Dragonbane general thread

[overgeeked]

I agree that players should be on the lookout for traps and be descriptive, but I also think that the GM/adventure should telegraph traps through description.

Those are contradictory. If the referee telegraphs traps, there's no need for the PCs to be on the lookout. They never have to lookout because there's nothing to lookout for. The referee simply tells them.

I believe that Ben Milton, for example, even advocates for automatically revealing a trap if the players are spending time looking for one in a scene. But for him, the game of finding a trap is not as interesting as the game of dealing with a trap.

I don't particularly see value in the 10-foot-pole playstyle.

Players describing how they're spending time looking for traps is "the 10-foot pole playstyle".

That's literally what I'm talking about. If the players spend time describing their PCs looking for traps, I simply tell them. No roll required. Description trumps rolls. If they never describe looking for traps, they are never looking for traps. Just like if they never describe opening a door, they never open the door.

Do you require the players to narrate that for every hallway and room?

No. Nor do I require the players repeatedly tell me they're walking or riding or any other "perpetual" action that is regularly repeated until stopped. If they say, "We're tapping the floor with a 10-foot pole" then they're doing that until they either find something or say they stop. If I'm not sure, I'll check with them. But if that's all they ever say, then they'll miss anything not easily discovered by tapping a 10-foot pole.

To me the very heart of RPGs is the conversation between the players and the referee where the players interrogate the environment around them. Skipping that is skipping over the game itself.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Do you require the players to narrate that for every hallway and room?

It doesn't come up that often because I will generally describe the room and always tell them of anything that could require deeper investigation. We're not doing 10-foot pole style playing anymore -- we left that behind a long time ago. But if the hallway floor looks unstable, or there is a pile of rubble hiding a pressure plate, or a torch opens a secret door, I'll always describe that without any rolling, and wait to see if a character investigates the object. If there was some sort of elaborate trap ala Grimtooth I'd probably describe the setup as completely as possible and perhaps call for an Awareness roll for something strange about the place.

 

[Bill Zebub]

To me the very heart of RPGs is the conversation between the players and the referee where the players interrogate the environment around them. Skipping that is skipping over the game itself.

Oh, I 100% agree with this!

And I have a goal of stripping away whatever isn't necessary.

The way I see it, if the players are telling me in every hallway and every room that they are tapping with a 10' pole, then they are just being repetitive, covering all their bases, and not really responding to varying scenes in interesting ways.

Same thing if at the beginning of the dungeon they say, "...and we are going to tap everywhere with a 10' pole."

The type of scenario I like to create is that (just as an example) they come to a hallway where they think there might be a trap...because they got some kind of telegraph or hint, maybe earlier in the dungeon...but they aren't sure. So they say, "We're going to tap our way down the hall with the pole." And I say, "Ok, great. But..." and then I add something like "...as you start, the tap-tap-tapping echoes eerily in the dark hallway. It's a long way down, and that's a lot of tapping. What do you do?"

The implication being: you might very well attract attention with all that tapping. But it's their choice. Since they have some reason to believe this hallway is trapped, they now have a dilemma, with no sure way to compute what the optimal choice is.

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about, and that I strive for. I'd rather dispense with all the repetitive trap and secret door finding and replace it with just a couple of scenarios like this.

 

[Aldarc]

Those are contradictory. If the referee telegraphs traps, there's no need for the PCs to be on the lookout. They never have to lookout because there's nothing to lookout for. The referee simply tells them.

There is a difference between the GM telling players that there are traps and the GM telegraphing them, just like there is a difference between the author foreshadowing and the author telling you that the dog dies at the end of the book. Telegraphing danger is an important part of OSR gaming.

Players describing how they're spending time looking for traps is "the 10-foot pole playstyle".

I can't say that I agree. If it was then I would expect that 10' poles would be a part of how Dragonbane actually plays, but it doesn't. There are a fair number of OSR games that avoid devolving into playstyles that have Conan the Barbarian using 10' poles.

That's literally what I'm talking about. If the players spend time describing their PCs looking for traps, I simply tell them. No roll required. Description trumps rolls. If they never describe looking for traps, they are never looking for traps. Just like if they never describe opening a door, they never open the door.

I think that you can describe your PCs looking for traps without them needing to pull out 10' poles from their rucksack. IMHO, there is a lot of GM-oriented "gotcha!" that I associate with players feeling like 10' poles are necessary for detecting traps.

