korgoth
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 323
|
Post by korgoth on Nov 20, 2007 16:49:36 GMT -6
This stickied thread merges several old threads with discussion about searching for/finding/springing traps in OD&D, particularly prior to addition of thieves. The original post in each thread is annotated with the original title of the thread to aid in following the conversation. Feel free to add further replies, comments or questions to this thread --- Zenopus.
THREAD: SEARCHING FOR TRAPS
I've got a couple of related questions about searching for traps in OD&D.
In Moldvay, as most of you will know, mechanical traps are found on a 1 in 6, or 2 in 6 for dwarves, and small or special traps can only be found by the Thief class.
I have seen some defend "descriptive searching", which is a method I have had some experience with: rather than rolling to search, you describe where you look and what you are looking for. Assuming that the DM doesn't force you to "pixel hunt" (like those old interactive movie games, where winning was based on mousing over the single pixel that had the dingus; "You said you were looking at the stones, not checking the stones for discoloration!") I agree that this can work.
However, is "descriptive searching" really the method of OD&D? I ask because in theory descriptive searching could also apply to secret doors, which Vol 3 says you roll to search for.
I will say that if we're rolling to search for things, I like Moldvay's method. But I am interested to know: how do the gentlefolk here assembled handle searches, especially trap searches, for OD&D? If you use "descriptive searching", how exactly do you implement it?
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 21, 2007 2:52:50 GMT -6
Caveat: I haven't run OD&D yet, so this is how I THINK I would run it:
I'd allow descriptive searching, but I'd also roll dice. A good description would give a bonus (+1 or even +2) on the die roll. But hey, some traps are just really well hidden!
Also, if someone is detailed in their search for a secret door, I'd give a bonus to that also.
Remember: The dice are there to serve the DM, not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Nov 21, 2007 12:07:06 GMT -6
Since there's no procedure for roll-based trap searches in the rules -- even for dwarfs it's simply mentioned that "they note ... traps ... in underground settings" with no associated die-roll or percentage for success -- that leads me to believe that descriptive/negotiation-based searching (or at least ad-hoc rolls determined by the DM rather than any fixed/defined procedure) was the assumed method (though I suppose it's possible a die-roll like for secret doors was intended and simply missed in the published rules).
My method is description/negotiation plus ad-hoc rolls: the players state where and how they're searching, and on that basis I determine how likely they are to find the trap -- it might be automatic, it might be a die-roll (on which dwarfs would typically get a bonus), or they might not have any chance of success. It's subjective and it varies by situation, and there's no single "magic word" or procedure that will always work, but it works in practice and keeps the game moving.
EXAMPLE: In a room, there's a pit-trap hidden under a rug. The players are searching the room for traps. If they say "we're searching the room for traps" with no further detail I'll assign a chance, 2 or 3 in 6 say (since a pit under a rug isn't exactly the most ingeniously-hidden trap...), that they find the pit trap (and if this roll fails there'll be the standard (2 in 6) chance that they unknowingly trip it); if they say "we look under the rug for a trap" they'll find it automatically with no die roll required; if they say "we're examing along the walls, the ceiling, the bed, and the armoire looking for traps" (i.e. they mention specifically where they're searching that doesn't include where the trap is) they'll have no chance of finding it (and, instead, will have the standard, or perhaps even increased to 3 or 4 in 6 since they're obviously moving about a lot in the room, and not paying any attention to the rug, chance of tripping it). In another room, or with another type of trap, the exact procedure would be a bit different (though the general idea would still hold).
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Nov 22, 2007 10:22:11 GMT -6
Excellent example, Foster! Even with secret doors, I expect some description of how players are searching -- and sometimes might not require a roll. For instance, if someone tries to move a particular statue on a shelf, that might cause a panel in the wall to rotate.
|
|
|
Post by Rhuvein on Nov 22, 2007 11:20:58 GMT -6
Agreeing with everyone, I think descriptive searching is the key to success most of the time. My players have finally learned this after a few singed beards and eyebrows, that they had better do thorough checks.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 22, 2007 21:35:53 GMT -6
In keeping with the general philosophy of OD&D, I tend not to nit-pick unless there is a special reason to do so. If a person says "I search the room" I might counter with a question to determine if it's a quick or extensive search (clearly eating up different amounts of time along with potential wandering monsters) and then make a roll.
