Searching for Multiple Traps

[Bareheaded Warrior]

the heroes should not be able to find a trap that they cannot move to without falling in other trap through such theoretical movement. So yes, I think such undiscovered trap should be only found in a later searching if moving there is possible (in other words, if the trap blocking the movement there was already disarmed or is intentionally jumped to do this second search).

I extend this rule also for secret doors searching and treasure chests inspections, but this last one is another topic, I guess.

Apart from sounding more complicated, but not necessarily being more complicated, how different is this to the rule included in some Quests, where traps are particularly well-hidden so only the nearest trap (including trapped chests or secret door) is found when you search.

That option has the advantage of being an existing official HeroQuest rule that we would just be extending the application...

[Kurgan]

Yeah it feels like a loophole. We had a quest where a literal wall of traps was put into a room requiring the heroes to jump over. However by using the "Disarm" action after discovering them they could use this to magically jump over some of the traps and get past them to the end. I don't consider it that much of a cheat since it was more like a lucky roll to jump over, however this scenario probably won't come up very often.

Agreed that unless it's some special quest note that you can only search one trap at a time (say because of magical darkness obscuring your view) then the heroes should be alerted to this ahead of time. There is a quest in which Zargon is told NOT to tell the heroes this, but I think that's kind of a dirty trick, because they have to find out via trial and error (at least they're only spear traps and so won't necessarily hit every time, but still, I think that was Kellar's Keep that did that, wasn't it? a lot of dirty tricks in that pack!).

Normally when you search a room for traps you find any and all of the traps there (special traps that can't be found by searching in the expansions are simply never found this way, period). Just as searching for treasure searches the entire room (the idea of searching each individual piece of furniture individually on each turn for treasure and getting something is an idea discussed in the draft notes for EQP/BQP but never implemented, a lot of fans like these sorts of ideas but they slow down gameplay considerably if heroes are going to be doing this in each room with more than one piece of furniture, keep that in mind!), so too searching for traps will find all of the traps in the room but they must be disarmed individually.

Searching for treasure without disarming all of furniture traps means that you will trigger all of them at once! That's how the base game works and I don't really mind it, but when you are creating your own quests you may want to keep that in mind.

If Zargon ever feels that the heroes are cheating by exploiting some loophole in the rules, that's either the fault of the quest maker (if it's Zargon, he should just get over it unless it really does ruin the entire adventure, ask any good GM what to do) or it's just one of those things he has to make a decision on... what's the most fun that keeps things going?

I know we had a debate on here some time ago about Disarming. I always played it such that you don't have to expend movement squares to disarm a trap, you just automatically drop on top of the square as long as you're in the same room or corridor. Some would interpret "move onto the square" (is that the precise wording?) means that you have to roll enough on your movement dice to actually move up to and then stand on the square and thus any traps you might encounter on the way would trigger and stop you from disarming as your action. I guess that is "more realistic" but if that's a better game experience for you, that's your call to make as Zargon.

When searching for traps you will know all the squares, and this will only be a problem if you forget which squares were "dangerous." You can't disarm a trap unless you have first detected it. Now jumping ANY square was another draft note rule clarification that was discussed (but never officially implemented), so in theory you could "jump" your way to the disarm square but you still might get an unlucky roll (or not choose your squares wisely) and land on the trap on the way. But knowing ahead of time and then requiring them to jump.. to cover for a poorly thought out or ill-designed Quest layout, would be nice to know ahead of time. "In order to get to this trap you'll have to jump this other square first" seems reasonable enough for Zargon to do and a reasonable compromise.

I too am one who doesn't think adding complexity for the sake of realism (at the expense of making the game take longer) is always an improvement with HeroQuest, but each to their own.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

I wasn't suggesting that HispaZargon's proposal was a "loophole", just that it is functionally similar to an existing rule that appears in a small number of official Quests where you search but find only the nearest trap, rather than all traps, in an area. I was thinking that applying that existing rule more widely by making it the standard might be a better way of arriving at broadly the same or at least a similar result, and would be another step towards the goal or fixing or plugging gaps in the official rules which is my current objective as part of the "Polishing the Second Edition" project.

