Should traps have tells?

[GMMichael]

Simple question.

Should traps have tells?

It's a trap!

I think this thread is trying to catch people from the "We Don't Need Thieves" thread contradicting themselves. So I'll just step on the panel . . .

Unlike some here, I'm fine if they move at a snail's pace searching every square inch for traps, as that's what cautious characters would do.

Bad idea. That's what the trap maker wants you to do.

The movies always have the person step on a land mine and hear the click. . . . I fell it make some situations better if the PC steps on a pressure plate and hears the click. Maybe by failing the Perception check by 5 or less.

How about failing within a margin of one's competence bonuses? Or hearing the click and not blowing up if you succeed on the follow-up reflex-defense? Sorry, I'm not a fan of typical margins of error.

I think we should lean into the gaminess of traps instead of trying to emulate how they apply to other media.

Aw! Then we miss out on hearing a SNAP! And turning around to see that Steve has a dart in the side of his neck. Classic.

 

[Fenris-77]

Specifically the tension of "oh crap don't move or you'll die" is not something I have ever seen work at a table outside of its gameplay implications. There is a degree of removal from the action, with the dice and character sheet etc... serving as a veil. Like I said, i don't think it is impossible. You could have immersion oriented players willing to throw themselves into the mindset. but it is exceedingly rare.

That doesn't mean don't do it, though. As I said before, lean into the gameplay aspects and it can still be fun and worthwhile.

I've used this exact example more than once and it's gone very well. The players reacted like you'd expect if you expected them to react using their intuitive iunderstanding of the 'cinematic' logic in play. LIke I said, the real difference here is that different groups with different backgrounds vis a vis system and game style can have very different play types.

 

[Celebrim]

Should traps have tells?

Yes, but also no.

An area with traps should have an early tell or else be the sort of place where you would expect to have a trap.

Once in a "trap filled area" it becomes no longer necessary to telegraph the trap heavily. You don't need a pile of bones around the locked chest in the evil lord's sepulcher to declare there is a trap likely to be here. That's implied by the context.

The real crux of the issue though is "Is the trap fun?" Traps are inherently unrealistic as presented. Elaborate booby traps do not normally persist because the nature of a trap is to be sensitive to being triggered and sensitive things don't endure for very long in a functional way. So if we have traps then in most cases we are stretching credulity anyway, and you might as well have the trap designer create traps that are interesting rather than as efficiently lethal as possible. In my experience, players don't really contemplate the difference anyway.

This isn't to say that a trap should completely forgo realism. A trap out to be able to plausibly exist in the state it is found for an extended period of time and ought to give off any sensory clues like temperature or order that we might expect to radiate from a trap. Pools of acid should give off noticeable fumes. Pools of lava should give off both fumes and heat. Gelatins and whipped creams are naturally going to dissolve into liquids over time or attract insects or spoil. A boat that is on the edge of falling apart is going to noticeably have problems long before you get it into deep water, and a cursed boat that falls apart when used should radiate magic and a curse. "Gotcha" is not a fun sort of trap.