Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6750200" data-attributes="member: 97077">Again, I suggest looking at it a different way. Traps don't have static DCs. A specific goal and approach to dealing with a trap has a DC. If the player articulates that specific goal and approach, then the listed DC applies. If some other goal and approach is articulated, another DC may apply (or outright success or failure). You're looking at what is effectively shorthand. When used in actual play, it must be taken into the context of the basic conversation of the game and the rules for ability checks.See, your solution is to a problem of how you're looking at adjudication, not a problem with the game itself. Though I will say the game could be clearer on these points for sure.With regard to the characters keeping their eyes peeled for hidden threats, while it's generally safe to assume competent adventurers are doing this, there is more to it. This choice comes with a trade-off. You basically can't do anything else at least as distracting as map-making, foraging, tracking, or navigating. Do any of those things or something similarly involved and you've got no chance of noticing hidden threats. Further, you must be in the fictional position to actually notice the trap e.g. the guy at the back of the party might not see a hidden threat at the front of the marching order. So I recommend getting some measure of specificity out of the players as they do things during play. Presuming character action without player input can lead to issues.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 6750200, member: 97077"] Again, I suggest looking at it a different way. [I]Traps[/I] don't have static DCs. [I]A specific goal and approach to dealing with a trap[/I] has a DC. If the player articulates that specific goal and approach, then the listed DC applies. If some other goal and approach is articulated, another DC may apply (or outright success or failure). You're looking at what is effectively shorthand. When used in actual play, it must be taken into the context of the basic conversation of the game and the rules for ability checks. See, your solution is to a problem of how you're looking at adjudication, not a problem with the game itself. Though I will say the game could be clearer on these points for sure. With regard to the characters keeping their eyes peeled for hidden threats, while it's generally safe to assume competent adventurers are doing this, there is more to it. This choice comes with a trade-off. You basically can't do anything else at least as distracting as map-making, foraging, tracking, or navigating. Do any of those things or something similarly involved and you've got no chance of noticing hidden threats. Further, you must be in the fictional position to actually notice the trap e.g. the guy at the back of the party might not see a hidden threat at the front of the marching order. So I recommend getting some measure of specificity out of the players as they do things during play. Presuming character action without player input can lead to issues. [/QUOTE]

Verification