Searching for treasure without disarming all of furniture traps means that you will trigger all of them at once! That's how the base game works and I don't really mind it, but when you are creating your own quests you may want to keep that in mind.

This is correct for NA edition only, other editions trigger a chest trap when you open the chest without having searched for traps first, so individual, as you can only open one chest at a time.

We had a quest where a literal wall of traps was put into a room requiring the heroes to jump over. However by using the "Disarm" action after discovering them they could use this to magically jump over some of the traps and get past them to the end. I don't consider it that much of a cheat since it was more like a lucky roll to jump over, however this scenario probably won't come up very often.

If Zargon ever feels that the heroes are cheating by exploiting some loophole in the rules, that's either the fault of the quest maker (if it's Zargon, he should just get over it unless it really does ruin the entire adventure, ask any good GM what to do) or it's just one of those things he has to make a decision on... what's the most fun that keeps things going?

I know we had a debate on here some time ago about Disarming. I always played it such that you don't have to expend movement squares to disarm a trap, you just automatically drop on top of the square as long as you're in the same room or corridor. Some would interpret "move onto the square" (is that the precise wording?) means that you have to roll enough on your movement dice to actually move up to and then stand on the square and thus any traps you might encounter on the way would trigger and stop you from disarming as your action. I guess that is "more realistic" but if that's a better game experience for you, that's your call to make as Zargon.

I'm just trying to understand this last bit, 'movement' in HeroQuest involves rolling the red dice (for heroes at least) and moving the hero square by square to your destination, so I don't see any reason why moving to a square to disarm a trap would be any different from moving to a square to open a chest or attack a monster, open a door or any other reason, but your house rule/interpretation allows a hero to automatically drop on top of the square as long as they are in the same room or corridor as the trap without expending movement squares.

In a scenario where a hero enters a room, searches for traps and discovers a row of traps across the room from wall to wall, and another trap adjacent to a door at the opposite side of the room, you would allow that hero (on their next turn) to 'declare' a disarm action and indicate the trap by the door on the opposite side of the room, across the "wall of traps", and allow them to port directly over the line of traps without having to disarm or jump any of them? Having used their disarm action (assume it was successful and the trap tile is removed) could they then choose to move as usual afterwards having not expended any movement points? What about the next hero that enters that same room following the first hero, would they have the option to follow the first player and port directly over the wall of traps, or would that option have been prevented by the removal of the trap on the far side of the room by the first player, and they would have to jump or disarm to follow the leader? That would be an interesting situation where successfully disarming a trap would inhibit movement.

Unless I have misunderstood, which is quite possible, it sounds like your house rule has introduced a loophole to be exploited that wasn't present in the original rules, so I don't think I'll be adopting that particular house rule personally.

[dragon5145]

This topic seems very subjective, and probably best left to quest notes entirely. My reasons are due to the assumptions that seem to be applied to said search such as hero movement. This seems to indicate the heroes always get dangerously close to traps to find them, fine if they're only using touch to find them, but the rules allow finding traps in long corridors far beyond a hero's movement range.

This doesn't consider if the heroes might have other methods like vision to spot indicators of trap locations. Example include but not limited to: spotting a trip wire, a pressure plate, or cracks/holes in the walls, floors, or ceilings. If that is the case it would theoretically be possible to find more than one trap even if another bocks movement to it.

Which is why I think exceptions to finding all appropriate trap to a particular search should be decided by a particular groups house rule or th quest designers quest notes. Besides the more found the higher the likelihood of the position of some traps being forgotten.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

My reasons are due to the assumptions that seem to be applied to said search such as hero movement. This seems to indicate the heroes always get dangerously close to traps to find them, fine if they're only using touch to find them, but the rules allow finding traps in long corridors far beyond a hero's movement range.

This doesn't consider if the heroes might have other methods like vision to spot indicators of trap locations. Example include but not limited to: spotting a trip wire, a pressure plate, or cracks/holes in the walls, floors, or ceilings. If that is the case it would theoretically be possible to find more than one trap even if another blocks movement to it.

