Quote from: fearsomepirate;953693I'd run it like this (assuming successful check):

"You slowly crack the lid of the chest and peek in. You notice a bell hanging from the lid of the chest that would have rung had you opened the lid quickly."

Most players will figure out that's an alarm, but I wouldn't tell them that.

My players would proceed to ring it, just to see what happens.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;953764It is a trap if the referee decides it is a trap.

Tautologically true, unless the referee lacks even that minimal authority.

But at the extreme the referee could declare almost any danger a trap: an ambush, a natural hazard, the fine print in a contract, a clever chess gambit, unexpectedly high trans fats in a banquet entree, and so on. I don't care for games where play involves persuading the referee to make an advantageous interpretation rather than characters actually doing things based on reasonably objective criteria. I would rather expect a trap to be some concealed contrivance intended to expose its target to harm. So, a car with its brake line damaged is more likely a trap than a car that's simply poorly maintained-the latter falls to someone with skill as a car mechanic to detect.

And the referee should consider the rationale for the ability to detect: if a cleric casts a spell to detect traps, then it's what the god decides is a trap -- a war god might not view a bell that attracts an enemy to fight or that exposes stealthy characters as a trap.

Quote from: Tod13;953910My players would proceed to ring it, just to see what happens.

But first you find cover to hide behind, ring a bell from a distance with a well placed arrow then wait for the guards to come. Once the guards are dead, it's safe to cross the bridge.

Quote from: rawma;953920I don't care for games where play involves persuading the referee to make an advantageous interpretation rather than characters actually doing things based on reasonably objective criteria. I would rather expect a trap to be some concealed contrivance intended to expose its target to harm. So, a car with its brake line damaged is more likely a trap than a car that's simply poorly maintained-the latter falls to someone with skill as a car mechanic to detect.

I agree with your preference, but your example seems to contradict it.  If your brake line is broken at the same point in both cases, I fail to see any objective rationale for why you would use Detect Traps to notice the problem if it was cut intentionally, but Car Mechanic to notice if it were due to poor maintenance.

My personal resolution is to interpret the "Traps" abilities to apply to mechanical devices in general, so "Detect Traps" allows you to detect concealed mechanisms and "Disarm Traps" allows you to sabotage them.  The purpose, intent, or effect of the mechanism don't enter in to it.

Quote from: Technomancer;953692What causes me to wonder is, unlike with most other traps, the cause isn't connected (physically or intuitively) to the effect; no wires, switches, gears, etc.  The thief may find the bell, but there is no obvious indication it has anything to do with the monster, especially if it is made to look like something ornamental.  Thief wouldn't automatically know it was an alarm.

So it's something I wouldn't begrudge them finding, but I don't think they should automatically know it is a trap.

The mechanical/technical skill involved in finding the trap in no way allows the character to suddenly know the significance of any device part that is discovered. The bell may be detected and the player may deduce that it is an alarm of some kind. Knowing that a specific monster is trained to respond to the bell is knowledge that wouldn't be gained by simple discovery of the device.

Quote from: rawma;953920And the referee should consider the rationale for the ability to detect: if a cleric casts a spell to detect traps, then it's what the god decides is a trap -- a war god might not view a bell that attracts an enemy to fight or that exposes stealthy characters as a trap.

Wow, that sounds like a screw-the-players response. Unless you're going to tell the cleric up front that because they're devoted to the god of war, their idiosyncratic version of Detect Traps has been nerfed?

I can see a game structured like this, but think I'd strongly prefer to run "Because you're devoted to the god of war, you're granted this variant spell list, which happens not to include detect traps or ...

I definitely prefer the idea of a 'mundane' trap detection skill to simply be an acute awareness to threats, particularly of the mechanical variety. Magic, OTOH can separate out things that are 'intended as traps' from things that simply are dangerous. Each would have their own benefits. Mundane skill would be useless against magical/fantasy traps with no mechanisms involved -- "the wizard cast a spell (that leaves no runes or anything) saying, 'if this door is opened, a dozen demons are summoned and will devour the opener'"). However, it would occasionally be useful in detecting mechanical things that aren't actually traps -- a secret button on the altar causes a hidden compartment to open and reveal the secret treasure.

Quote from: Naburimannu;953957Wow, that sounds like a screw-the-players response. Unless you're going to tell the cleric up front that because they're devoted to the god of war, their idiosyncratic version of Detect Traps has been nerfed?

I can see a game structured like this, but think I'd strongly prefer to run "Because you're devoted to the god of war, you're granted this variant spell list, which happens not to include detect traps or ...

Sure, and instead this god grants the spell 'detect threats' which may be better or worse ("you're in a dungeon, the whole place glows").

Quote from: Krimson;953921But first you find cover to hide behind, ring a bell from a distance with a well placed arrow then wait for the guards to come. Once the guards are dead, it's safe to cross the bridge.

