Is this fair? -- your personal opinion

Is this fair? -- (your personal thought/feelings)

  • Yes

    Votes: 98 29.1%
  • No

    Votes: 188 55.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 51 15.1%

Probably just REALLY subjective then. :)

I wouldn't spring this on my group, but I've never known them NOT to take the bait. If this were sprung on me...I'd like to think I'd be suspicious, but if the rogue's gonna take a half hour searching the thing, I could do less than detect magic or something while he's busy.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

delericho said:
You’ve cleared out the dungeon and found the McGuffin you were seeking. Then you come to a room located in the back corner of the dungeon. In the room is only a large lever sticking up out of the floor. You search the room and find a secret door in one wall. You can’t find a way to open the door.

The rogue searches the door and lever for traps, and finds that both are somehow connected to a trap. He's also sure that the trap is well beyond his ability to disarm, and is of extreme lethality.

The party Wizard casts Detect Magic, but no magic is detected.

At this point, the party elects to leave. The Monk is in the front of the marching order. As he leaves the room, he has to make a saving throw – he rolls a 19 on the die, adds in his mods, and fails the save. He turns into a pile of fine dust on the floor.

It turns out that the trap was on the doorway into the room - anyone who tried to leave through either door triggered the trap. Pulling the level would have disarmed the trap.

I thought about this trap while I was at lunch (which probably says something about me, but that's another thread...) and decided that I like it, and very well may use a variation of it someday. I agree with the other response (Ourph?) that this trap is significantly more difficult than the OP's trap because 1) the party has no choice but to disarm it in order to survive/continue, and 2) the party triggers it without realizing they've done so (and thus there's nothing to arouse their caution or suspicion). Neither of these make the trap "unfair," but they do make it very difficult (much moreso than the OP trap), and any DM who uses it should do so fully aware that it's likely to cause PC fatalities.

Here's how I'd react to this trap were I a player in this game. First off, an otherwise empty room with no apparent exits and a lever in the middle of the floor, way in the back/bottom of the dungeon (assumed because the room was discovered after the macguffin had been recovered), after we've already got the macguffin. This whole setup smells like a trap to me. Therefore, I'd probably never enter the room in the first place, and would suggest my party-mates not do so either. Even if they did enter the room, I probably wouldn't follow them -- I'd stand in the doorway, observe, and shout advice to them. Seriously, I do stuff like this all the time. Yeah, the other players make fun of me for being a coward, but their characters die and mine doesn't. But, for the sake of argument, we'll assume that the DM or the other players were somehow able to trick or cajole me into entering the room.

We search the room and find a secret door but no way to open it. We search the door and lever for traps and are told that both are somehow connected to a trap, and that the trap is well beyond his ability to disarm and is of extreme lethality. Stop right there: I wouldn't accept that answer, and would want more detail. How are the lever and door "somehow connected" to a trap? In what way? What makes him think the trap is beyond his ability to disarm? What makes him think it's of extreme lethality? I wouldn't accept this vague explanation and would try to get as much detailed and specific info about the nature of the trap as possible. Depending on how much magic I had available I might even consider attempting to commune, contact higher plane or similar magic to try to gain more info about the nature of the trap.

But, assuming that for whatever reason I was unable to gain any more specific info, the party wizard casts detect magic and no magic is detected. Why is that? Clearly this trap is magical, and both the lever and both exits should detect as magical (and, likewise, any magical means of trap detection such as a find traps spell or wand of secret door and trap detection should've also shown both exits as being trapped). This is the one element of the trap that strikes me as unfair (unless the detect magic spell somehow works differently in 3E than in the versions I know/play (OD&D and 1E AD&D).

But, assuming for whatever reason that the detect magic doesn't work, yeah, at this point I'd probably decide it was time to leave. ZAP -- the monk gets hit by the force-field and dies. Now is where things get interesting, because we have 2 vital new pieces of information: 1) what the trap actually does, and 2) that it's blocking our retreat (and, possibly, 3) that the monk failed his save even with a rolled 19, meaning that running through and hoping for a lucky roll isn't a realistic strategy). This is where I sit forward in my chair, put the bag of chips down, and start really paying attention.

