Traps, again

[Nick]

OK, here is a proposal which possibly retains the surprise element of traps while not enforcing detection:

• All traps are detected only on stepping onto them, at which point they become 'active'
• Once the trap is stepped on, the player can choose either to attempt to disarm, or to step off the trap
• A failed attempt to disarm while on the trap sets it off
• Stepping off an active trap is completely safe, but the trap remains active (and visible), so the player can't now retreat over it without disarming or accepting the effects
• There is no trap detection, and no noticing before activating the trap - visible means active

It is also possible to expand this a bit:

• Some traps (which I'll call radius-1 traps) have an effect when the player is adjacent to the trap, and are activated by stepping adjacent
• To avoid an activated radius-1 trap, you have to step out of the radius
• A radius-1 trap can be disarmed on noticing, or from distance 2 if approaching when already activated
• Successful disarm of a radius-1 trap moves the player onto the trap square (or toward it if disarming from distance 2)

Please find the flaws in this proposal, or give opinions, positive or negative.

[takkaria]

EDIT: I think I misread. I thought that when you stepped on a trap you would trigger it. Re-reading it seems like that isn't what you mean! Original text below.

----

This sounds better than the current setup. You're preserving the peril of the old system without the spamming, and as compensation you get to walk past traps the first time you find them, giving you the choice of whether you try to disarm now vs. risk needing to disarm later when running away. It also removes the unsatisfying and slightly hokey part of the current game where you always notice traps just before you step on them.

I think there are also maybe other ways to reintroduce elements of detection that aren't based on spamming, which would vary the texture of the game a bit:

• trap detection could be a timed status effect with an effective radius of 5 or 6 grids in LOS - and it could be available only on consumable items to avoid spamming, as well as to compete for inventory space
• rogues (but no other classes) could have some chance of noticing traps before they step on them. traps noticed this way could perhaps be side-stepped more easily too

For variation, and to balance out the nastiness of unpredictably stepping on random trapped grids, there should also be some traps that are generated visible. For example, web traps (they don't exist yet but should) and other object-based ones (like mines) might make sense as always visible. Some would make sense generated sometimes visible, sometimes not - like the discoloured spots.

Interested to hear what others think!

[Antoine]

It may work from a gameplay perspective but seems weirdly unintuitive - this ability to just stroll off the trap and be fine, so long as you not return to it.

A.

[Carnivean]

• All traps are detected only on stepping onto them, at which point they become 'active'
• Some traps (which I'll call radius-1 traps) have an effect when the player is adjacent to the trap, and are activated by stepping adjacent

This obsession with removing detection just gets more bizarre. Now I can either step onto a trap without triggering it or near a trap without triggering it and I can't walk near or onto it again (which depends on something) and if I want to disarm it I walk onto the square the trap was on regardless of where I want to go.

Why should traps be obvious to anyone? They're traps, designed to trap the unaware. The design choice to make them obvious to even the dumbest @ to walk the dungeon is absurd. At that point they aren't traps.

Warriors, paladins and priests should be aware that traps exist, but have limited abilities to spot them. Rangers should be more environmentally aware and have a better chance of spotting them. Rogues should be really good at spotting them. Mages should be paranoid enough to use magical detection. Despite the gameplay aspects, that is the fundamental nature of the classes. To have them all the same diminishes their differences.

Make magical detection a buff to the trap detection skill and you can prevent the detection spam problem without resorting to changing the fundamental nature of traps, classes and gameplay.

[Ingwe Ingweron]

This obsession with removing detection just gets more bizarre. Now I can either step onto a trap without triggering it or near a trap without triggering it and I can't walk near or onto it again (which depends on something) and if I want to disarm it I walk onto the square the trap was on regardless of where I want to go.

Why should traps be obvious to anyone? They're traps, designed to trap the unaware. The design choice to make them obvious to even the dumbest @ to walk the dungeon is absurd. At that point they aren't traps.

Warriors, paladins and priests should be aware that traps exist, but have limited abilities to spot them. Rangers should be more environmentally aware and have a better chance of spotting them. Rogues should be really good at spotting them. Mages should be paranoid enough to use magical detection. Despite the gameplay aspects, that is the fundamental nature of the classes. To have them all the same diminishes their differences.

Make magical detection a buff to the trap detection skill and you can prevent the detection spam problem without resorting to changing the fundamental nature of traps, classes and gameplay.

+1. I've voiced my repeated objections that the removal of detection for doors and traps is terribly weighted against the already difficult mage survival. Sure, robust warriors can survive pretty much any trap and can blunder about in rooms looking for secret doors, but why is there a continual drift toward removing any of the small advantages of a mage?

[Nick]

Why should traps be obvious to anyone?

Because otherwise always detecting is optimal so everyone always detects so traps are always obvious.

[Sky]

everyone always detect traps IF they are under control - not confused, blind, being chased by mobs, and in possession of a rod of detection.
by the way, i forgot to mention that, the "DTrap area" also shows you how far you have detected objects.

sorry if i seem pedantic but i think traps should be changed as such:

1. raise the damage.
2. lower the disarm chances, you'll want 90% at CL50.
3. i'm ok with alarms, cave-in, lava traps.
4. keep the same activation/detection system as 4.5

i'm ok with a careful player with rod of detect NEVER stepping on a trap. as long as you maintain ideal conditions of control, which is not always. just recalled, next to a unique, do you detect, or do you run?

(in classic DnD, Teleport Self is a high level spell, we really need to look at that staff of teleport again)

if you get what i'm saying, surprise is ok, but not if the layer has all the resources he needs and absolutely does not want to be surprised - then its not surprise, it's arbitrary.

