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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 3028385" data-attributes="member: 3424">After thinking about it for some time, I've narrowed it down to about three dimensions of fairness:A. Warning Shot: Were the PCs given some indication of what they are going to do is dangerous? There is a continuum of what different people may consider to be a sufficient warning:1. Obvious signs of danger, e.g. a sign written in Common that says, "Danger! Trapped lever".2. Signs that hint at danger, e.g. a pile of dust in front of the lever.3. Signs that can be discovered with an average reactive check (50% or greater chance of success), e.g. Spot, Listen, Knowledge, Sense Motive.4. Signs that can be discovered by taking reasonable* precautions, e.g. a rogue taking 20 when searching for traps.5. Signs that can be discovered with a difficult reactive check (about 25% chance of success).6. Signs that can be discovered by taking extraordinary* precautions, e.g. detect magic.7. Subtle signs that require knowledge of specific information or conventions on the part of the player, e.g. "Levers are always trapped".8. Signs that can be discovered with a very difficult reactive check (about 5% chance of success).9. No sign of danger.B. Avoidance: What can the PCs do to avoid the danger? Again, there is a continuum:1. Obvious way to circumvent the danger, or facing the danger does not contribute to any of the party's objectives, e.g. going around a pool of lava, getting out of the dungeon by the same way you came in after getting the McGuffin.2. Danger can be avoided with an average check (50% or greater chance of success), e.g. Disable Device, Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Hide, Move Silently, Climb, Jump, Tumble, attack roll vs AC, a saving throw.3. Danger can be avoided by taking reasonable* precautions, or facing the danger contributes in a minor way to the party's objectives, e.g. do not openly wear the holy symbol of a deity when attempting to parley with the servants of another deity that opposes him, a trap that guards some useful potions.4. Danger can be avoided with a difficult check (about 25% chance of success).5. Danger can be avoided by taking extraordinary* precautions, or facing the danger contributes in a major way to the party's objectives, e.g. use a rope to activate a lever, rescue the hostages taken by the BBEG.6. Danger can be avoided with a very difficult check (about 5% chance of success).7. Danger cannot be avoided, or facing the danger is the party's objective, e.g. defeat the BBEG.C. Consequences: What effect does it have on the PCs? Once more, there is a continuum:1. Temporary or minor consequences, e.g. character death in a campaign where an NPC is willing and able to cast true resurrection for free.2. Longer-term or moderate consequences, e.g. character death in a campaign where a PC is able to cast true resurrection.3. Very long-term or major consequences, e.g. character death in a campaign where a PC or NPC is able to cast resurrection or raise dead.4. Permanent, irreversible consequences, e.g. character death in a campaign where coming back from the dead is not possible or practical.* Definitions of "reasonable" and "extraordinary" may vary between groups.Since the OP's example seems to fall at the upper range of the continuum on the Warning Shot scale, and (depending on one's perspective) falls at either the lower or upper range of the continuum on the Avoidance scale, and does not really address the Consequences scale (although many posters seem to assume character death will always be at the upper end of the continuum), I can see why it has generated a lot of discussion.</blockquote>

Verification