D&D General Traps, Agency, and Telegraphing Dangers

[Scribe]

I get that. The problem is telegraphing makes no sense from the trap creator's point-of-view. Leaving clues literally defeats the purpose of even having a trap in the first place.

You enter a room, there are some skeletons in a specific area, you wonder why.

That kind of thing is what I mean.

 

[DeviousQuail]

Traps are tricky. I lean towards a very limited number of traps that are telegraphed in my dungeons. This has more to do with how boring I find the gameplay of constantly checking for traps than anything else.

I also really hate traps that don't make sense. One example that really irks me in published and homebrew games I've played is an explosive trap on a chest/desk/safe in a baddies room. I hope you don't mind your entire room being engulfed in flame, acid, etc. Let alone any potential backlash from the trap onto the things you are protecting or anything else of value in the room. A much better trap I ran across in a similar situation was a chest that glued itself to the person who opens it if they don't say the password (and also set off an alarm spell).

 

[Charlaquin]

Trouble is, non-gotcha traps don't make sense. The literal point of the trap is for it to go undetected so that it catches the target unaware so that it can inflict pain, suffering, and even death on whoever stumbles into it. Signposting a trap negates the literal point and purpose of there being a trap.

The two most famous examples of traps in modern times, I think, are Raiders of the Lost Ark and the Vietnam War / Resistance war against the US. In the first, Indy knows there are traps so is careful and intentionally triggers one to show the audience there are traps. The whole temple sequence of the movie is one long trapped dungeon. In the second, the Vietnamese used guerilla tactics and a wide variety of traps to resist the US. In neither case were the traps signposted to give the targets a "fair" warning*. Because that would literally defeat the purpose of the trap.

* Unless of course the signpost was itself part of the trap. Here's an obvious trap, pay attention to this obvious trap while you are hit with this non-obvious trap. The angler fish trap, as it were.

So would the referee saying, "All dungeons have traps" be enough? Or, "This game features traps" be enough?

I gotta disagree strongly that the traps in Raiders of the Lost Arc weren’t telegraphed. The spikes were indicated by the beams of light. The poison darts were indicated by the tiling on the floor and faces on the walls. The rolling bolder was indicated by the unguarded idol on the pedestal.

A telegraph doesn’t have to be an unambiguous indication of exactly where the trap is and how it works. Simply setting up a scenario that might give players reason to suspect something is amiss suffices. The point of a telegraph is not to give the trap away, it’s to get the players investigating and trying to find and solve the trap creatively, or failing that, to give them something to look back at after blundering into the trap and realize what they missed.

 

[Xetheral]

Where do other people stand on this? What are better arguments for or against telegraphed dangers?

Whether any given set of players likes the idea of traps that aren't telegraphed in advance is a style question, so I don't think there can be universally applicable arguments for or against telegraphed traps.

That being said, there are ways to incorporate traps into the world where the trap both makes sense as presented and either makes sense to be telegraphed in advance, or else its presence telegraphs the danger of other nearby traps. Here are some possibilities:

• The trap is old. Due to the passage of time and the decay of the structure around the trap, it's much easier to spot than it would have been when it was built. (Note that having one or more easily detectable old traps in a decayed part of a structure counts as telegraphing the potential trap danger in less-decayed parts of the same structure.)
• A trap has already been triggered, and the occupants of the structure (if any) haven't had a chance to reset it yet. As above, this telegraphs the potential danger of other, as-yet untriggeted traps nearby.
• The trap wasn't designed to stop the PCs. This has many variations, from amateurish traps that the PCs are simply too skilled to miss, to traps designed for creatures of a wildly different physiology. These can still be an obstacle for the PCs, without being the unavoidable death trap that they might be for the intended targets.
• The trap was never intended to be hidden. Instead it was meant as a deterrent and an obstacle.
• The trap requires manual activation by an enemy. Reliable triggers that can discriminate between friend and foe are extremely hard to design and build, so it makes sense that many primitive traps would be manual in nature. Since the sentinel needs some way to observe the location of the trap, it makes sense that the sentinel might be noticable by the PCs, even if the trap mechanism itself is undetectable.
• The trap isn't typically armed. This makes sense for traps in occupied structures, where leaving a trap set could pose too much risks for the occupants. Finding an unset trap telegraphs to the PCs that if their presence is detected, the occupants might arm other traps.
• The trap requires inhabitants of the structure to take visible precautions to avoid. Traps that are always armed in an occupied structure require some way for the inhabitants to avoid triggering them. If the PCs observe such precautions, that can reasonably telegraph the danger.
• The trap is a multistage trap, and the first stages can't be concealed. Anything that does progressive damage is a good example of this, such as a magical trap that simply does ongoing damage to everyone in an area. This kind of trap telegraphs itself, giving the party time to figure out how to respond, while still being an obstacle. (Another example of a multistage trap would be one that starts with Dispel Magic to strip protections, telegraphing an imminent follow-up attack to take advantage of the unprotected targets. That may give the PCs time to retreat out of range, but the trap is still an obstacle.) These sorts of traps make sense in the world if they're intended to deny or delay access to an area.

