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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Haffrung Helleyes" data-source="post: 4316333" data-attributes="member: 1068">I like the ideas of secret doors, but I am not really happy with how they've been implemented traditionally in RPGs.In 1E, finding the secret door was usually contingent on the group telling the DM that they looked in the right place.  'I twist the torch sconch.  I look under the bed.  I look behind the photo.  Etc'.This was fun the first few times you played, but quickly devolved into tedium.I skipped 2E, in favor of RuneQuest.  In RuneQuest, you had a search skill that you had to roll, but it wasn't used passively so the same problems existed.In 3E, there is a search skill, but 3E introduced a convenient shorthand for searching.  'We take 10 searching the room' (when in a hurry) or 'We take 20 searching the room' (when not in a hurry).This eliminates a lot of the boring nature of searching, while also eliminating all the randomness of outcome -- since there is no die roll, the DM determines when crafting the adventure whether his PCs will find it.  As a DM, I find this boring.  I think the PCs should find the secret doors exactly SOME of the time.What I would prefer, would be a passive search skill with some degree of randomness.  That is, the players don't have to present a laundry list of everywhere they are searching, yet there is still a die roll involved, secretly, on the part of the DM.  This die roll should be influenced by the skills of the PCs searching, but there should still be an element of randomness.Ken</blockquote>

Verification