Based on recent events, mine would set up catering tables (Cave Catering) with food dosed with sleeping powder, and ring the bell shouting "dinner's ready!" (Pun intended.) But then try to charge the monsters a gold piece each. (Is that a trap?)

This thread highlights why some systems fall back on "Detect Traps" skills and why I don't care for them. It's generally easier (more clear-cut, objectively understandable for everyone at the table, etc) to have a blanket x% chance of spotting any trap, but I don't find that nearly as fun as actually figuring out the presence and nature of a trap.

You might as well just tell the players where the traps are and then let them roll to spot them - it would speed up the game.

"You see a chest. It's trapped. Your thief has a 65% chance of noticing the trap." "I rolled a 70." "Ok, you didn't see it, so you open the trapped chest and take 2d6 damage."

That's a practical approach, and would probably be more serviceable in an environment with lots of traps.  

The problem of "player skill" trap detection (which a lot of answers to the OP's trap rely upon) is that, while I find it more satisfying, can really bring a game to a crawl. Literally, as PCs crawl, wiggle, tap, etc. carefully around everything.

Yeah, the counter to that are wandering monster checks, torch/food/other resource limits, but as a DM you really need to be sparing in your use of traps to prevent games from grinding down to lengthy descriptive checks of every single object.

And then you get into definitional Bingo with "what's the difference between a trap, an ambush, misdirection, and deception?"  If you steal my beer I'm going to punch you in the nose, does that mean my beer is a trap?

Quote from: darthfozzywig;953978The problem of "player skill" trap detection (which a lot of answers to the OP's trap rely upon) is that, while I find it more satisfying, can really bring a game to a crawl. Literally, as PCs crawl, wiggle, tap, etc. carefully around everything.

Yeah, the counter to that are wandering monster checks, torch/food/other resource limits, but as a DM you really need to be sparing in your use of traps to prevent games from grinding down to lengthy descriptive checks of every single object.

I agree with this. I remember in some old dungeon crawls when we would exhaustively ask questions about everything, "What does the floor look like?" , "What does the ceiling look like?" etc. That's because if we didn't say we were specifically looking at things, then we wouldn't get the description. In one game, we came up with a written "Standard Operating Procedure" document that would go over how we would handle halls, doors, chests, etc. Things that would take seconds for our characters (like looking around at each part of the room) would take minutes in the game.

I think for player skill issues, it works much better to have specified puzzles/enigmas. i.e. "Here's the puzzle. Now solve it without setting off traps."

Quote from: Technomancer;953639Assume you are playing a game where there is some mechanic (skill, thief ability, etc) for detecting traps. What do you think actually constitutes a trap? How far does that mechanical ability stretch.

For an example: There is a bell hung on the inside of the lid of a treasure chest. Opening the chest will cause the bell to ring, which will cause a monster (who has been trained to come when it hears the bell) to come and attack whoever is opening the chest.

Is the bell a trap for the purpose of detecting traps?  Would your players be pissed if they used their thief skill to examine the chest for traps, you told them they found nothing, and they then opened the chest and got attacked by the monster?

It doesn't require much beyond malicious sapient intent (and, usually, passive). Mechanical complexity and directness are essentially moot to the equation.

For example, a simple bit of shiny discreetly peeking from debris across a quicksand feature can be a trap. As can be deliberate obfuscation of a path hazard. As can be deliberate creation of a well worn path into a natural wilderness hazard.

What you described is an alarm, one of the most basic uses for a trap there is. The point being 'a Trap is a sapient intent trying to induce a response that triggers a negative circumstance'. A bit technical and wordy, but basically what it is; an alarm is a trap to induce the negative circumstance of defender's awareness.

As to your example, since I always tell players they think they did fabulous! on their hide and sneak rolls -- because we always think we do great until proven otherwise -- telling them they found nothing and then showing the contrary is rather a non-starter.

Quote from: Tod13;953969Based on recent events, mine would set up catering tables (Cave Catering) with food dosed with sleeping powder, and ring the bell shouting "dinner's ready!" (Pun intended.) But then try to charge the monsters a gold piece each. (Is that a trap?)

When Pundit's new OSR is done you could totally run a Black Adder game.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;953979And then you get into definitional Bingo with "what's the difference between a trap, an ambush, misdirection, and deception?"  If you steal my beer I'm going to punch you in the nose, does that mean my beer is a trap?

"Pull my finger..."

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;953979And then you get into definitional Bingo with "what's the difference between a trap, an ambush, misdirection, and deception?"  If you steal my beer I'm going to punch you in the nose, does that mean my beer is a trap?

Im imagining this D&D-esque Rube Goldberg trap where there is a string attached to the beer which when pulled opens a cage with a mouse. The mouse scampers to some cheese and triggers a mouse trap. The trap propels a d20 onto a player piano which plays barroom brawl music. The music alerts Gronan to beer thievery who then punches said libation snatcher in the shnozz.