Traps on the other side of the door

[dragon5145]

I actually plan to use sectioned corridors, but the houserule in my last post is probationary; maybe it will be more trouble than it's worth. Both rules may be used together or separately.

If the latter houserule is to be used alone, Zargon should only disclose any traps (or secret doors) in the near half of the corridor before the unrevealed monsters, leaving the Heroes to assume the entire corridor has been searched. After a Hero "looks" down the double corridor, the hidden monsters are revealed and only then are the Heroes told that the remainder of the outer corridor requires a further search. After they learn how the houserule operates, they should no longer be cued for the additional search.

I have read through several different forum topics regarding this or similar issues, and unfortunately most work around leave other holes to be fixed. As for the corridors being searched it is a matter of a person's perspective, is one long corridor with another forming a T with it or actually 3 corridors that meet in a T. If you use the second perspective (3 corridor T) the entire board can be broken into well defined corridor zones where only one or two squares will fall into multiple corridors. Unfortunately breaking up the corridors in such a way drastically increases the amount of searches required to clear a quest, since some of the interior corridors are incredibly short. Another problem I have with the search mechanism for traps and secret doors is the assumed movement. The assumed movement seems to come about from another assumption that heroes can only find the traps directly adjacent to them, while I don't completely agree with this it is better than searches only being stopped by walls. If you take the adjacent to find assumption, it still doesn't change the fact that with this heroes will potentially find traps and single doors far beyond the area their actual movement roll would allow. Sucks when roll . What do they do run back and forth their full potential movement find everything to find in that search, then go back to where they started and advance a much smaller amount? Makes no sense.

Another issue is with the rules for searching and monsters, rules for traps just say no visible monsters, many say go ahead and allow searches with visible monsters. This is okay I guess, however I believe any and all monsters visible that have a path and movement value enabling them to reach said searcher be granted an immediate chance to approach and make an undefended attack. This would be considered something of a "attack of opportunity" caused by the hero try to attempt such a focused task in such a hostile environment with enemies present.

As such I would propose changing the search for traps and secret doors into a somewhat modal action. First the EWP and hero players need to agree to a search radius, stopped by walls and doors even if open I'll discuss thru open doors after this, I would suggest one or two square search radius including diagonals for the one square at least ( ie the surrounding 8 squares). During play at the start of a players turn, they say I want to search for ____ or I am searching ____, this starts their search mode. They then make make their movement role and proceed to move their character slowly in order for the EWP to indicate any discoveries just like how players are supposed to allow time for placing furniture and monsters on the board. Since this is more of a modal action, the search continues even if the player turns at a corner or intersection to go down a new corridor, what matters is the search area around the hero. This allows player to go around traps if possible in double corridors and continue the search without the poof found them all effect of the base rules. Hopefully this moving search would help offset the increased searches due breaking up corridors at intersections, since you could continue your search in a new corridor as long as you had the movement left. For those worried about low movement roles, the remake expansions made official what was probably a popular homebrew rule for some, a fixed movement for heroes when no monsters present. When monsters are revealed during movement the search mod automatically end, any traps or secret doors that come into search range at the same time monsters become visible remain undiscovered; unless the player wants to risk immediate undefended attacks.

As for allowing search thru open doors whether into a room or a corridor, I disagree with allow that due to fact the heroes are in a dungeon or castle. My reasoning is the key to activating the trap is the door itself only noticeable from the other side of the door, falling block or spear traps could easily be in ceiling blocked from sight till the hero unfortunately step thru by then it's too late. An argument could be made for finding pit traps, but I prefer to say no for consistency if nothing else.

Man that was long, but not too confusing. I believe it will play better than it reads.

[Daedalus]

From the OP:

As I was browsing through the various quest books, I noticed how especially the Elf Pack seemed to feature traps directly behind doors - including Falling Block Traps, sometimes even at a door to a room that has no other exits.

According to the official rules, you can only search for traps in the same room or hallway as the character doing the search. I've searched the forums, but couldn't find much about this specific topic. As it is, with the official rules, traps behind doors are pretty much sure-fire traps. The Falling Block Traps are especially deadly in this respect, if there is no other exit and the Hero decides to jump sideways instead of backwards through the door he came into the room (a backwards move which by the EU rules is actually forbidden). In my opinion, this seems to make those traps more dangerous than elsewhere on the board. . . .

From the NA perspective at least, I like this minimalist solution that doesn't require more than a certain but reasoned application of the rules:

. . . To avoid the dissapointing situation of seeing a hero falling into a trap just at the other side of the door in a room with monsters (so the room cannot still be searched fro traps), I just would allow the heroes to jump the square, following the standar rules for jumping traps, even if they dont know if there is a trap there or not.

Yes.

. . . If we follow the same rules described in the rulebook for jumping traps, a hero trying to jump an unsearched square is taking the risk of finishing his turn just there if the jump is unsuccesful (rolling a Skull, 50% chance), so he could finish his turn too exposed to the enemy, being something likely undesired for him. In other words, I think the heroes will not be jumping everywhere through the board because it implies potential risks to them, so I think they will only do it when they really suspects a trap could be in front of them.

Yes, again. Failing a Jumping-a-trap roll ends your turn in every case. Springing the trap may cause damage and end a Hero's turn, but is also may cause no damage and still ends his turn; damage depends on the specifics of the trap, but failing to jump a trap universally ends a turn. On the other hand, springing certain traps may sometimes allow a Hero to continue part or all of his turn. Spear traps, Wandering Monster traps and Swinging Axe traps may allow or do allow a Hero to continue with movement, an action, or both--even when sprung.

As failing to successfully roll to jump a trap is intrinsic to the jump attempt rather than the damage or effect, ending the Hero's turn should always apply, even if there isn't an actual trap in the square that would have caused damage. This is an effective consequence for attempting to jump everywhere, as over the course of a Quest this will almost certainly reduce overall movement. As we already know from plate mail restriction of movement, this isn't popular with players. If I were playing with a group that insisted on always jumping anyways, as Zargon I'd shut that down by inserting real traps until the behavior cut back to a level appropriate to the spirit of the game.

It's the Hero's expectation of a trap that counts for jumping to apply. Consider a case where the Heroes (no crossbows or daggers) retry a Quest that begins with a corridor containing a trap and a monster beyond. In the first Quest attempt, a Hero sprung the unsearchable trap before he could get at the monster. In the replay of this failed Quest, Zargon may choose to keep the same setup of the corridor or change it. If he keeps the Quest Map setup the same with a trap in the same unmarked square on the gameboard, a Hero may naturally consider the trap already found and wish to jump it before continuing on to the monster for an attack. The jump attempt is allowed since there is a trap there. Whether it is first found or not in the actual Quest being played verses an earlier attempt turns out to be immaterial to the Jumping a Trap rules.

Now what happens if Zargon had instead opted to remove the trap for the replay, but kept the monster there? If the Zargon player thinks there isn't a trap so a jump isn't allowed, then he is revealing the lack of a trap by disqualifying the attempt. Realizing this, the Hero players are now free to always declare jump attempts to reveal unsearchable traps in front of them. This is just as counter-productive as having Heroes free-jumping anywhere in a Quest, so nothing is actually gained from the restriction as far as I can see, invalidating it in my opinion.

All said, I'd think jumping into a room to avoid a suspected trap just beyond the doorway as a general tactic isn't awfully useful unless some kind of magic is at play. A Hero with Rabbit Boots could work this, but even he would risk falling flat. At least other Heroes following in his wake could shore up a defense if the trap wasn't actually there. For general use, I'd think it's better to reserve a blind jump for when the situation merits it, such as when a monster doesn't advance to attack.