I'm afraid that a continual list of places to search could get boring in a hurry. Under the cabinet? Second drawer down? On the table? Under the table? Under the throw-rug? etc.
In the same way, I tend to be minimalistic when it comes to searching for traps. If a player says "I search the lock on the chest for a trap" I might give a bonus to the roll if the trap is actually there, but in general a statement of "I search the room for traps" is usually fine. The difference, again, would be in terms of time expenditure and the potential for wandering monsters.
If characters have time they would be able to search more. Kind of like 3E's "take 10" or "take 20", but not as formalized a rule.
|
|
|
Post by crimhthanthegreat on Nov 22, 2007 22:47:36 GMT -6
I am in general agreement with everyone, I like the descriptive search with a roll or ruling as appropriate, I lean toward the minimalistic side of things, and my players as a matter of course do a thorough check unless something prevent them from it or there is a reason why they are rushing through the area to get someplace else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2008 10:05:45 GMT -6
THREAD: Traps and Detection
My first post here... I'm intrigued by the whole OD&D concept (I played some Classic D&D in the late 70's or early 80's but am pretty sure I never played OD&D).
One thing that bothers me a bit is the concept of players having to look for traps. Don't get me wrong, I love the concept of players having to decide how to disarm the trap themselves, or even some of the examples given of how players determine that there's a pit trap in front of them (besides the standard 10 foot pole).
But how do you keep players from exploring every single 10 foot square or portion of a wall or object in a room. Maybe that's the point, but it feels as though that could really slow down a game.
Do most people use 'standing orders' for the normal dungeoneering down tunnels (ie, "Cardek keeps an eye on the floor in front of him, Lilla looks at the ceiling, Sal looks at the left wall and Bob looks at the right wall; all carefully in order to see if there are irregularities") and then if there is something that a careful player would spot, the DM tells them there's something odd here, and proceed to describe what they see?
Obviously slowing things down would allow more chances for wandering monsters if they are used, so that could keep characters a bit more lax.
ie, how do you guys keep overly cautious players from slowing things WAAYYYY down?
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jul 29, 2008 10:19:45 GMT -6
Wandering monsters. Realization that they are wasting valuable gaming time.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jul 29, 2008 10:24:24 GMT -6
That, plus the fact that they just aren't finding anything. Nor are they setting anything off.
Sooner or later, they'll give up.
(Naturally, that's when they DO find a pit trap or something...)
|
|
|
Post by BeZurKur on Jul 29, 2008 10:39:49 GMT -6
Hi Gambler.
I've thought about this too. What I discovered is that OD&D is a very personal game. Everyone (DM included) should be having fun at the game. I don't believe anyone should ever be bored. What the right level of caution is something you and your group ultimately have to come up with.
What works for me is to use traps-out-of-nowhere very sparingly. It's okay every now and then, but if the players are conditioned that moving means springing a trap, then they're (rightfully) going to check every 10 square feet. It shouldn't be an obvious clue, but even something a little our of the ordinary -- a hall lined with statues, runic writing on a door, a faint smell, anything -- will trigger the exploration that is the fun part for everyone. Again, nothing wrong with the sudden trap -- used sparingly. Even then, however, it shouldn't be a sure killer.
For me, I don't like standing orders. It removes what I like best about the game. I want the player to tell me he's looking over his shoulder when he thinks of it. It is part of the role-playing experience (immersion?) of OD&D.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jul 29, 2008 11:40:30 GMT -6
Having some clues is definitely a good way to keep the paranoia from taking over. Ultimately, each group needs to come to terms with this on their own. A fair GM should result in a group who take some precautions but don't bog down the game.
I think there is also room for standing orders, though this is most often used for doors and the like. But if the players want to assign one person to watch the floors carefully, and another to watch the left wall, and another the right wall, and a fourth to watch the ceiling, well, then I'm probably going to give them a better chance to spot traps (at least some of the time). Of course I might also make them move slower (more random encounters) or suffer other penalties (perhaps the watchers are surprised 1 in 6 more easily when a threat doesn't come in the direction they are watching.
