Legends & Lore: A Few Rules Updates

[Mistwell]

If you're referring to my referencing landslides and spooky noises, actually, they are both specific examples from 1e modules.

The landslide appears as a random wilderness encounter in S4, in the wilderness exploration section of the dungeon. The spooky noises appear in L1, and I think they are in the dungeon level of Bone Hill itself but would have to go back and find it to be absolutely certain.

naw i was referring to you saying you once put a portal in a dungeon that just popped out monsters on a constant basis until the pcs close the portal. which is a great concept, it's just not the traditional wandering monster system.

 

[I'm A Banana]

A trap doesn't move around to "point at your eye". This is purely a function of how the PC is moving (given that the trap is static in place). And if a random roll for a trap attack can represent it getting tangled in some spiderweb (which is an action for the spiders, not the trap!) then why can't an obscurement roll for a trap represent the same thing (the trap is hidden by dust, or cobwebs, or shadows)?

The trap is the thing moving, the thing acting, the thing that might get its action thwarted, so an attack roll for it doesn't bug me. It's not about agency as much as it is about action. I could see a reasoning for making it a DEX save too, though, and that'd be fine, too: the character reacting against a mechanism.

What's not so cool is a roll to do nothing.

Look at it like the stealthiness of the trap was established (i.e. rolled) when it was constructed/built.

Way too far removed from the action to be satisfying to me. Plus, why wouldn't the crafter Take 10? Meh...bleh.

 

[jrowland]

What's not so cool is a roll to do nothing.

I see it differently. It's the trap setter that is doing the rolling (how well they set/hid the trap). You as DM *could* pre-roll representing when the trap was set, or roll when/if the PCs encounter it. The trap isn't "hiding", the trap-setter is hiding the trap.

 

[the Jester]

naw i was referring to you saying you once put a portal in a dungeon that just popped out monsters on a constant basis until the pcs close the portal. which is a great concept, it's just not the traditional wandering monster system.

Um, not sure that was me. I may have made a reference to the Random Monster Generator in the joke version of Castle Greyhawk or something at some point?

 

[pemerton]

Um, not sure that was me. I may have made a reference to the Random Monster Generator in the joke version of Castle Greyhawk or something at some point?

I think it was [MENTION=66434]ExploderWizard[/MENTION] - whoever it was, I XPed it.

EDIT: Post number 15:

Its also fun to sometimes place little shrines made of bones throughout the dungeon that just keep spawning monsters until the PCs find & destroy them.

 

[pemerton]

The part where you accurately describe what she's doing as "Running" or what you're doing as walking very slowly. This is just math. If it takes you X steps to reach point p, and it takes her 2X steps to reach point p because her stride is shorter, then her velocity to reach point p at the same time or earlier than you has to be substantially higher than her standard velocity. When each of you are taking steps at the same rate per second, you will arrive at point p before she does, because she is slower.

<snip>

Since we can easily define it in a equation, it's pretty much inarguable that smaller creatures move slower than larger creatures, and the only way for them to arrive at the same point at the same moment in time is for the smaller creature to increase it's velocity.

This seems wrong to me.

At the end when you say "only way for them to arrive at the same point at the same moment in time is for the smaller creature to increase it's velocity", that doesn't seem quite right. For S and L to bother arrive in the same place at the same time (assuming the same starting position) requires that they have the same velocity.

I think what you meant to say is that if S has a shorter stride than L, S needs to take more steps per given period than L to maintain an equal velocity to L ie S needs to increase its frequency.

Which then takes us from maths to biology: the definition of walking or running is not simply in terms of frequency of steps. It's to do with motions in the various joints of the leg, and how many feet are on the ground at once. It's absolutely possible for some small things to have faster walking speeds than some large things, because their anatomy and physiology mean that their legs are capable of a greater frequency of movement. A practical example: my cat has always been small than my daughters, at least since they could walk. But it was certainly faster than them when they first started walking, and while I haven't done any proper experiments I'd find it easy to believe that it still is!

Even if we confine it just to bipeds, I have had friends who are taller than me but don't walk as quickly as me, because I'm fitter than them and hence can get my hips, knees etc to move at a greater frequency of steps.

