Is this fair? -- your personal opinion

[pawsplay]

He doesn't have to think it opens the door. It could, for example, ring a bell somewhere to summon a servant. Why are the only two options trap and open the secret door? Why is it so obviously trapped? I can see no reason for the PCs to think its traped beyond "levers are traped" metagame thinking.

A lever to ring a bell to summon a servant? Riiight.

It's not so much that levers are trapped, so much that levers in strange places have strange functions and should be approached accordingly. An obvious lever in a room with a secret door suggests someone is hoping someone will pull the lever and suffer a terrible fate.

Incidentally, disintegrate does not take a Reflex save, so there's no telling what the trap does. If it does a disintegrate effect for 20d6, Fortitude for half, you could make your save and still end up a pile of dust.

 

[Sejs]

Other: What was the reasoning for the disintegrate switch being there in the first place? Does it serve some purpose other than to hose PCs?

If it's there for some practical reason (.. wacky magical trash disposal, maybe?) is the area its in appropriately indicitative of said use? Why does it disintegrate the switch flipper?

What was the basis for the saving throw DC? I guess that's really the only hard and fast critera for being fair in the not-cheating sense. Otherwise it just falls under the aegis of poor DMing.

 

[pawsplay]

Other: What was the reasoning for the disintegrate switch being there in the first place? Does it serve some purpose other than to hose PCs?

If it's there for some practical reason (.. wacky magical trash disposal, maybe?) is the area its in appropriately indicitative of said use? Why does it disintegrate the switch flipper?

My guess would be that it opens a special vault, and the owner either has some kind of immunity, or some way of circumventing the effect.

[/quote]
What was the basis for the saving throw DC? I guess that's really the only hard and fast critera for being fair in the not-cheating sense. Otherwise it just falls under the aegis of poor DMing.[/QUOTE]

If we're talking about a 6th level monk (Fortitude save, say, +7), then we just need to identify how to generate a DC of 27. A disintegrate heightened to level 9 is DC 19. If the area it is in generates a constant greater bestow curse which the monk has already succumbed to, there you go.

 

[EricNoah]

To me it is the DC. If you can't survive it by rolling a natural 19, there should be clearer signs to stay away. Jumping into lava is instant death. Pulling a lever shouldn't be without a good reason, some relevant clues, and a decent chance to avoid the horrible fate.

Not related to the fairness issue is the "what I'm teaching my players" issue. I want to reward my players for taking reasonable risks -- the reward being a fun situation, not necessarily a pile of gold falling out of the ceiling. I do not want them grinding the game to a halt every time they come across a lever or a door or a pillar or a brown smudge on the wall.

 

[ThirdWizard]

A lever to ring a bell to summon a servant? Riiight.

It's not so much that levers are trapped, so much that levers in strange places have strange functions and should be approached accordingly. An obvious lever in a room with a secret door suggests someone is hoping someone will pull the lever and suffer a terrible fate.

Incidentally, disintegrate does not take a Reflex save, so there's no telling what the trap does. If it does a disintegrate effect for 20d6, Fortitude for half, you could make your save and still end up a pile of dust.

Levers exist in the real world. How many are trapped? Obviously levers can have many purposes beyond killing the puller. Who would ever expect the purpose of a lever to be to kill the puller? Last time I used a lever, it opened a secret door to the sewers. Why was it a lever? It was an escape measure, and it was used as such. The door was hidden because it was just a trap door in the floor. So, I for one have used a lever to open a secret door.

The concept of approaching a lever as some kind of deadly instrument just isn't realistic, IMO.

Perhaps a greater question of "why do dungeons exist" needs to be posited. The purpose of the dungeon, in a campaign context, will tell us its purpose. Who lived here, and why? Who made the trap? Why did they trap the dungeon? Answers to these can help the PCs determine what to expect inside and give meaning behind the lever if such questions are important in the game.

If the meaning behind the dungeon is just "so the PCs can adventure" in the game, then the lever makes sense because nothing makes sense anyway, so it fits right in. If the dungeon serves a purpose beyond the PCs' adventure, then the answer to if the 50+k gp trap on the innoculous lever makes sense can begin to be questioned.

Lastly, note that the OP directly says he failed the save. He didn't make the save but still take enough damage to die.

What was the basis for the saving throw DC? I guess that's really the only hard and fast critera for being fair in the not-cheating sense. Otherwise it just falls under the aegis of poor DMing.

It's an important note, I think that it is impossible for the save DC to be that high under RAW. While that doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, it does mean that the DM should think hard and carefully about making the DC that high before using it. In this case, it seems uncalled for unless the DM was specifically hoping to kill a PC.

 

[pogre]

Whether it is fair or not is neither here nor there for me. It is something that for me does not seem to add anything to what's going on. There does not seem to be any "fun" quotient attached to it so it is a not something I would wish to challenge my party with.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

Entirely true in my case as well. But I voted yes just because the darn question seemed so slanted to "no."

 

[Hussar]

To me it is the DC. If you can't survive it by rolling a natural 19, there should be clearer signs to stay away. Jumping into lava is instant death. Pulling a lever shouldn't be without a good reason, some relevant clues, and a decent chance to avoid the horrible fate.

Not related to the fairness issue is the "what I'm teaching my players" issue. I want to reward my players for taking reasonable risks -- the reward being a fun situation, not necessarily a pile of gold falling out of the ceiling. I do not want them grinding the game to a halt every time they come across a lever or a door or a pillar or a brown smudge on the wall.

This pretty much answers JRRNeiklot as well. If the DM has invisible lava with no heat radiating from it and no smoke, well, I'd say that was pretty unfair. You know that the lava is there. A lever on the floor is not lava.

