OK, I looked around and didn't see this particular topic here so I apologize if it has already been covered. I want to clarify Detecting Traps, just to make sure it's supposed to work the way our group thinks it does.
First of all, a Rogue does have the option to Take 20 on his Search skill, correct? Assuming, of course, he/she has the time and isn't under duress. Just wanted to make sure this was true, because it seems like a PC with just a few levels of Rogue can have a very decent result on a Take 20, rendering many traps pretty easily detectable. Now mind you, the party Rogue is not the type who searches every 5' of movement in every room or down every hallway, but he's pretty good when it comes to doors and chests and stuff, especially when objects/things are particularly mentioned (i.e. the hallway is described with certain features rather than it being "just a regular hallway")
And here's where the second clarification comes in-- the PC's were in a metal hallway, which was described as having star-shaped diagrams down the length of it. At the end of the hall is a (false) door, and attempts to pick lock or force open this door triggered the trap. Spears thrust out of the star-shaped emblems all up and down the hall. Here's my question-- would the Search skill reveal the fact that a trap exists no matter where the skill was attempted down this particular hallway? Or would it only reveal that a trap exists if the door itself was checked? To put it another way, can you detect a trap at both the location where the trap is triggered and where the effects happen? I understand this is a lot easier, say, on a trapped treasure chest that triggers a trap when it's opened; but what about if for example a pressure plate stepped on triggers a portcullis to come down 50 or so feet away? Would the Rogue then in essence get 2 chances to detect the trap, at the effect point AND the activation point?
And I guess I might as well ask, can the Rogue use Disable Device at either the effect or the activation point to successfully disarm the trap?? For example in my first example, if the Rogue's Search revealed a trap coming from the star-shaped emblem on the wall, can the Rogue use Disable Device to disable the whole trap right there? Or would it work on only that particular emblem, and the Rogue would have to use Disable Device on all the star-shaped emblems to take care of all of them? Or can the Rogue only disable the trap at it's source, the trigger point (in this case the false door)?
OK, I looked around and didn't see this particular topic here so I apologize if it has already been covered. I want to clarify Detecting Traps, just to make sure it's supposed to work the way our group thinks it does.
First of all, a Rogue does have the option to Take 20 on his Search skill, correct? Assuming, of course, he/she has the time and isn't under duress. Just wanted to make sure this was true, because it seems like a PC with just a few levels of Rogue can have a very decent result on a Take 20, rendering many traps pretty easily detectable. Now mind you, the party Rogue is not the type who searches every 5' of movement in every room or down every hallway, but he's pretty good when it comes to doors and chests and stuff, especially when objects/things are particularly mentioned (i.e. the hallway is described with certain features rather than it being "just a regular hallway")
Actually, you can take 20 on search checks. Taking 20 assumes some failures as you go along, and there is no penalty for failing a search check. Doing so is the same as not noticing a trap, which in and of itself doesn't cause bad things to happen -- triggering the trap after failing to notice it does. For the same reason, you cannot take 20 on disable device, and I don't know many DMs that would even allow you to take 10, since disabling a dangerous trap is always pretty much a "stressful situation." The reason that rogues don't take 20 all the time is the massive time it takes. If they can't afford to progress at a crawl through the dungeon or don't want buff spells running out, the literally hours this would waste becomes a major issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amazing Mumford
And here's where the second clarification comes in-- the PC's were in a metal hallway, which was described as having star-shaped diagrams down the length of it. At the end of the hall is a (false) door, and attempts to pick lock or force open this door triggered the trap. Spears thrust out of the star-shaped emblems all up and down the hall. Here's my question-- would the Search skill reveal the fact that a trap exists no matter where the skill was attempted down this particular hallway? Or would it only reveal that a trap exists if the door itself was checked? To put it another way, can you detect a trap at both the location where the trap is triggered and where the effects happen? I understand this is a lot easier, say, on a trapped treasure chest that triggers a trap when it's opened; but what about if for example a pressure plate stepped on triggers a portcullis to come down 50 or so feet away? Would the Rogue then in essence get 2 chances to detect the trap, at the effect point AND the activation point?
And I guess I might as well ask, can the Rogue use Disable Device at either the effect or the activation point to successfully disarm the trap?? For example in my first example, if the Rogue's Search revealed a trap coming from the star-shaped emblem on the wall, can the Rogue use Disable Device to disable the whole trap right there? Or would it work on only that particular emblem, and the Rogue would have to use Disable Device on all the star-shaped emblems to take care of all of them? Or can the Rogue only disable the trap at it's source, the trigger point (in this case the false door)?
I definitely appreciate your input on this...
I don't know, honestly. I could see an argument for detecting at both places. If you wanted it to be detectable at only one location, I'd go with where it is triggered, rather than where it acts. As for what disabling it involves...that's up to you, as the DM. It might mean blocking those holes the spears come out of. It might mean just making sure the party isn't in line to get hit when it triggers. It might mean finding some kind of bypass to the trigger mechanism. The player's roll and DM fiat decides how that works out. It doesn't really "matter" as long as you allow successful disablings to do as they're supposed to -- keep the party safe from the trap.