Note that traps that the PCs successfully avoid don't have to be wasted table time. In addition to telegraphing the possible presence of other nearby traps, they can continue to be a danger if they're not disarmed (for example, making rapid retreat much more dangerous), or they can potentially be repurposed by the PCs against other foes, making them an active component of later encounters. And if disarming a trap requires more interaction than a simple skill check (e.g., the party has to figure out how the thing works first, then decide between various ways of sabotaging it and any potential consequences those might have, and then roll to find out if they're skillful enough to effect the desired sabotage) then interacting with the trap can be an entire non-combat encounter on its own. Particularly formidable traps might be the subject of an entire adventure, if bypassing it requires resources the party doesn't yet have.

 

[darjr]

I’m in the middle.

However I prefer my traps to be obvious as “something” even if not as traps or the solution isn’t obvious. Especially if it takes role playing to “toy” with them.

Sometimes I have put something ominous and definitely dangerous or deadly and not consider a way out. Let the players figure that out. Key emphasis on LET the players figure it out.

 

[overgeeked]

Traps are tricky. I lean towards a very limited number of traps that are telegraphed in my dungeons. This has more to do with how boring I find the gameplay of constantly checking for traps than anything else.

I also really hate traps that don't make sense. One example that really irks me in published and homebrew games I've played is an explosive trap on a chest/desk/safe in a baddies room. I hope you don't mind your entire room being engulfed in flame, acid, etc. Let alone any potential backlash from the trap onto the things you are protecting or anything else of value in the room. A much better trap I ran across in a similar situation was a chest that glued itself to the person who opens it if they don't say the password (and also set off an alarm spell).

That sounds like a really cool trap.

 

[soviet]

The point is that practically speaking you get what you reward for. If there are non-telegraphed traps that have a significant effect but can only be found by a thorough search... well welcome to a game where players thoroughly search every conceivable surface.

Not sure what it has to do with agency though.

 

[darjr]

Traps are tricky. I lean towards a very limited number of traps that are telegraphed in my dungeons. This has more to do with how boring I find the gameplay of constantly checking for traps than anything else.

I also really hate traps that don't make sense. One example that really irks me in published and homebrew games I've played is an explosive trap on a chest/desk/safe in a baddies room. I hope you don't mind your entire room being engulfed in flame, acid, etc. Let alone any potential backlash from the trap onto the things you are protecting or anything else of value in the room. A much better trap I ran across in a similar situation was a chest that glued itself to the person who opens it if they don't say the password (and also set off an alarm spell).

Oh that’s amazing. Swipe!

 

[Reynard]

One thing to remember about Old School traps is they did not automatically go off like modern traps. usually there was a 1 in 6 or 2 in 6 chance it would go off. Meaning, when the PCs went down the hall, they may not have stepped on the exact tile that sets it off, or maybe they stepped over the trip wire. That changes the dynamic. In modern dungeons, just breathing wrong sets off traps and makes them a lot more tedious.

As to telegraphing: I agree with the cohort that thinks traps are more fun when the PCs interact with them, so I'm for not just telegraphing, but outright informing the PCs there is a trap there. "A huge spikey portcullis hangs precariously over the altar where the treasure sits. What do you do?" That starts an interesting sequence of events driven by player choices.

That isn't to say I never use gotcha traps. I am, after all, a bit of a RBDM and sometimes the kobolds dump a barrel of scorpions or green slime onto you from murder holes above.

 

[bloodtide]

I'm on the second side of at least half of the events in an RPG can and will happen without the players foreknowledge or direct consent. The players only have the very limited viewpoint of a couple very limited characters.

Some times, somethings will be telegraphed. The players will be told flat out that the Cursed Ruby of Katrorrak has a powerful curse that effects anyone who touches it. Other times the characters might find some ancient ruins of a dark god and have no direct knowledge that the area is cursed.

In a realistic simulation type setting of a game the PCs will "fall" for things at least half the time. And even if you have a divination trapmaster character, they will only shave a couple percentage points off.

As an Old School DM, my game world is full of not just traps, but tons of things the players, and the characters, know nothing about but can and will have huge negative effects.

I do think that a bit less then half of traps and other such things are telegraphed. But less then ten percent are the the Easy Button Obvious Type. The Vast majority of the potential telegraphed traps and such require a huge investment by the player and character to figure out.

This is part of the bigger "player agency" argument. Where many feel everything should be rolled out for the players and characters on a red carpet. Exactly like a movie or TV show does. And those of us on the other side saying the characters and player must put in a fair amount of work, focus and effort to discover anything.

And this brings in the Huge difference between Old School and Modern play. In the Old School Style a player is often given hints, clues, and fragments of information. Many are quite subtle. Many are not obvious. And a great many require the player to have the character take some proactive action. And nearly all require the player....for Real...to use their Real life knowledge, intelligence and skills...for Real...to figure out things in the game world. Irregardless of "The Rules" or any "dice rolls".

And the Modern shift is obvious. In the Modern game it is all about Character knowledge, intelligence and skills. In the Modern game, by design, the player just rolls dice. The player is not required to use any Real knowledge, intelligence and skills. This makes traps pointless and boring and binary. "The Character" with their amazing abilities just finds, avoids and disarms the traps....all with the roll of some dice. The player just sits back and relaxes.