Frank
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2008 12:18:12 GMT -6
Hi Gambler. I've thought about this too. What I discovered is that OD&D is a very personal game. Everyone (DM included) should be having fun at the game. I don't believe anyone should ever be bored. What the right level of caution is something you and your group ultimately have to come up with. What works for me is to use traps-out-of-nowhere very sparingly. It's okay every now and then, but if the players are conditioned that moving means springing a trap, then they're (rightfully) going to check every 10 square feet. It shouldn't be an obvious clue, but even something a little our of the ordinary -- a hall lined with statues, runic writing on a door, a faint smell, anything -- will trigger the exploration that is the fun part for everyone. Again, nothing wrong with the sudden trap -- used sparingly. Even then, however, it shouldn't be a sure killer. For me, I don't like standing orders. It removes what I like best about the game. I want the player to tell me he's looking over his shoulder when he thinks of it. It is part of the role-playing experience (immersion?) of OD&D. I agree wholeheartedly with this and it is essentially how I run it. I like a game that moves quickly and if you run your campaign so that the players are afraid to move then the game bogs down while they spend hours in real world time searching for traps. Not fun for the players or the DM. YMMV
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2008 13:30:58 GMT -6
Maybe that's the point, but it feels as though that could really slow down a game. It can, & does. What I do is allow my players to roll a d6, with a (1) signifing success for a Human or a Hobbit, & a (1-2) signifing success for an Elf or a Dwarf. But here's the catch: depending on how descriptive the players are in their search, they could gain a bonus to their roll (whatever you think is acceptable). This method works well for us; it allows a quick roll to speed things up, but still allows room for descriptive searching. Hope this helps ya! *And if your using the Sup. 1 (Greyhawk) Thief, "Find Traps" works just like his "Hear Noise" Ability, & advances as the same.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Jul 29, 2008 13:39:43 GMT -6
To the OP:
I really don't see any difference with asking to roll for a skill check every 10'.
As it has been said, wandering monsters and the desire of the players not to waste time prevent this problem in my experience.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Jul 29, 2008 15:05:27 GMT -6
Searching takes time, and as other said, wandering monsters. Also, you could try to describe things in such a way as to give very subtle clues as to where a likely trap or secret door might be, and leave it up to the players to pick up on the clues.
|
|
korgoth
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 323
|
Post by korgoth on Aug 5, 2008 23:25:21 GMT -6
Hi Gambler. I've thought about this too. What I discovered is that OD&D is a very personal game. Everyone (DM included) should be having fun at the game. I don't believe anyone should ever be bored. What the right level of caution is something you and your group ultimately have to come up with. What works for me is to use traps-out-of-nowhere very sparingly. It's okay every now and then, but if the players are conditioned that moving means springing a trap, then they're (rightfully) going to check every 10 square feet. It shouldn't be an obvious clue, but even something a little our of the ordinary -- a hall lined with statues, runic writing on a door, a faint smell, anything -- will trigger the exploration that is the fun part for everyone. Again, nothing wrong with the sudden trap -- used sparingly. Even then, however, it shouldn't be a sure killer. For me, I don't like standing orders. It removes what I like best about the game. I want the player to tell me he's looking over his shoulder when he thinks of it. It is part of the role-playing experience (immersion?) of OD&D. This sounds like a reasonable method. It certainly makes it a bit of a game - you toss out a clue, and their job is to make something out of it.
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Aug 31, 2008 13:41:18 GMT -6
1) Wandering monsters - you roll for them every X minutes...the more time PC's spend peering at a floor looking for trip wire, pressure plates or just a plain old hidden pit, the greater the chance that a band of wandering monsters will show up...and monsters in OD&D aren't "balanced" for the party...they can be a single lost kobold...or a platoon of orcs led by a couple of evil magic-users. In other words, wandering monsters can cause a bit of anxiety.
2) Traps don't come up that often. They aren't all over the place. Thus, putting in the time to look carefully for them becomes a calculated gamble...do you look for them, realizing that there most probably isn't one there? Are there any clues that might indicate that there is a trap (like a bunch of dead bodies). Is it worth spending time looking for traps knowing that a band of wandering monsters that can TPK your PC's can come tromping around the corner? However, if a trap IS there and you blunder into it, someone is probably going to die.
It's a different style of play. You're going to be dreading the appearance of wandering monsters (instead of thinking of them as carefully balanced smorgasbords of XP's). And traps won't be there at every 10' of dungeon corridor. So the utility of carefully checking each section of dungeon corridor is suspect. It's more about fear and paranoia, less about slash and hack.
