Traps. Avoidance, detection, meaning.

[ewert]

This would also have a side-effect of giving warrior like classes real tangible benefits from int/wis bonuses atleast until they have 18/200 dex ...

Now if I knew what was broken in birth screen menu on the latest git and knew how to fix it so I could test my no-selling option I could get on with the spell changes, and this trap detection change. I actually think I could code this trap detection stuff in just a few moments ...

[buzzkill]

... LoS trap detection up to 4 paces away? With chances as x, x/2, x/3 and x/4 where x is search% to spot? Make default "move into known trap" an avoidance move with dex based success, and disarm is only command based. Class and level + int + wis for search% if it isn't already (wisdom usually contains intuition in many games, and acts for spot checks etc.). That trap placement non-randomness is good idea too.

I'm a little late to the party but this sounds like a winner to me. I don't hear anyone supporting traps/trap detection (bundled) as it currently exists. I also don't see a reason why we can't have LOS searching and spell based infallible trap detection working together, at least for starters until we figure out how potentially survivable or deadly pure LOS detection is. I'd just make spell based detection more costly/deeper (or don't, but that would be making the game easier yet again).

[ewert]

Yes, those changes would also be good if the trap system is remade. For casters combined int/wis for ranged detection would usually be good enough to give very very good chances of trap detection (I think not 100% so that a +searching item has some value even in the end, remember they will have multiple chances usually due to LoS near range checking), and for physical guys lacking as good wis/int of course a dex based evasion chance. A detected trap would have way less chance of being sprung (dex 18/100 failproof walkover for example), undetected would need 18/200 for failproof.

Actually, maybe detect traps could still be in game, I mean it would be for those paranoid and riskfree-styling players for the early/mid game?

[Timo Pietilä]

My feelings about traps are that they should be avoidable without detection given right stats like very high DEX combined with perception, avoidable with detection without needing to go around them with greater success and disarm-able only with detection (obviously).

Nobody seem to discuss about this suggestion. With this changed I can see a lot better flow of game, IE traps do not need to be detected and they do not activate automatically. This also changes trap deadliness quite a bit.

Like theft-proof DEX with high enough searching/perception and DEX you should get to the point where traps simply do not activate and/or you can detect them before you step on them.

[ewert]

Ahh yes, that is definitely not fleeing but sort of absolute protection, and will be just as valid an option with a free-move-teleport trap.

[fizzix]

Now who if entering a new level immediately flees instead of detecting? ... Yeah. :P

If I'm playing a mage, rogue or ranger my first move on a new level is create doors. Not fleeing per se, but it's the same idea.

[ewert]

I can agree that teleport traps with even a free move are dangerous. However, that gives you atleast the option of either a) detect or b) flee. If you choose to detect, depending on how long you have stayed on the level and what you have teleported away, that is risk taking. Now who if entering a new level immediately flees instead of detecting? ... Yeah. :P

And I agree that teleporting deeper is too risky. Q's however as pointed out can be killers.

Anyways, lets say we remove teleport and replace with deep descent traps ... Atleast it will be a new level with no extra spawns. Harhar. Personally, depending on how the LoS trap detection is, I could live with teleport traps. I live with Qs too ... one might even value +search a smidgen, if there are real risks with traps.

[Derakon]

The thing about summoning traps is that they always put the monsters right next to you, so you can see if they're dangerous. The problem Eddie is outlining is the same one you face when you enter a new level: there are enemies in LOS that can kill you in one turn, but you do not know they are there because it's dark and either you lack ESP or they're mindless. This is a pretty rare problem, but I don't think it's so rare that I'd say a summoning trap is worse than a teleport trap. At the very least with summoning traps you know what the threat is.

[fizzix]

Teleport is still not as dangerous as summoning traps. Though, they are by far the second most dangerous trap, everything else (besides trap doors) are jokes. However, Nexus Q's are essentially harder to detect teleport traps that act from a distance. Much more dangerous.

@Pete: DaJ does a lot of what you are suggesting with pits. You may want to check out the code. Some things that DaJ has beyond what you suggested.

