you your class role "for free", but I don't know if that should taken as applying to every possible application of a class ability. After all, once you've fulfilled your role "for free", what do you do with your leftover action besides attack? I don't know if D&D's party structure works best when everyone's playing offense.

 

[Umbran]

You need to get a lot smarter before you'll be in a position to tell other people what they mean.

Folks,

Suggesting that other folks are insufficiently intelligent is not an acceptable rhetorical approach on these boards. We do not want to see any more such in this thread. Treat your fellow board members with respect. Please review The Rules, and abide by them as you continue. Thank you.