For me, it's the DC. Again, if the monk can't make his save on a 19, that probably means that any other character will die as well. 95% is close enough to 100 to say that the save isn't really a save in any case.

It's not that save or die traps have no place. Of course they do. I can tell you that LOTS of people complained about the roller trap in TOH. OTOH, if you were playing TOH, you pretty much knew ahead of time that you were going to die, it was more just playing to see how you died.

Heck, I have even used no save situations. In the first region of the World's Largest Dungeon, there are unstable portals that are summoning fiendish creatures. A were-rat sorcerer is guarding the portals. In the combat, I suggested the fourth level rogue to jump into the portal (the suggestion was worded that it was a way home) - he failed his will save and managed to evade no less than three AOO's from party members trying to grapple him before launching himself into the portal and smearing himself across 11 dimensions. Very, very dead.

Fair? I think so. He died because of a string of bad luck, which happens. He was never placed in a situation where he had no chance of survival if he took a particular act.

That's my problem with this setup. The party can do anything, except pull the lever. Any other action and they live, pull the lever and die. I hate "gotcha" stuff. It's no fun.

 

[I'm A Banana]

For those who say the scenario is unfair:

There is a recurring theme, I see. So I want to ask about it.

Is it the results of the scenario that makes it unfair, or the set up of the scenario that makes it unfair?

It's really the combination of the two. No clues + instant nigh-unavoidable death = not fair. This is why I drew the comparison to "you walk out the left door and you catch a deadly disease." There are no clues, and it's nigh-unavoidable death. There is no in-character reason to suspect that left door, and there is not significantly more in-character reason to suspect that lever (one assumes this lever didn't just stand out by being a lever in a room, that levers exist in this party's experience that did not kill you). If it had no clue and did something less deadly and more challenging, it would be more fair. If it had big clues to it's deadly consequences, it would be more fair.

Had the scenario said the monk rolled a natural 20 and survived unharmed, would the scenario be called fair?

Just because people get lucky doesn't mean that requiring them to get the best possible "trump card" result is fair. You can win a hand of poker with a pair of fives, but that doesn't make a pair of fives a good hand.

How about if the monk rolled a natural 10 and survived unharmed, would the scenario be called fair?

Significantly more fair, because that would represent a danger overcome for the character.

Or is it the mere presence of the trap in the form of a lever that makes it unfair?

ThirdWizard and Bagpuss have both given examples of trapped levers that I'd find perfectly fair.

Would some clues have made it fair? Say, some piles of dust around the lever? How about a sign on the door saying, "Do not enter. Deadly trap within." [I'm not joking about this last thing, either. I could see the dungeon inhabitants putting such a sign on the door after a comrade or six got dusted.]

This would make it immensely more logical, and definately more fair, because it would give them a chance to avoid it. If they push the button that says DO NOT PUSH, feel free to zap 'em. This is more similar to my style of DMing where I don't balk at big explosions, but I do paint the barrels bright red and show some exploding before I jam one in a hole with a PC.

Obvious clues and warnings, but the trap has a high save DC (and/or does deadly damage).

...or...

No clues or warnings at all, but the trap has a low save DC (and/or does low damage).

Would you say the above two options are fair?

I would say they are fair enough, or at least significantly more fair. It doesn't seem as arbitrary if it makes sense. I go for the first result myself, more often than not, but the second result is an option that is still more realistic (though, IMHO, it lacks some teeth).

That still doesn't get into the rogue not finding the trap (a search DC of how high?), or the CR of the trap being taken into account with XP awards and treasure tables, or why the trap is instant-death instead of something a bit more less binary, but I think we can agree that those are secondary to the concerns about the fairness of the trap itself.

 

[FrostedMini1337]

Is it the results of the scenario that makes it unfair, or the set up of the scenario that makes it unfair?

Setup.

Had the scenario said the monk rolled a natural 20 and survived unharmed, would the scenario be called fair?

No. The effect of the monks roll has no effect on the fairness of the situation. Why are you asking how if altering the result alters a choice I made based on the setup?

How about if the monk rolled a natural 10 and survived unharmed, would the scenario be called fair?

No, but it's leaning closer towards fair.

Or is it the mere presence of the trap in the form of a lever that makes it unfair?

Trapping a level isn't cool, but it's ok. Keep the PCs on their toes and whatnot

Would some clues have made it fair? Say, some piles of dust around the lever? How about a sign on the door saying, "Do not enter. Deadly trap within." [I'm not joking about this last thing, either. I could see the dungeon inhabitants putting such a sign on the door after a comrade or six got dusted.]

Completely. I've smoked PCs like this before. Be brave, not smug. Just the piles, not so much. If there are clues and the PCs don't look for them, then it becomes more pallatable, but still distasteful.(Since there are details missing, I'll assume the PCs can and did all in their power to trapcheck)

 

[T. Foster]

For those who say the scenario is fair:

What would make it unfair?

If this trap were presented to a party of newbie players with low-level characters

If the party were required to open the secret door (whether by pulling the lever or otherwise) in order to leave the dungeon

If even magical means of trap detection and/or divination had failed to uncover the potential negative consequences of pulling the lever

If attempts to either open the secret door without pulling the lever (knock, passwall, crowbars, etc.) or pull the lever remotely (via ropes, unseen servant, telekinesis, summoned monster, etc.) either weren't successful or still didn't prevent the trap from affecting a PC

If the GM had previously given the players the impression (on a metagame level) that they were expected to pull levers, open doors, etc. without taking such precautions as outlined above and/or that they would only be faced with traps were 'balanced' to the party's capabilities to discover via searches and/or survive via saving throws