Monsters can also fall into pits.
Players and monsters can climb over rubble (or fail to)
Acid breaths/balls create pits in the dungeon floor.

This allows for some interesting terrain management. Let's say Uvatha is coming at you down a corridor, you acid ball the floor creating a bunch of pits and slowing him down while you launch arrows at him.

[PowerDiver]

Hmm, I meant hitting a teleport trap gives the player a forced first free turn. Coding spesifics I guess, but I really really mean that the player gets a move before anything else if hitting teleport trap.

It will definitely be more dangerous than entering a new level. But not on the level of current teleport-dangerous.

I could be wrong, but one move isn't necessarily enough. Your move is to detect the monster that kills you next move.

I think it still has to be worse than current teleport, since I buff before teleporting. Even so, I've given up teleporting past DL70. An unexpected teleport even with a free move seems worse to me than no free move with full buffing, but I suppose that could be a playstyle issue.

That kind of trap would certainly change the way I play. Currently, there are times when I continue on a level knowing teleport self is unthinkable and I will have to teleport level at the first hint of danger. If that trap is possible, I'd have to teleport level immediately without further exploration.

[ewert]

Hmm, I meant hitting a teleport trap gives the player a forced first free turn. Coding spesifics I guess, but I really really mean that the player gets a move before anything else if hitting teleport trap.

It will definitely be more dangerous than entering a new level. But not on the level of current teleport-dangerous.

Also coding mechanics somehow on the summon trap (if you were talking about that, where -100 energy won't help some chars vs some summons) should probably also be made so that the monsters won't move until the player moves. It WILL scare the bejeezus out of you with a bad summon, but also will allow you to use a surefire escape if you have one. ... Everyone brought their escapes, yes?

[PowerDiver]

Make teleport traps give the player a free turn like entering new level, voila, not insta-death (it is insta-new-level-entrance-danger-zone, but you face that every time you, well, change level).

That is still much more dangerous than entering a new level. I try to rest to full hp and mana, and then cast buffing spells before level change. Without those, lack of haste means even with a free turn the gravity hounds may breathe before I move.

That doesn't mean the trap shouldn't exist, but don't downplay the danger.

[ewert]

Make teleport traps give the player a free turn like entering new level, voila, not insta-death (it is insta-new-level-entrance-danger-zone, but you face that every time you, well, change level). Make summon monster traps summon monsters that have -100 energy, giving player the first turn against them.

Any other traps that people feel should be changed / removed that removing detect traps spells would not be epic fail? I mean would not be unfair increase in risk ...

[grumbleguts]

An interesting ability along with disarm (D) would be (J) jump over. which puts you the square beyond the trap a two square jump which costs 2 moves worth of food and only works next to traps. This way traps can be avoided in corridors without the risk of setting them off but requires a roll-check for success,

[Pete Mack]

Traps should be obstructions--you should be able to detect them, but you should have to work to avoid them. In particular, traps that affect architecture (pits and trap doors) should not be removed by disarming. (From here I will call all such traps "pits".)

The idea here is that you can walk onto a square with a detected pit, but you can't do much when standing on that square.
Some examples:
* Walking onto a pit requires a DEX- and DISARM- determined save against falling into the trap.
* If you are standing on a pit and you take damage from a monster, you will fall into the pit.
* If you are standing above a pit, and your DEX is less than some limit (say 18/200) your only guaranteed move is to move off of it. Spell casting will have some DEX-determined failure rate, where failure means you fall into the trap. Disarming an adjacent trap is also problematic.
* Melee is right out, and taking damage from a monster means that you will fall into the pit.

Given this model, there are any number of possible modifiers
* Total burden makes failure rate higher.
* Berserk Strength makes failure rate 100%.
* iron spikes can "jam" a trap so that spell failure rates are lower.
* If you are "in" a pit trap, you can't attack monsters, but they can attack you. You must climb (or ?Phase) out of the pit to get back into the fight. Climbing out of the pit has a finite chance of failing on each turn.

This doesn't change things for most traps, but it means they can slow you down fatally in hallways, and can block you from getting into (or out of!) a vault without *destruction*.