First course of action is going to be to determine if the force field is still there or if it was a one-time effect. Throw a pebble through the doorway and see if it gets zapped. If not, throw something larger, etc. Have the thief check for traps again (and detect magic again) to see if the trap still seems to be there, etc. Assuming that I am somehow able to determine that the trap is still there (perhaps even by losing another party member), attention turns to how to get back into the hall without passing through the force-field. Passwall, dimension door, teleport, plane shift, etc. If I have one available (not bloody likely in 3E, much moreso in OD&D or 1E) I might even burn a wish to get the party safely outside of the room (much to the chagrin of the dead player(s), who were hoping that wish would be used to resurrect them, no doubt). I don't care about trying to get past the secret door at this point because I don't know what lies beyond it and don't want to use up resources possibly getting myself from the frying pan into the fire (and possibly still not having any means of escape, assuming there's not an exit beyond the secret door), but I keep it in mind for a future expedition, after we've gotten out of this trap, because whatever's behind that door, being guarded by this trap, is very likely to be something interesting or worthwhile.

The DM by this point, depending on how good a poker face he has, is likely laughing his ass off at all the elaborate means I'm trying to avoid this trap and how little success I'm having. If I see this, I realize that the solution is probably simpler than what I've been trying (and this is the first action of everything I've done that is actual metagaming; everything else, as far as I'm concerned, has been completely in-character appropriate). So I do another thorough search of the room looking for any additional clues (hidden keyholes or inscriptions or such). Not finding any I for the first time consider pulling the lever (which is, to my mind, still an obvious trap and sucker-killer, but if the DM's smiling too much then I suspect that the too-obvious solution may in fact be the correct one).

But, assuming I don't have any means of escape and the DM isn't giving anything away with his body language, I stop and consider my situation, what I know, and my options. At this point I probably conduct another search looking for additional clues as described above. Once all other options are exhausted (as, given the situation described, they eventually will be) I begin to consider the lever. I still don't trust it, I still think it's too-obvious and intended as a sucker-killer, but I have no other choice. If possible, I perform an augury (or divination, commune, etc.) to try to learn as much as I can about the consequences of pulling the lever, and whether they're likely to be good or bad. (Another trick I try at this point, if not earlier, is to draw a wandering monster into the room, to see if the force-field works both ways, or only for people trying to leave the room -- not that knowing this would necessarily help me, but I want to have all the information possible at my disposal.)

Finally, assuming I'm not able to gain any definitive info about the consequences of pulling the lever, I still don't pull it myself -- I use an unseen servant, or a rope (and stand in the most remote possible part of the room before pulling it), or try to talk one of the other surviving PCs (if there are any) into doing it.

Even after pulling the lever, I don't automatically assume the trap is disarmed, and follow the same sort of testing procedure described earlier -- throwing pebbles, having the thief search again, casting detect magic again, etc. -- and only when I'm totally sure the trap is no longer operative do I hurry through, gather up the remains of my companions, go home and either try to get them resurrected or seek out replacements, and begin planning a return expedition to find out what lies beyond that secret door.

Oh, and incidentally, I would've had a really fun time at this session, and would congratulate the DM on coming up with such a good trap and ask him how he expected we'd deal with the trap and laugh about all the hoops I jumped through when the solution was literally in plain sight the entire time. This is the kind of stuff I enjoy. This is why I play this game.
 

Flexor the Mighty! said:
It's not that pulling levers in itself is rash, but in this context it screams trap. Why would a secret door have a blatent lever as an opening device?

If it is illogical to assume that the lever opens the door, that it is equally illogical to make any connection with the secret door at all. Why do you keep connecting the two?

Does a lever in an otherwise featureless room scream trap to you also?

Subtract the secret door out of the scenario.
 



Kamikaze Midget said:
If you see a hundred dollar bill laying on the street and look around for people who might be missing it and even call out "Hey, did anyone drop this?" and then pick it up, I don't think that's rash.

You keep bringing up real world situations that don't have any relation to the situation described by the OP. If my character saw a gold piece laying in the middle of the street in a village, there would be no more reason to be paranoid than your example. Finding a lever in a dungeon in a room with a secret door and relying on a single character (the Rogue) to determine whether it is safe is not in any way related to either of those two situations.

I guess I also don't see caution and fear of levers as a very heroic trait.

If you want a game where the "hero" never has to second guess his environment then more power to you. On the other hand, I can think of a number of heroes from literature, cinema and television who would be quite paranoid about the setup in the OP without being "out of character" so (while your preference is valid) you're working from a fairly narrow definition of "hero" IMO.

BTW - I don't think you answered this when I asked before. Some of your earlier comments led me to believe you simply don't like traps in the game period. Is this true?

I would also say that, judging by the results of this poll and the ensuing discussion, a lot of people don't like to play in unfair situations like the one the OP described.

