Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8285744" data-attributes="member: 18">Yes it is and I've done it, more than once, however, IMHO, you have to not be a jerk about it. Traps are physically real objects (or they're magic as all hell which means vulnerable to Detect Magic lighting up real bright and detailed), and too many trap designers in 1E and even 2E and later editions forget that like, these are not existing in "idea space" (or "katana space" - that being wherever Duncan MacLeod of the clan MacLeod draws his katana from). Way too many traps just don't have the mechanism they'd need (even like, in a simple way) to actually make them function. To me, and I don't mean to dictate on this, but to me, that's the worst kind of BS. So I always check all the traps in any adventure I intend to run to ensure they aren't naughty word in that way.But yeah, if you have a "double-play" trap that's fine IMHO so long as if they really think about it, or make an effort to double-check, there's some way to discover that at least something hinky is going on.Personally when I come across traps in someone else's adventure which I intend to run I check the following:1) Does the trap even work, as written? About 80% do. In the remaining 20%, they range from missing some obvious thing which will make it fail (or totally trivial to avoid) to outright "didn't understand physics". I have run ones that didn't work and just had them fail where it contributed to the vibe of a dungeon/adventure. If they don't, I usually fix them though, trying to retain the concept/style.2) Does it make a single lick of sense that the trap would be there? This is like 80% in 3PP adventures, and er... more like 50-70% in WotC and TSR adventures. I have no idea what is up with the latter (and to be fair I am not talking 5E much, mostly earlier editions but definitely including 4E where it was often more like 30-50% in early 4E WotC stuff. Is there some plausible explanation or does it being implausible help in some sense with atmosphere or something? If the answer is no, I decide - either I remove the trap, or I come up with some sort of explanation as to why it is there (which has actually come up a surprising number of times).3) Is the trap actually going to make the adventure more interesting? Again we're at like 70-80% on 3PP adventures and er... a lower figure for WotC and most TSR ones. WotC in 3E and 4E really had a lot of "this trap obviously just exists because there was a trap quota" traps. If the answer is no, I either just remove it, or replace it with one that's actually interesting.I can't speak for everyone, but my main party, or me, would immediately zap the rope from a distance because it's suspicious as hell. No-one just leaves a useful rope to get out of a pit, or suspiciously vertical in a pit. I just don't see any scenario that rope doesn't get zapped or shot with a flaming arrow from at least 30' (or some poor familiar or the like is sent in 5E, if the angle isn't right). That would be hard to defeat because the trap designer couldn't guess where the party would be when they did it.Of course if you'd used this on me when I was 10-12, my PC would be dead at the bottom of that pit right now.One thing I feel is a bit underused in adventures is fired traps or traps which have partially failed due to age. The latter can be especially fun because you have a really terrifying trap that is quite dangerous but also fails in some way that makes everyone sigh with relief.</blockquote>

Verification