In HeroQuest the general principle is that if you can see it it is placed on the board, if you can't see it, it isn't. Traps (and Secret Doors) are not placed on the board when the rest of the contents are revealed because they are hidden (or secret) and cannot therefore be seen. If you could spot "a tripwire in a dimly lit dungeon" (your own example from a different thread) from 100 yards away then I would argue that it is NOT hidden! You may however spot a trap at the last moment once you are dangerously close to it, but can you then disable before it triggers and drives a sharpened spear through your guts...oooh the tension

[Kurgan]

Something else (and I may have gotten it wrong in a previous reference) but the Explorer only finds adjacent traps once per turn. However he could move up to a square and then search for traps, finding any other traps within the room/corridor (EXCEPT any of the blue flagged "undetectable" traps).

An Elf with Potion of Vision could see even more traps just by looking (and STILL use their action to find more traps, potentially).

[dragon5145]

In HeroQuest the general principle is that if you can see it it is placed on the board, if you can't see it, it isn't. Traps (and Secret Doors) are not placed on the board when the rest of the contents are revealed because they are hidden (or secret) and cannot therefore be seen. If you could spot "a tripwire in a dimly lit dungeon" (your own example from a different thread) from 100 yards away then I would argue that it is NOT hidden! You may however spot a trap at the last moment once you are dangerously close to it, but can you then disable before it triggers and drives a sharpened spear through your guts...oooh the tension

You right that, even I don't like the idea of spotting traps from way down the hall, but at the same time don't care for the idea that you can spot the trap and attempt to disarm it at the moment you stepped into the space without any inkling something is there before hand. As for when traps are placed on the board is related to the edition you are playing, I am not very familiar with the UK edition but I think early on traps were placed on the board at time of search and spear traps were considered disabled. NA rules don't place the traps on a search but the locations are pointed out, secret door tile are placed on the board on a search for them just not considered open yet. I've read in your download and in some of your other posts how you handle trap disarmament. It appears to work like a free constant search (non action) thus can still attempt to disarm. I just wish you had made the notification of finding the trap on an adjacent or "next to" (your terminology from HQ golden rules). My reasons for this are two fold: First for me it more closely resembles the NA by allowing the character declare their attempting (cosider declaration a free action)to disarm (action) before they step on the trapped square. Second it opens more options for the player, if low on health the can either stop their movement, or if possible in the double corridors they could go around. If they can and choose to go around they can choose to let the hero mark the trap location as long as the are still "next to" it, can be used as a precaution for if other players forget. This is the most likely way I'd play it unless I decide to make players declare the search as an action (prevents taking disarm action that turn), which means player options are stop, go back, go around, or continue forward and tank the damage. Other wise you could just as easily do away with the concept of disarming and call the test a reflex save ala D&D and use the same test rules to avoid damage. To me the difference my method using "next to" as opposed on top of as in golden rules is more thematic than mechanic.

And yes in my take on your search rules, precludes the ability to find traps through door. I believe the abstucted vision from the smaller stone door archway when compare to the height of the corridors or probable room ceiling, as well as the door it self still one its hinges in the way, more than justifies not being able find the trap. This is the situation I don't mind forcing the player to risk tanking trap damage. But at the same time I don't think such trap situations should be [url]commonplace[/url]with out introducing some additional methods for healing small amounts of damage.

[Kurgan]

(from Jan 2024):

Rules and the HeroQuest community

ReV: First, a couple of technical questions related to the game rules, which have originated long discussions in famous HQ forums like Ye Olde Inn. Is it mandatory for a Hero to be next to a treasure chest to open it, or is it enough to search for it within the room where the treasure chest is located?

SB: When you search for treasure you search the whole room. This will trigger a Morcar/Zargon note related to what may be in a chest or a trap associated with it. I know some players differentiate between Search the Room versus Search a Chest, which requires that you are adjacent.

https://forum.yeoldeinn.com/viewtopic.php?f=143&t=6708&hilit=stephen+baker+interview#p129365

Mr. Baker has the benefit of having been there for the creation of the game through the first and second editions. Yes, he only spoke with Mike Gray (whose team designed the NA edition) at the beginning of that project, but he's also been a freelance vendor and guest writer for Avalon Hill's revival/remake. The admits he doesn't remember everything, but it's always great to hear his take on things.