I don't have a view on whether it's good or bad for the game that dwarves and halflings be as fast as humans - it strikes me as a pretty minor point, and in B/X and AD&D I don't remember dwarves, gnomes and halflings being slower (if they were I've clearly forgotten) - but there's nothing mathematically or biologically objectionable about it.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

I see it differently. It's the trap setter that is doing the rolling (how well they set/hid the trap). You as DM *could* pre-roll representing when the trap was set, or roll when/if the PCs encounter it. The trap isn't "hiding", the trap-setter is hiding the trap.

Even though many people try to convince me otherwise...

If the trap setter has done his work, he and the dungeon designer know the result. They should tell the DM this, not "hey, roll to see how this worked out, because I don't have an idea."

But we're actually talking semantics, here. I guess I'd got with hints, which may be noticed with Passive Perception, and DCs for active searching. Somtehing like:

Passive Perception 12: Notice a minor reflection from the wall when entering the room. Cannot exactly tell where it came from.

Passive Perception 15: Notice a stone in the wall whose surface looks smoother than the ones surrounding him.

Search Result (10 minutes search) 10: Find a stone in the wall whose surface looks smoother than the ones surrounding him.

Search Result (10 minutes search) 15: Find a floorstone besides this wall stone wich isn't completely fixed

Search bonus +5 when searching the room for half an hour.

So the Passive Perception should trigger PC actions but only PC actions gice you all the information.

 

[RevTurkey]

When running modules, especially when based in a confined location such as a dungeon...I just pick wandering monsters as suits what is happening in the game. If the group is really beat up and just had loads of combat then it might be boring for them to have more hacking about to do etc..

I think wandering monsters are great to roll a bit more freely if the group is doing wilderness adventuring, as it is more likely for a wider variety of creature to be encountered over a larger area.

As said before...they are a tool. To be used to help create drama within games. You don't have have to do things exactly as written in roleplaying games...that is part of the beauty of them! In Pac Man you have to go up down left right, eat pills, cherries and ghosts etc...in the Pac Man Rpg you might get bored doing that and suddenly turn a corner to discover a dragon is waiting for you...why? Because it was getting dull and this might be more fun!

Passive Perception...it is okayish...helpful tool so that you don't have to be constantly rolling for things. Don't use it all the time or the players will start building characters with the most common target numbers met etc... My own preference is to have a page of some random d20 rolls behind the screen...that way I can find out sensitive check results without the PCs knowing they were even looking.

Movement speeds...I can live with what is being suggested. I think the combat in D&D is abstract enough to cope with this. I mean...old D&D used to standardise weapon damage to d6 and the game was still fun. I think it might be pushing it for a podgy hobbit to be as quick as an athletic powerhouse tall human fighter though. Most games the movement penalty just frustrates players who have to wait longer to engage opponents and get in on the action, so this might help keep everybody more involved in the action around the table. It's not realistic but sometimes that works in the games favour. It is also a rule very easily re-introduced as an optional module...so no problems.

Looking forward to see how this all turns out in print

 

[Klaus]

Way too far removed from the action to be satisfying to me. Plus, why wouldn't the crafter Take 10? Meh...bleh.

If Take 10 exists in the ruleset, the crafter can definitely Take 10... which means he's putting no real effort into hiding his trap, doing the basics, tried-and-true techniques. Stuff that might not fool a slightly-more-than-cursory glance by a more perceptive person (Take 10 Craft vs. Passive Perception = highest modifier wins).

 

[I'm A Banana]

I see it differently. It's the trap setter that is doing the rolling (how well they set/hid the trap). You as DM *could* pre-roll representing when the trap was set, or roll when/if the PCs encounter it. The trap isn't "hiding", the trap-setter is hiding the trap.

Again, way too far removed from the action. Plus, Take 10. Plus, if I roll beforehand, we're still in that scenario of "why does a trap that we see without doing anything and that thus has no effect even exist?"

If Take 10 exists in the ruleset, the crafter can definitely Take 10... which means he's putting no real effort into hiding his trap, doing the basics, tried-and-true techniques. Stuff that might not fool a slightly-more-than-cursory glance by a more perceptive person (Take 10 Craft vs. Passive Perception = highest modifier wins).

She's putting all the due diligence into hiding the trap that any professional trap-crafter would (which, given that traps are designed to be unseen, and the trap-crafter is presumably a professional and not just some dude off the street and thus has some training in the skill, would fool your "average" onlooker).

Mearls referenced the "feel" of the game as a reference to the rules helping you pretend to be a character. The "feel" of this rule is entirely off.