Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5674867" data-attributes="member: 22779">All right, let's stick with Basic D&amp;D then.&nbsp; Standard party is 6 PC's, plus 3-5 henchmen.&nbsp; We can search that room in 2 turns.&nbsp; Maybe 3.&nbsp; Still not adding large amounts of time to the game.&nbsp; The problem is, most of the time, when you search, there's nothing to find.&nbsp; You come into a room with X furniture and Y features.&nbsp; Well, that's pretty much the same as the last fifteen rooms - after all no DM is going to advertise a secret something is he?&nbsp; That kind of defeats the point.So, the party searches everything.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Because searching everything is heavily rewarded.&nbsp; The best treasure is always hidden.&nbsp; Makes sense after all - if I have this honking big diamond, I'm going to put it somewhere safe.&nbsp; But, the party doesn't really have the option of ignoring stuff since ignoring stuff either results in you missing significant rewards, or missing significant threats.&nbsp; And, if wandering monster do happen by, well, that's usually just free xp since wandering monsters were almost always fodder anyway.&nbsp; And lots of adventures actually drew wandering monsters from existing encounters, which made later encounters that much easier.&nbsp; Kill them now or kill them later, what difference does it make?So, even though there's only three secret doors in the dungeon, you still have to search every room, because you have to assume that there is a secret door in every room in order to find the three that are really there.Heck, I can't be the only one whose group turned into something like this:DM:&nbsp; You find a four armed statue.Player A:&nbsp; Ok, I'm the thief, I've got an X check for traps.&nbsp; I'm checking the statue.Player B:&nbsp; No traps found?&nbsp; Ok, well my elf actively looks for secret doors, I've got a 3 in 6 of finding it.Wash, rinse, repeat as needed.I'll admit, I never played OD&amp;D, so, I cannot comment on that.&nbsp; But, mechanical approaches to dungeon crawls are hardly something new.&nbsp; Every group I've ever played in has approached things exactly the same way - throw dice at the problem until it's resolved.&nbsp; I remember running Tomb of Horrors for one group and, at the part where there's a bunch of secret doors and spear traps if you open them wrong, I asked them how they were opening the door - asked them to stand up at the door of the room and show me.&nbsp; Figured a bit of role play might be nice.&nbsp; The players looked at me like I had two heads.&nbsp; They had zero interest in this sort of thing.The whole &quot;search it this way, search it that way&quot; got very old, very fast.&nbsp; It was fun for maybe a few dozen sessions, twenty or thirty years ago, but, now?&nbsp; No thanks.&nbsp; I don't ponce about describing exactly how I swing my sword, so, why would I do the same thing describing how my trap expert searches the chest or the wall?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5674867, member: 22779"] All right, let's stick with Basic D&D then. Standard party is 6 PC's, plus 3-5 henchmen. We can search that room in 2 turns. Maybe 3. Still not adding large amounts of time to the game. The problem is, most of the time, when you search, there's nothing to find. You come into a room with X furniture and Y features. Well, that's pretty much the same as the last fifteen rooms - after all no DM is going to advertise a secret something is he? That kind of defeats the point. So, the party searches everything. Why? Because searching everything is heavily rewarded. The best treasure is always hidden. Makes sense after all - if I have this honking big diamond, I'm going to put it somewhere safe. But, the party doesn't really have the option of ignoring stuff since ignoring stuff either results in you missing significant rewards, or missing significant threats. And, if wandering monster do happen by, well, that's usually just free xp since wandering monsters were almost always fodder anyway. And lots of adventures actually drew wandering monsters from existing encounters, which made later encounters that much easier. Kill them now or kill them later, what difference does it make? So, even though there's only three secret doors in the dungeon, you still have to search every room, because you have to assume that there is a secret door in every room in order to find the three that are really there. Heck, I can't be the only one whose group turned into something like this: DM: You find a four armed statue. Player A: Ok, I'm the thief, I've got an X check for traps. I'm checking the statue. Player B: No traps found? Ok, well my elf actively looks for secret doors, I've got a 3 in 6 of finding it. Wash, rinse, repeat as needed. I'll admit, I never played OD&D, so, I cannot comment on that. But, mechanical approaches to dungeon crawls are hardly something new. Every group I've ever played in has approached things exactly the same way - throw dice at the problem until it's resolved. I remember running Tomb of Horrors for one group and, at the part where there's a bunch of secret doors and spear traps if you open them wrong, I asked them how they were opening the door - asked them to stand up at the door of the room and show me. Figured a bit of role play might be nice. The players looked at me like I had two heads. They had zero interest in this sort of thing. The whole "search it this way, search it that way" got very old, very fast. It was fun for maybe a few dozen sessions, twenty or thirty years ago, but, now? No thanks. I don't ponce about describing exactly how I swing my sword, so, why would I do the same thing describing how my trap expert searches the chest or the wall? [/QUOTE]

Verification