Should traps have tells?

[zakael19]

I think that if you're playing a game in which a significant goal of play is the back and forth of investigating a dungeon using conversational modes between the players declaring actions and the DM responding with a clear hierarchy of Landmark -> Hidden -> Secret knowledge, you must have Tells of some sort. As noted above, Dr. Jones instinctively notices certain key tells that traps might be present, and then puzzles them out. THat's the sort of vibe this style of gameplay is trying to hit on.

You also generally see this style of play in rule-systems that deemphasize discrete I See Things skills or the like, or those are a fallback with a good chance of failure compared to being curious and poking at the environmental descriptions. An example from the Tomb of the Serpent Kings is the first door. It's complicated, it has things to look at that lead to new information, it gives hints that something bad is happening when you mess with it, you can say that examine the ceiling and probably notice the hammer, you can get clever and see the results without getting smashed, etc.

 

[Fenris-77]

Other than our diverging opinions about Angry DM, I think we're pretty aligned on the overall question.

Angry is a divisive guy, that's the schtick. By and large I find him insightful, but sometimes I need to finish eye rolling a couple of times.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Well, this is a standard skill check so there are actually a number of choices to be made, and some RP also. Additionally there are occasional other choices

• Obviously, there is the often tricky choice of whether or not to spend hope to improve your chances. Classic RPG decision on balancing current needs versus future possibilities. It becomes more tricky again when you have magical success as an option. Yeah,. you will succeed, but what attention will you attract?
• With a large party, or (as for my players) when they have a guide, which roles do you double up on?
• My players will often change roles during journey as one of them is losing hope or endurance. Do you stick with a guide who is nearly miserable, but has 3 skill, or one who is pretty hopeful, with only two skill? This has proven to be a tricky decision.
• My players will also try to solve the challenge in a way that engages either their helpful items, or that makes them inspired when they spend hope.
• Not common -- but it has happened in my game that players have to decide whether to force march or not to make up time lost

I'm not saying that journeys are any favorite part of TOR -- I generally agree that they could do with more, and I usually also players to choose other skills if it makes sense when rolling on the vanilla table.

I think there is a categorical difference between making decisions about how to overcome obstacles and making decisions about how best to succeed because a dice roll has been imposed upon you by the game.

For example, the player could say, "I'll try to wade across the flooded ford". The LM could say, "Ok, but that will cost you 1 Endurance, and you'll have to make an Athletics check and if you fail that...etc." The player says, "Hmm...maybe instead I'll scout around upstream...". There he finds a log over the stream, and the LM presents a new test/consequence. Now the player has two bad choices to choose from. Etc.

In my mind, at least, that's entirely different from the LM saying "Because I rolled on a table, you have no choice but to give me an Athletics test to see if you lose Endurance" and then the player deciding whether or not to spend Hope, or whether to afterward drink one swallow of miruvor.

But there are more decisions required than I think you are either aware of, or maybe just haven't played?

FWIW, I was talking about 1st Edition, which I mentioned earlier in the thread but not in that last post, so the rules are a little different. No Inspiration, for example.