I agree that the style of play I and my group enjoys is in the minority. My vote in the other, related poll reflects that. That has been the case since around 1983. That doesn't really prove that the situation is objectively unfair. I think the main thing this thread and poll reveal is that someone's perception of fairness is entirely colored by their expectations about the types of challenges that their characters will face in the game.

Bagpuss said:
You know I don't really know, but you seem to be have the same sort of drive to call folks that would pull the lever "rash", "stupid", "hypocritical", and also quoting stuff out of context, so perhaps we should both look in the mirror then continue to play our own brands of badwrongfun in peace.

In this context, I don't think "rash" is an insult, if anyone has taken it as such I apologize. When I say the player/character acted "rashly" I simply mean to indicate they took the most direct route and failed to explore less direct options first. The phrase "stupid thinking" was directed at a hypothetical situation constructed by another poster involving imaginary players. I do believe the imaginary players in that specific situation were acting stupidly, it's not my intent that anyone posting to this thread should take that as a personal slam against them. As for hypocritical, I completely stand behind the use of that particular word because it's accurate. It is not intended as an insult. It is merely an accurate description of at least one poster's comments about the issue at hand. If you are condemning the "fair" position for relying on metagame thinking you're being hypocritical because the "unfair" position relies on metagame thinking to the same extent, if not moreso (at least, IMO). If you've not asserted that metagame thinking is a reason to eschew the "pro-fair" position, then this comment doesn't apply to you.
 

Ourph said:
If you are condemning the "fair" position for relying on metagame thinking you're being hypocritical because the "unfair" position relies on metagame thinking to the same extent, if not moreso (at least, IMO). If you've not asserted that metagame thinking is a reason to eschew the "pro-fair" position, then this comment doesn't apply to you.

How do you figure?
 

Ourph said:
If you want a game where the "hero" never has to second guess his environment then more power to you. .

That about sums it up for me -to me the environment is the place where the heroes get to do cool and heroic things. If there are bad guys that have set up something then the characters might get suspicious, but overall, no I don't want my players/characters second guessing the enviroment.

Thanks for making the statement that helped me clarify my position on that. :)
 

I voted 'fair' because it technically is. Why? They didn't HAVE to. I try to think of it from the view of who built the the dungeon. Why put this thing here, anyway? It's a huge drain on resources(lotsa money to boost that DC to rediculous heights) and, more importantly, is not protecting you(the BBEG) or the all-important McGuffin(MacGuffin? You know what? I don't like that word anyway. Ima just use Macguyver).

If said would-be evil overlord had possession of this all-important thing that a group of ragtag mercenary types might slaughter their way to finding, wouldn't it make more sense to put it and oneself BEHIND this excellent doohickey that is sure to take out at least one of them?

Or, if said WBEO(would-be evil overlord) had another Macguyver of equal or greater importance, it still doesn't explain why this uber-trap isn't defending the ENTRANCE to his stomping grounds, not to mention he himself, rather than in the back where it MIGHT punish a curious tresspasser only after he and his buddies have killed all your pets and taken their stuff.

If said WBEO(aka BBEG) is a lich and immune to the effect: still; why not be BEHIND it? Even if you reform later, I'm sure it stillsucks to get your rotted ass kicked.

So there. That's what I think. Fair but stupid.
 
Last edited:

ThirdWizard said:
How do you figure?

Examples of metagame thinking on the "unfair" side in this thread so far (paraphrased).

  • It's OK to pull the lever because, even if it is trapped, insta-kill traps aren't fun, so the effect will only be an inconvenience or consume resources or be a temporary setback. The DM won't put anything in the dungeon that's "unfun".
  • The monk should pull the lever because he has the best Saves. If there is a trap, he will definitely survive because the DM shouldn't be setting DCs that are impossible for our best character to make.
  • The Rogue "took 20" and found nothing. Any level appropriate trap should have been found and the DM always runs level appropriate encounters for us, so there must not be a trap.
  • If this lever is trapped with a really deadly trap beyond our ability to detect it will just encourage us to be paranoid and super-cautious. I know the DM doesn't want to run a game where we are super-cautious rather than balls-to-the-wall hero types, so we'll either detect the trap or it won't be too deadly or there simply isn't a trap.
  • The rest of the dungeon has been level appropriate, so this one room must be too.
  • The DM wouldn't have put this lever here if we weren't supposed to pull it, so it must be safe.
 

Remove ads

Top