Regarding searching, more recently, Avalon Hill's Doug Hopkins said that (when it comes to searching, response to my questions about how the Companion App handles it) Treasure cares about monsters in the room, while Secret Doors and Traps care about visibility. AH is usually content to presume that whatever was in the NA edition, as written, is how their edition works. Occasionally they'll admit something wasn't spelled out and so it can go however you want, but other times they will flat out rewrite things to conform to how they interpret the game rules (most recently in First Light), even though at times backing off admitting they made mistakes (see the "Lightning" spell). But their outward intention seems to be to preserve the 1990 US version of the game rules, and simply clarify and add to it, because he knows about the debates and how nitpicking we can be! But at least with Stephen Baker we can get a glimpse into what was most likely intended back then, even if it's different than now.

[Bareheaded Warrior]

You right that, even I don't like the idea of spotting traps from way down the hall, but at the same time don't care for the idea that you can spot the trap and attempt to disarm it at the moment you stepped into the space without any inkling something is there before hand.

The side of a square on the HQ board represents an in-game distance of roughly 4-5ft so there is more space than you might imagine but that aside picture the popular moment in a book or film where the lone hero steps on a hidden mine with an ominous click but manages to retain sufficient awareness not to step off, or who moves with such caution and sensitivity that he feels the tension of the tripwire against his leg before applying enough pressure to set it off...

As for when traps are placed on the board is related to the edition you are playing, I am not very familiar with the UK edition but I think early on traps were placed on the board at time of search and spear traps were considered disabled. NA rules don't place the traps on a search but the locations are pointed out

Yes but in all editions at the point when a hero looks into a room or passage for the first time and the contents are laid out on the board, traps and secret doors are NOT laid out on the board, because they are NOT visible, at least not at that point.

secret door tile are placed on the board on a search for them just not considered open yet.

And yet there is no tile for a closed secret door, only an open one.

I just wish you had made the notification of finding the trap on an adjacent or "next to" (your terminology from HQ golden rules).

Bear in mind that we are discussing the three "standard" trap types from the basic game the Pit, Block and Spear traps but expansions introduce many new trap types, a lot of which fall into the "no tile" category (triggering them doesn't result in a tile or marker being placed to represent a "feature") like a Spear Trap. If you always find a trap that is on an adjacent square and it is of the "no tile" category then what is the point of making a disarm roll, whether the disarm roll is a success (and the trap is made safe) or it is a failure (the trap triggers and affects the adjacent square which neither you or anyone else can be occupying) the end result is exactly the same...which is why searching for a Spear Trap under the classic rules renders it harmless (a rule that many people don't like) because if disarming happens from an adjacent square then there is no point telling a player to make a roll when success and failure outcomes are identical)

First for me it more closely resembles the NA by allowing the character declare their attempting (cosider declaration a free action)to disarm (action) before they step on the trapped square.

Something which can only be done in a scenario where the trap has already been found and that the hero has the ability to disarm it, in that scenario why do they need to declare that they are moving onto the trapped square in order to disarm it, what other good reason would there be for moving onto the known trapped square?

Second it opens more options for the player, if low on health the can either stop their movement, or if possible in the double corridors they could go around. If they can and choose to go around they can choose to let the hero mark the trap location as long as the are still "next to" it, can be used as a precaution for if other players forget.

Consider the simple scenario of a double-width passage that the players have to go down on their way to fulfil the objective of the quest. Two squares side by side, the one on the left is safe, the one on the right is trapped.

Whether the trap is located in a position that blocks progress or a position that can be avoided, isn't player choice, it is the choice of the quest creator. The player choice in this situation is whether they move onto the square to the left and miss the trap or move onto the square to the right and land on the trap.

The process of searching for, finding and choosing not to disarm a trap and then hoping that players remember where it is (the official rules do not include any marking!) and don't accidentally stand on that square on the return journey (50-50 chance for any given hero) is just a very long-winded and drawn out way of pretending that you are giving players a meaningful choice, when the chances of any given hero stepping on the trapped square in the first place were the same 50-50.

Even if you house rule to allow a "suspicious square" marker to be placed, then you are just giving players the choice of avoiding taking damage through traps (if they remember to search*) simply because they are low on health, but that will result in them never dying...which makes the game dull. Taking the chance of opening a chest when you are battered and bruised and on your last BP, desperately hoping that the chest you are opening contains a Healing Potion and isn't trapped is what it is all about!

