Unfair Character Death?

[Brother Shatterstone]

"You have triggered a magical trap."

and I can quote the results again... Really I think I'm done here. I've giving my opinion and my solution and you can do with them as you see fit.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

You Have Traps!

Describing the effects of a magical trap and telling the PCs they have triggered a magical trap seems pedantic and redundant.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Here is exactly what I told the party:

"Without warning, a dozen jet black, bony ridged tentacles errupt from the deck floor and fortress walls."

After two characters made their Spellcraft rolls, I informed them that they had triggered an Evard's Black Tentacles spell.

Now, I could have been more descriptive and evocative, but I believe that this was sufficient information for any veteran player to realize that a magical trap had been set off.

For the record, my first guess would have been "Invisible spellcaster," not "magical trap."

I generally expect traps - magical or otherwise - to have some pretty specific logic to their placement. The middle of a random corridor doesn't cut it, in my mind. A locked and barred door? Sure. A treasure chest? Absolutely.

And a better description might have been, "As soon as Bob crosses [point X], blah blah blah."

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Invisible Casters Rule

For the record, my first guess would have been "Invisible spellcaster," not "magical trap."

There were no verbal cues; still, I see your point. Nonetheless, no one attempted any sort of investigation. No one mentioned enemy spellcasters or attempted to locate them.

For the record, the party cleric did cast detect magic and picked up the auras of numerous grease traps (he just did not scan any locations where any active Evard's traps were located).

I generally expect traps - magical or otherwise - to have some pretty specific logic to their placement. The middle of a random corridor doesn't cut it, in my mind. A locked and barred door? Sure. A treasure chest? Absolutely.

The trap was designed to protect the main floor of the fortress; it was not triggered by the inhabitants.

And a better description might have been, "As soon as Bob crosses [point X], blah blah blah."

A minor point, but worth considering.

 

[billd91]

From my point of view, it looks like the player made a mistake and is getting pissy about it. I don't see anything the DM has done wrong, nor do I see any reason to apologize for it.
Now, in the interests of diffusing the situation, I might say "Look, Chuck, I'm sorry your character died but them's the breaks and this is just a game."
Jumping on the DM because he didn't apply the hints with a hammer doesn't seem the right thing to do. If I get slammed with Evard's Black Tentacles more than once out of the blue, I'm thinking magical trap and not wizard with a silent spell feat.

 

[RedShirtNo5]

"I think we had a mismatch of play styles last session. If I understand correctly, your expectation was that I would explicitly tell you when you encounter a trap because of your character's knowledge. But that's not how I want to DM. I would rather have you, as a player, listen, ask questions, and make logical deductions. I'm sorry that our different expectations resulted in your character's death, but I'm not taking it back."

-RedShirt

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Hanging by a Thread

To top it all off, the Evard's Tentacles trap was on a tower roof and the rogue was hanging from a rope right above it before he set the trap off.

Afterward, the player attempted to convince me that he would have searched for traps on the tower roof (while hanging from a rope) had he known that the tentacle effects were indeed magical traps he could disarm.

Frankly, I know what killed him ... bad luck and a poor conception of the rules ... not me ....

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Word (x3)

"I think we had a mismatch of play styles last session. If I understand correctly, your expectation was that I would explicitly tell you when you encounter a trap because of your character's knowledge. But that's not how I want to DM. I would rather have you, as a player, listen, ask questions, and make logical deductions. I'm sorry that our different expectations resulted in your character's death, but I'm not taking it back."

Agreed ....

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Granted, there are other possible explanations for this spell effect ... but a magical trap is the most logical.

Yes and no. Seeing what you said in print, the word "triggered" does suggest a trap over actual spellcasting. But at the gametable, with a battle going on at the same time, that word could easily be overlooked. And if it was, or if it wasn't clearly heard, then believing the spell to be the result of an invisible spellcaster is just as logical as a trap.

But that's really beside the point. For me, this all boils down to DMing style. As a DM, I tend to consider the game a cooperative one. Even though I'm running all the monsters, traps, devious villains, lascivious breadmaking neighbors, etc., I'm rooting for the PCs to win in the end. I don't pull punches (or the players would get bored), and I run a dangerous game, but still--I want to see the PCs triumph.

So if the players are missing something, like the fact that they're getting zapped by magical traps without even trying to Search for them, I'll start dropping hints, more and more blantantly with each trap that goes off unsearched for.

That's just me. Thayan Menace, you seem to be more neutral in your attitude toward DMing, which is perfectly fine too. From such a position, it makes sense that you wouldn't bother to remind players of their abilities, etc. (whereas I would.) Indeed, your players may prefer that, and I suspect they don't remind you of any monster abilities you forget, either.

None of that's really important, though, since the actual adjudication has already come and gone. What's important now is where you go from here. If this person is your friend, then I assume you want to resolve this while remaining friends, both at and away from the gaming table.

Working under that assumption, I suggest that you simply tell him you're sorry that his PC died, you'll do your best to provide more informative descriptions in the future (even though you believe your descriptions are plenty-informative now,) and you hope he can let bygones be bygones as well, and continue to have fun with you at the gaming table.

Besides, caving is not friendship ... self-degradation is not a sign of loyalty.

Regarding this quote, it's been my experience that sometimes friendship is caving. It's sometimes putting your friend's wishes above your own. And yes, sometimes loyalty is self-degradation, if it's for the sake of someone you're loyal to. But really, self-degradation is a very melodramatic word for what is, after all, a very, very minor affront to your dignity.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Tales From the Hard Side

None of that's really important, though, since the actual adjudication has already come and gone. What's important now is where you go from here. If this person is your friend, then I assume you want to resolve this while remaining friends, both at and away from the gaming table.

Working under that assumption, I suggest that you simply tell him you're sorry that his PC died, you'll do your best to provide more informative descriptions in the future (even though you believe your descriptions are plenty-informative now,) and you hope he can let bygones be bygones as well, and continue to have fun with you at the gaming table.

I am sorry that his PC died, but I am not responsible for his death.

I want to reconcile with this player, but he wants complete capitulation.

I am willing to concede that I could have been more descriptive, but he wants me to admit that my "mistakes" killed off his character pointlessly.

He has gone as far as to tell me that I derived enjoyment from slaughtering his character and that I purposely set him up to die.

He's characterizing me as dishonest and vindictive, and, frankly, that's hard to deal with.