 

[Bill Zebub]

And I'll add one addendum: in something like Shadowdark I would let them find the trap automatically if they choose to tap. No roll required, but I would then roll for random encounters.

But in Dragonbane they need skill rolls in order to get Dragons/Demons in order to improve. So ideally the decision to tap would result in automatically finding the trap, but I would still call for a roll and then improvise some sort of "success with complication" on a failed roll. And maybe that complication is a roll on the random encounter table? I'm not sure, exactly, but that's the sort of thing I want to achieve.

Anyway, this style of play takes a lot of preparation, and is going to require a very close study of the published adventures.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Those are contradictory. If the referee telegraphs traps, there's no need for the PCs to be on the lookout. They never have to lookout because there's nothing to lookout for. The referee simply tells them.

I think you are misunderstanding 'telegraph'. It's not handing them all the information.

Take the example I offered upthread: door #1 has an open pit trap. Door #2 looks very similar to Door #1.

Players describing how they're spending time looking for traps is "the 10-foot pole playstyle".

Kind of. I prefer to have a reason for tapping in this location, rather than "we tap in all locations".

No. Nor do I require the players repeatedly tell me they're walking or riding or any other "perpetual" action that is regularly repeated until stopped. If they say, "We're tapping the floor with a 10-foot pole" then they're doing that until they either find something or say they stop.

I get that. And I've played that way. I just eventually decided that, for me, that while it wasn't a bad experience, it also wasn't the best experience because it didn't require any sort of interesting decision-making. And I have finite time to play!

 

[overgeeked]

Oh, I 100% agree with this!

And I have a goal of stripping away whatever isn't necessary.

The way I see it, if the players are telling me in every hallway and every room that they are tapping with a 10' pole, then they are just being repetitive, covering all their bases, and not really responding to varying scenes in interesting ways.

I mean, I literally just said I didn't do that. So I'm not sure what you're arguing against here.

The implication being: you might very well attract attention with all that tapping. But it's their choice. Since they have some reason to believe this hallway is trapped, they now have a dilemma, with no sure way to compute what the optimal choice is.

That's the sort of thing I'm talking about, and that I strive for. I'd rather dispense with all the repetitive trap and secret door finding and replace it with just a couple of scenarios like this.

To me, "you're in a dungeon" is reason enough. And yes, of course, constantly making noise is going to draw the attention of something. It's all part of the risk-reward of dungeon delving.

 

[Bill Zebub]

P.S. And it's ok if telegraphs are totally missed! In my experience, the realization that "we should have realized this door was like that last one!" is also really fun/funny. The damage taken isn't just arbitrary resource attrition, the players recognize it as their own mistake, and they accept it.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I mean, I literally just said I didn't do that. So I'm not sure what you're arguing against here.

I guess I'm confused, then. You said you don't like telegraphs, and you also wrote:

"If they say, "We're tapping the floor with a 10-foot pole" then they're doing that until they either find something or say they stop.

I took that to mean that they can announce it at the beginning of the dungeon, and then they are tapping for as long as they are in the dungeon.
And if it doesn't mean that, and they are applying it selectively, why do your players sometimes tap, and sometimes not? How do they decide when it's necessary? (It's possible we're talking about the exact same thing.)

To me, "you're in a dungeon" is reason enough.

I didn't quite follow this. Reason enough for what?

 

[overgeeked]

There is a difference between the GM telling players that there are traps and the GM telegraphing them, just like there is a difference between the author foreshadowing and the author telling you that the dog dies at the end of the book. Telegraphing danger is an important part of OSR gaming.

Dragonbane isn't an OSR game. At most it's an NSR game. Modern design that's meant to evoke an old-school feel without mimicking or copying an old-school game. Sure, Drakar och Demoner is a 40+ year-old game and some elements have remained or were carried over when Free League rebooted it.

I think that you can describe your PCs looking for traps without them needing to pull out 10' poles from their rucksack. IMHO, there is a lot of GM-oriented "gotcha!" that I associate with players feeling like 10' poles are necessary for detecting traps.

Sometimes the 10-foot pole is literal, sometimes it's an easy stock phrase that's a stand in for a whole host of stuff. Just like dungeon delving isn't always in a literal dungeon.

I can't say that I agree. If it was then I would expect that 10' poles would be a part of how Dragonbane actually plays, but it doesn't. There are a fair number of OSR games that avoid devolving into playstyles that have Conan the Barbarian using 10' poles.

Ah. So there's not really any meaningful conversation to be had on the topic. Got it. Moving on.