*And why do you need to remember to search for traps, surely any experienced adventurer can be assumed to be checking for traps at all times (unless distracted by a more imminent threat like a charging monster)?

(petulantly): "I'm not stupid, I'm perfectly aware that dungeons contain hidden and devious devices that might severely maim or even kill me if I don't check for them, but I'm choosing to assume that this particular passage is safe"
(smirking): "Tell me, how long have you been an adventurer?"
(defensively): "Well this is actually my first quest..."
(smirking): "Really, you can't tell"...gestures forwards with a sweep of his hand..."After you...Elves first!"

Other wise you could just as easily do away with the concept of disarming and call the test a reflex save ala D&D and use the same test rules to avoid damage.

No, because that ignores the possibility of the trap being successfully disarmed thus avoiding any associated feature (the block or the pit) being placed on the board and acting as a permanent obstacle. I consider it as a "detect & disarm roll" because it is a compound test, to be successful you have to both detect it and disarm it, failure to do either results in the trap being trigerred* and you suffering the effects.

*hence the lower odds of success than jumping a pit, if you assume a base 4/6 chance of success for a standard test (like successfully jumping a pit), then for a detect & disarm combined roll you would need to sucessfully detect (spot) it 4/6 AND successfully disarm it 4/6 which is statistically equivalent to a single roll with 3/6 chance of success (approx), but is more efficient as you only need to roll once.

And yes in my take on your search rules, precludes the ability to find traps through door. I believe the abstucted vision from the smaller stone door archway when compare to the height of the corridors or probable room ceiling, as well as the door it self still one its hinges in the way, more than justifies not being able find the trap.

I'm not really bothered about addressing the "traps behind doors issue" directly, I see that as a symptom of an underlying problem with the search/disarm rules that should disappear when the underlying problem is fixed. After all I'm confident that the search/traps rules were not designed with the intention of creating that scenario, they just discovered it later and pretended it was intentional all along by calling it out in later editions of the rulebook as a feature because it was too problematic to fix (software developers may recognise this scenario as an "undocumented feature")

[Daedalus]

First for me it more closely resembles the NA by allowing the character declare their attempting (cosider declaration a free action)to disarm (action) before they step on the trapped square.

Something which can only be done in a scenario where the trap has already been found and that the hero has the ability to disarm it, in that scenario why do they need to declare that they are moving onto the trapped square in order to disarm it, what other good reason would there be for moving onto the known trapped square?

Apologies about answering posts in this forum late since I'm repeating an answer from another topic somewhere in this forum room (but with another case this time.)

The reason the NA rules require a player to announce a disarm attempt is to head off a cheating/metagaming opportunity. Without a declaration, a player is free to tailor the action after-the-fact to suit the result of a die roll. For this to be possible, the trap must first have already been discovered, but a monster is present in the room or corridor. This is possible with Wandering Monsters appearing in a room after a search for traps or a monster being revealed around a corner as a Hero moves onto a discovered trap square. (There may be other cases in the AH edition, idk.) In either case, it should be necessary for the Hero to move onto the trap to attack the monster, either adjacently or with a dagger, staff, or unarmed attack.

A Hero moving onto the trap square without a declaration for disarming the trap sometimes has the option of rolling just 1 combat die for an attack. For Heroes with a tool kit, disarming the trap successfully or attacking successfully require the same roll, a , so normally there is no reason to cheat there. However, a Dwarf successfully disarms a trap with either a or , so if a is rolled, he would naturally apply it to disarm the trap, but perhaps he would have applied it to killing the monster if a was rolled and accept springing the trap. Particularly (but not exclusively) if the Dwarf was last in the Hero turn order, leaving a monster on the gameboard for Zargon's use could be a life or death decision.

If the choice of jumping a trap or disarming the trap is considered, a would result in failure for both cases for a standard Hero with a tool kit, so normally there is no reason to cheat. However, since anything but a is a success for a trap-disarming Dwarf or any Hero equipped with Rabbit Boots jumping the trap, there is a reason to cheat if a is rolled and apply it to a successful disarm or jump rather than accept a missed 1-die attack.