Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8442790" data-attributes="member: 6921763">These are examples of a DM prompting a player to be reasonably specific in how they are approaching something.&nbsp; These are NOT some expectation that the player is a trap expert.&nbsp; Nor are they a setup for a gotcha.&nbsp; Do you simply not believe [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER] when they explain this?&nbsp; Or are you trying to wedge these into your seemingly different playstyle?&nbsp; Maybe that's it and why it seems like it doesn't work to you.The DM description for the scene is important, too. What is the environmental clue that gives the player a sense that something is not right here?&nbsp; If the DM just says, &quot;there's a chest in the corner&quot;, then I guess I can see how it would be a gotcha if it is trapped and we expect the player to blindly guess what's going on. But, when we create a more detailed scene as DM that includes: &quot;There is a chest in the corner with an oddly shaped locked&quot; - now the player has a little more detail to work with when they decide upon the approach their PC is taking.&nbsp; In this style of play, if a player states &quot;I search the chest for traps&quot; without reasonable specificity, that puts the &quot;how&quot; of it on the DM.&nbsp; If the DM then makes assumptions about &quot;how&quot; we potentially end up with the PC touching the needle in the lock - which is a real gotcha and a recipe for table conflict.&nbsp; Instead it's up to the player to decide how the PC would react to the environmental clue and let the DM know with reasonable specificity:&nbsp; &quot;Grog smash lock with maul!&quot; or &quot;Sly wants to peer into the keyhole to see if there is any funny business&quot; or &quot;Bardikins uses his thieves tools to pick the lock&quot; or whatever the player wants their PC to do.&nbsp; The DM, in this playstyle, is not expecting them to go &quot;through every possible way to find a trap&quot;.&nbsp; The DM is expecting the player(s) to pay attention to the description of the environment (step one of the play loop) and then to declare their approach (step two of the play loop) so that the DM can do their job of adjudicating the action (step 3 of the play loop).Whether you like it or not, does this playstyle make sense to you?It really exists and people are having fun with it.&nbsp; Just like your playstyle exists and people are presumably having fun with it, too.&nbsp; We don't employ gotchas and we aren't expecting flowery declarations or mind readers or technical experts at the table.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 8442790, member: 6921763"] These are examples of a DM prompting a player to be reasonably specific in how they are approaching something. These are NOT some expectation that the player is a trap expert. Nor are they a setup for a gotcha. Do you simply not believe [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER] when they explain this? Or are you trying to wedge these into your seemingly different playstyle? Maybe that's it and why it seems like it doesn't work to you. The DM description for the scene is important, too. What is the environmental clue that gives the player a sense that something is not right here? If the DM just says, "there's a chest in the corner", then I guess I can see how it would be a gotcha if it is trapped and we expect the player to blindly guess what's going on. But, when we create a more detailed scene as DM that includes: "There is a chest in the corner with an oddly shaped locked" - now the player has a little more detail to work with when they decide upon the approach their PC is taking. In this style of play, if a player states "I search the chest for traps" without reasonable specificity, that puts the "how" of it on the DM. If the DM then makes assumptions about "how" we potentially end up with the PC touching the needle in the lock - which is a real gotcha and a recipe for table conflict. Instead it's up to the player to decide how the PC would react to the environmental clue and let the DM know with reasonable specificity: "Grog smash lock with maul!" or "Sly wants to peer into the keyhole to see if there is any funny business" or "Bardikins uses his thieves tools to pick the lock" or whatever the player wants their PC to do. The DM, in this playstyle, is not expecting them to go "through every possible way to find a trap". The DM is expecting the player(s) to pay attention to the description of the environment (step one of the play loop) and then to declare their approach (step two of the play loop) so that the DM can do their job of adjudicating the action (step 3 of the play loop). Whether you like it or not, does this playstyle make sense to you? It really exists and people are having fun with it. Just like your playstyle exists and people are presumably having fun with it, too. We don't employ gotchas and we aren't expecting flowery declarations or mind readers or technical experts at the table. [/QUOTE]

Verification