Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 7598115"><p>And let's talk about traps that <em>aren't</em> telegraphed for moment, and see if we can figure out what exactly the gameplay for this is supposed to look like.</p><p></p><p><strong>Option 1: Every 5' Square</strong></p><p>The players are just supposed to all make Investigation and Perception checks every 5', and hope that somebody in the party rolls high enough. I'm not saying this is how it must be played; just trying to cover all bases here. Can we all agree this one is not a desirable outcome?</p><p></p><p>Analysis: didn't we stop playing this way in about 1980?</p><p></p><p><strong>Option 2: Passive Perception</strong></p><p>If anybody's passive score is high enough, the trap is discovered, otherwise it's not, with no decision-making by the player. This might be what some refer to as "challenging the character" (or "challenging the build", as it were.) </p><p></p><p>Analysis: In addressing @<em><strong><u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=97077" target="_blank">iserith</a></u></strong></em>'s trapped hallway, @<em><strong><u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=22779" target="_blank">Hussar</a></u></strong></em> claims that once the Perception check succeeds no further explanation/input by the player is required; the DM can infer that a trap of which the party is aware is also successfully avoided. So it would seem that the players don't actually need to do anything here: if their passive Perception is high enough, nothing else happens. Otherwise the trap is triggered (presumably with some narration by the DM: "It's a poison arrow trap, you take X piercing and Y poison damage.") </p><p></p><p>Instead of actually doing all this work behind the DM screen during play, it might be more expedient to add up the average damage of all the traps, multiply by the odds of the trap being triggered, divide by the number of people in the party, and just have everybody reduce their hp by that number. You could speed things up even more by not reducing damage and instead having everybody check off the spell slots and HD necessary to negate all that damage. </p><p></p><p><strong>Option 3: Clues</strong></p><p>There's some clue that challenges players...oops, I mean, <em>alerts</em> players...to make a Perception check in this particular spot. Umm....</p><p></p><p>Analysis: Oh, wait, a clue is like a "telegraph" and we're not supposed to be discussing "trap here" scenarios.</p><p></p><p><strong>Option 4: Known Locations</strong></p><p>This one is sort of a hybrid of 1 and 3: players aren't expected to make checks in every square, just the ones that canonically "May Contain Trap". So the trap isn't telegraphed, per se, but savvy players (damn, there's that "challenge the player" thing rearing its ugly head again) know which locations to check: chests, closed doors, huge gems sitting on top of altars, etc. So it's a combination of "always check" and "but only in certain locations". </p><p></p><p>Analysis: While somewhat more efficient than "check every square" it also hobbles the DM, who now can't put traps in other places without risking annoying the players and/or teaching them to start searching every 5' square.</p><p></p><p>So which is it? Those of you who deride telegraphing traps, what does it look like at your table?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 7598115"] And let's talk about traps that [I]aren't[/I] telegraphed for moment, and see if we can figure out what exactly the gameplay for this is supposed to look like. [B]Option 1: Every 5' Square[/B] The players are just supposed to all make Investigation and Perception checks every 5', and hope that somebody in the party rolls high enough. I'm not saying this is how it must be played; just trying to cover all bases here. Can we all agree this one is not a desirable outcome? Analysis: didn't we stop playing this way in about 1980? [B]Option 2: Passive Perception[/B] If anybody's passive score is high enough, the trap is discovered, otherwise it's not, with no decision-making by the player. This might be what some refer to as "challenging the character" (or "challenging the build", as it were.) Analysis: In addressing @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=97077"]iserith[/URL][/U][/B][/I]'s trapped hallway, @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=22779"]Hussar[/URL][/U][/B][/I] claims that once the Perception check succeeds no further explanation/input by the player is required; the DM can infer that a trap of which the party is aware is also successfully avoided. So it would seem that the players don't actually need to do anything here: if their passive Perception is high enough, nothing else happens. Otherwise the trap is triggered (presumably with some narration by the DM: "It's a poison arrow trap, you take X piercing and Y poison damage.") Instead of actually doing all this work behind the DM screen during play, it might be more expedient to add up the average damage of all the traps, multiply by the odds of the trap being triggered, divide by the number of people in the party, and just have everybody reduce their hp by that number. You could speed things up even more by not reducing damage and instead having everybody check off the spell slots and HD necessary to negate all that damage. [B]Option 3: Clues[/B] There's some clue that challenges players...oops, I mean, [I]alerts[/I] players...to make a Perception check in this particular spot. Umm.... Analysis: Oh, wait, a clue is like a "telegraph" and we're not supposed to be discussing "trap here" scenarios. [B]Option 4: Known Locations[/B] This one is sort of a hybrid of 1 and 3: players aren't expected to make checks in every square, just the ones that canonically "May Contain Trap". So the trap isn't telegraphed, per se, but savvy players (damn, there's that "challenge the player" thing rearing its ugly head again) know which locations to check: chests, closed doors, huge gems sitting on top of altars, etc. So it's a combination of "always check" and "but only in certain locations". Analysis: While somewhat more efficient than "check every square" it also hobbles the DM, who now can't put traps in other places without risking annoying the players and/or teaching them to start searching every 5' square. So which is it? Those of you who deride telegraphing traps, what does it look like at your table? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
Top