[Carnivean]

Because otherwise always detecting is optimal so everyone always detects so traps are always obvious.

Don't change the traps, change the detection. Make it an always on, mana-draining buff. Removes the hassle, but doesn't make traps stupid.

Note I'm not having a go at you, as I know that you're trying to solve a problem here. I'm annoyed at the attitude that has backed you into this corner.

[Philip]

I agree that always noticing a trap before triggering it sounds off. If we really want to differentiate classes, and I believe you said you did, I think the best method is something along the lines of what Carnivean proposed, which is for Rogues to have the mechanic you described with the safe activation and the best disarming (maybe a bonus to disarm when you first notice it, too), give Mages a spell that activates (and reveals) all traps in LoS or something along these lines. This would mean you wouldn't be able to try to run across a trap field like a Rogue could, but you could try to find a path with the least dangerous traps to disarm. If you want to prevent people from spamming it and using it as DTraps you could make it reasonably expensive. Rangers should have some kind of passive bonus too, though I'm not sure what. Warriors, Paladins, and Priests should be expected to suck it up/heal it off, though of course they should get a chance to avoid (say, half as likely to trigger it as when disarming).

On the other hand, I really like the idea of having all visible traps be active, and removing detection. If we remove certain traps (trap door, summon), stepping on a trap would usually be nasty but not crippling. Hell, we could even keep trap door as long as say, Feather Falling were to protect you (if you fall that slow, maybe you can catch the floor before you fall down and climb back up). It would even make FF actually useful for once.

The current problem with changing detection in a major way is that trap doors are incredibly frustrating when unavoidable, and summon traps are just horrible. The current solution to this is making *dTraps available to everyone except Warriors by clvl 15, and available to Warriors by whenever they start finding _dTraps and -dTraps. This is inadequate, since that covers at most 1/10 of the game, which makes traps pointless for everyone incredibly quickly.

As for what Sky said about "do you detect or do you run?", well, you teleport. Either the unique is harmless, in which case you go about your business, or asleep, in which case you do your detections and then walk away, or awake and scary, in which case walking would get you killed. In Angband, you must always have ideal conditions of control, or you die. It's just that kind of game.

[PowerWyrm]

Remove trap detection and reintroduce perception (passive searching)? In that case, you keep the current system, but instead of automatically detecting traps, you need to pass a perception check. And if you trigger the trap, you still get a saving throw right?

[Mondkalb]

Remove trap detection and reintroduce perception (passive searching)? In that case, you keep the current system, but instead of automatically detecting traps, you need to pass a perception check. And if you trigger the trap, you still get a saving throw right?

Hm, and bring charisma back and rename it perception? ^^

[Nomad]

Remove trap detection and reintroduce perception (passive searching)? In that case, you keep the current system, but instead of automatically detecting traps, you need to pass a perception check. And if you trigger the trap, you still get a saving throw right?

Perhaps also restore the old amulets/rings of Searching, but as a binary on/off item that gives you automatic 100% trap-detection? Then weaker characters would have the option of trading a useful item slot for a guarantee of safety against traps.

And/or you could use the current division into physical vs. magical traps to give mages a leg-up against traps by giving them auto-detection of the magical ones as a class trait. (And maybe rogues auto-detection of physical ones?)

[Antoine]

My proposed solution remains:
- traps are hidden until detected
- not all characters have easy access to magical trap detection
- but traps are only found in certain predictable locations (e.g. in the centre of a rectangular room, in the centre of a 4-way junction, in spaces surrounded by secret doors, in certain spots in vaults and special rooms), so
- any character can avoid traps by moving in certain cautious ways, and
- to avoid tedium, a character who suspects they are next to a trap can detect it with 100% certainty by hitting 's' once.

A.

[Derakon]

OK, here is a proposal which possibly retains the surprise element of traps while not enforcing detection:

• All traps are detected only on stepping onto them, at which point they become 'active'
• Once the trap is stepped on, the player can choose either to attempt to disarm, or to step off the trap
• A failed attempt to disarm while on the trap sets it off
• Stepping off an active trap is completely safe, but the trap remains active (and visible), so the player can't now retreat over it without disarming or accepting the effects
• There is no trap detection, and no noticing before activating the trap - visible means active

Please find the flaws in this proposal, or give opinions, positive or negative.

I would modulate this to be "once you step onto a trap, your options are a) try to disarm, or b) try to evade (by moving to another tile); in either case, if you fail, the trap is triggered." Thus the player may be surprised by the trap, but they still have a consequential choice to make. Plus it makes a bit more sense IMO for a trap, once stepped on, to already be "activated" and thus the player should not be able to just walk away from it.

In general though, I think highly-visible dungeon obstacles make for a much more interesting game than invisible tripwires and trapdoors do. Think about other dungeon crawlers that you play -- do you more enjoy dodging the periodic swinging axe blades, or having a mine explode your legs off because you failed to realize that that floor tile was a pressure plate? Hidden traps just aren't fun -- they don't create any interesting decisions for the player. At best they may introduce added pressure to the current situation, but the vast majority of the time, they get triggered outside of combat, where the player can safely take the time to recover from whatever the trap did.

I suggested awhile back some variations on traps-as-terrain, including e.g. a room where every tile is a pressure plate that causes spikes to shoot from the floor one turn after it's stepped on. I think that approach is really the approach most likely to result in more fun gameplay. It would of course require substantial coding effort, however.

[Antoine]

> In general though, I think highly-visible dungeon obstacles make for a much more interesting game than invisible tripwires and trapdoors do.

'Highly-visible dungeon obstacles' are fine, you can put in lava / stationery monsters / turrets / whatever, but to me they aren't traps. Traps are things that are hidden until you either detect them or fall victim to them.

A.