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Oct 12, 2008 14:35:54 GMT -6
TITLE: TOOLS FOR SEARCHING FOR TRAPS
I can only think of a 10' foot pole to probe ahead to trigger any traps that may be out there.
Anyone else got any other standard methods of searching for traps?
|
|
JM
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 10
|
Post by JM on Oct 12, 2008 15:11:29 GMT -6
Off the top of my head, how about a leather wrapped weight tried to 20ft length (or more) string or twine? The leather wrapping dampens the noise when tossed, and pulling the weight back could set off pressure sensitive stones. Should there be tripwires, the string would lie on top of them, readily pointing them out too.
|
|
|
Post by Wothbora on Oct 12, 2008 17:13:51 GMT -6
Hired Henchmen or Prisoners!
Sometimes, nasty little Hobbits also work well with a rope tied around their waist for multiple attempts.
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Oct 12, 2008 18:43:59 GMT -6
Hired Henchmen or Prisoners! Sometimes, nasty little Hobbits also work well with a rope tied around their waist for multiple attempts. LOL. I heard sheep also work pretty well. The problem with using hired henchmen is that unless they don't have more than two neurons to rub together, they'll eventually do something very nasty to you in your sleep, and I'm not talking about tea-bagging.
|
|
jjarvis
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 278
|
Post by jjarvis on Oct 15, 2008 11:23:43 GMT -6
Fine powder in a tube, blow it into cracks and other spaces, it'll stick differently to different materials. Could provide a clue if some areas are lubricated without having to touch them.
Splash areas with water, to wash dust away. See if there are cracks you couldn't' see before.
Mirrors on poles. Look at stuff from a different angle can't hurt, you can look into some spaces if the mirror and pole are thin enough (of course then they will nto be very long). Look around corners this way too.
|
|
|
Post by philotomy on Oct 15, 2008 14:43:24 GMT -6
...nasty little Hobbits also work well with a rope tied around their waist for multiple attempts. Wothbora, I like the cut of your jib.
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Oct 15, 2008 22:42:23 GMT -6
Other trap/trick detector equipment I'd consider using regularly:
- a bag of marbles for sloping passages (may also double as a slowing device if you're being pursued!); water can also work, but why waste your water supply? - a canary or other critter sensitive to poison gasses - crowbar or 5' steel rod or such for stopping/slowing a descending ceiling (I'm sure this was in one of Jim Ward's "Notes from a Semi-Successful D&D Player" articles; there were several good advice articles in TD BITD) - a pick/shovel/digging implement, to smash in that likely-trapped chest's side panel or floor panel instead of using the trapped lock/front door - some acid, also useful for cutting away locks, hinges, and other metallic impediments - iron spikes and hammers to jam secret doors, one-way doors, etc. open - chalk to mark notes on the walls; even better: permanent ink/sharpies/magical ink/whatever, so that such notes won't easily be removed by passing gelatinous cubes
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Oct 16, 2008 8:12:40 GMT -6
This is good stuff - it really underscores the logistics challenge of early adventures.
|
|
|
Post by bigjackbrass on Oct 19, 2008 13:56:53 GMT -6
I wouldn't call it standard, but I once considered having my character build a small weighted wheelbarrow at the end of a long pole (which could be taken apart if needed), designed to trigger pit traps and pressure plates. Common sense eventually prevailed. On the other hand, a rudimentary spirit level, tape measure and a plumb bob are quite handy if your character needs to check for suspicious slopes and hidden areas. More engineering than heroics, though
|
|
|
Post by castiglione on Oct 19, 2008 17:10:22 GMT -6
I'm surprised noone mentioned a pouch with some lead weights to replace any treasure on pressure plates.
You've all seen Raiders, right?
|
|
|
Post by bigjackbrass on Oct 20, 2008 11:02:33 GMT -6
You've all seen Raiders, right? Aye, but it wasn't too effective a ploy in the film!
|
|
|
Post by James Maliszewski on Oct 22, 2008 7:31:19 GMT -6
I seem to recall an article in Dragon way back when that included an extensive -- and highly creative -- list of trap-detection tools from the author's campaign. I wish I could recall which issue it was, because I remembering really being impressed with the list. That guy had some really ingenious players.
|
|