Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouchy Chris
You can't permanently enchant an area with Create Fire. Look at the section on "Enchantments Without Items" on p. 18 of Magic, and the Item text for Avoid, p. 140. That's what I'm talking about.
I have what I consider a good reason for not just handwaving it and saying "The trap does 2d6 fire damage to anyone in area A if someone enters the trigger area B." That reason is player options. Using the standard magic system allows the players a broader range of ways to defeat the trap.
Let's say we're working with an alteration of the rules that lets me cast a permanent Fire Cloud area enchantment along with a Link spell that determines when it activates, and I place it in the path of the PCs. Then the area is magic, and so anyone with Magery gets a roll to detect it. Analyze Magic will let them find out what enchantments are on the area, or a Thaumatology roll will identify the spell if they see it in action. They can protect themselves against it with Resist Fire, or negate its operation with Counterspell. They can permanently disable it with Remove Enchantment. They can make a Thaumatology roll to determine that a Fire Cloud enchantment requires a ruby, then cast Seek Earth to find the ruby and remove or destroy it. If the trap is powered by a powerstone, they can find that and remove or destroy it.
And here's the really important part: if the magical trap system works using standard rules that are published for all to read, then clever players can figure all of this out for themselves, and know that it will work,, because these are all things that would work under the standard magic system. They can also come up with approaches the GM hasn't even thought of. That gives the players a lot more choices for how do deal with things, and I like giving my players the chance to succeed by being clever and figuring things out.
On the other hand, if I just say, "magical trap, take 2d fire damage, it just does what it does" then they are operating much more in the dark and don't know what their options are. They don't know whether there's a way to disarm or disable the trap at all, and might spend half the game session fruitlessly contriving one attempt after another to change something that can't be changed. That makes for a frustrating game for everyone. If I make a habit of using such traps, then the players eventually learn to just take it and move on. That's a whole lot of potential play shut down.
And maybe I do want to put a magical hazard into play some time, and say that it just does what it does, and your normal approaches to dealing with magic don't work. That's going to stand out a lot better as HEY THIS THING IS WEIRD AND DIFFERENT AND THEREFORE MAYBE PRETTY IMPORTANT a lot better if everything doesn't work that way.
So that's why I'm looking for magical trap rules that work this way.
|
And why do you think one negates the other?!
Glossing over the very tiny specific ways things are possible on your world doesn't have much with allowing your players to be clever and have fun on your game, and that's why I say you're (imo) paying too much attention on the wrong part.
The important part is the base Spell and that's pretty clear on the basic rules most of the times. Simply use the base spell rules and dynamics to determine those guidelines you said yourself you want to keep possible to your players to deal with and that's it.
Using your 2D fire spilling trap example:
Unfun Way
Why it works: Just because.
How it works: Cosmically and don't have any way to know or deal with it cleverly.
Good way
Why it works: Just because.
How it works: As Fireball spell.
Since it's mechanically a Missile Spell (Fireball) they can "Deflect Enerngy" it; They can use "Resist Fire" 2 to ignore its effects; They can "Missile Shield" against it...and so on.
It doesn't really matter much for your players if the rules would normally allow or not such enchant, as long as you keep it consistent with how things work inside the magic system in your setting and what they could expect from it.
On the "Fire Cloud" case, all the mechanics you cited are preserved if you consider the spell nature and work with it. Why would you not allow a Magery or Thauma roll if you just decided "This area is a trap and covers with Fire Cloud when triggered!" ?!? It's still magic and should work as magic, more specifically the base spells that originated.
Even if you create completely new spells, if you keep it consistent with base mechanics, your players will be able to deal with it.