This might be helpful, it's a Sean K. Reynolds essay on what skills he thinks you can and can't take 20 on, and why. Note it is 3.0, but that makes little difference. Take 20
My online gaming group, Torch of Spirit (Contains all information for the current game I'm co-DMing as well as lots of houserules I'm using or considering for the future. Feel free to check it out.)
...and I don't know many DMs that would even allow you to take 10, since disabling a dangerous trap is always pretty much a "stressful situation."
I often see statements like this, and they always irk me. The phrase "stressful situation" doesn't appear anywhere in the Take 10 rules. That is not the litmus test; it's "being threatened or distracted."
Why does the misstatement irk me? Because it leads to erroneous rulings on when Taking 10 is appropriate/permissible. For example, we know you can Take 10 on Climb checks, but climbing a sheer rock wall where a mistake could cause you to plunge to your death is "always pretty much a 'stressful situation,'" so you can't Take 10, right?
Likewise, interpreting "threatened" to mean something other than "in combat" (as many people do) leads to the same error. If the possibility of a trap going off in your face means you're "being threatened," then the possibility of falling to your death means the same thing...and it's clear from the example in the PHB that this is not what the authors intended.
In short, I allow characters to take 10 on Disable Device checks to disarm traps (under normal circumstances), and I think any DM who doesn't do the same doesn't really understand the Take 10 rules.
Here's my question-- would the Search skill reveal the fact that a trap exists no matter where the skill was attempted down this particular hallway? Or would it only reveal that a trap exists if the door itself was checked? To put it another way, can you detect a trap at both the location where the trap is triggered and where the effects happen?
The rules never say one way or the other, but I think any trap should be detectable from any location where it can be triggered. Why? Because otherwise all you have to do to create an undetectable trap is set its "trigger location" more than 10 feet away from its "can-be-detected location" (since the Search skill states that you "generally must be within 10 feet of the object or surface to be searched." And such easy circumvention of the Search skill is BS, IMO.
I often see statements like this, and they always irk me. The phrase "stressful situation" doesn't appear anywhere in the Take 10 rules. That is not the litmus test; it's "being threatened or distracted."
Why does the misstatement irk me? Because it leads to erroneous rulings on when Taking 10 is appropriate/permissible. For example, we know you can Take 10 on Climb checks, but climbing a sheer rock wall where a mistake could cause you to plunge to your death is "always pretty much a 'stressful situation,'" so you can't Take 10, right?
Likewise, interpreting "threatened" to mean something other than "in combat" (as many people do) leads to the same error. If the possibility of a trap going off in your face means you're "being threatened," then the possibility of falling to your death means the same thing...and it's clear from the example in the PHB that this is not what the authors intended.
In short, I allow characters to take 10 on Disable Device checks to disarm traps (under normal circumstances), and I think any DM who doesn't do the same doesn't really understand the Take 10 rules.
Part of it was that I was being lazy and not bothering to look up the exact terminology.
But another part of it is also that I guess I'm more harsh on taking 10 than the RAW allows. Note in the link I gave, SKR says you can take 10 on disable device, which I wouldn't allow, so I disagree with him there. I would not let a character take 10 on climb checks unless he had a climb speed and had to roll a check for some reason (though even then, not if he's falling and trying to catch himself). Likewise, I would not allow a character to take 10 on swim unless he had a swim speed (and needed to roll a check for some reason in a situation that was't stressful -- there, I said it again because I'm lazy! ) or was in fairly calm waters. I guess that's not RAW, but that's how I choose to interpret the take 10 rules. Maybe I should go easier on that, but none of my players have had a problem with it so far.
I just don't like combat and distractions to be the only things at all that prevent taking 10... If a character is caught in a violent storm and in the water, but is otherwise not in combat and completely focused on swimming...he can take 10? I don't like that...Or does that count as "distracting?" But if it does, then why isn't the 200 ft fall of the rock climber also distracting?
My online gaming group, Torch of Spirit (Contains all information for the current game I'm co-DMing as well as lots of houserules I'm using or considering for the future. Feel free to check it out.)
OK, I looked around and didn't see this particular topic here so I apologize if it has already been covered. I want to clarify Detecting Traps, just to make sure it's supposed to work the way our group thinks it does.
I've been doing some thinking about this myself recently.
Quote:
First of all, a Rogue does have the option to Take 20 on his Search skill, correct?
If they're willing to spend 2 minutes, yes. It seems like a good idea when you spot the treasure sitting on a plinth or a heavily reinforced door to take 2 minutes out of your schedule to check for any traps.
Don't forget aid other if anyone else in the group has trapfinding (or in some circumstances stonecunning). Anyone who has dipped into rogue who doesn't think their search is high enough to search themselves should aid other. (see page 10 rules compendium).
Quote:
Assuming, of course, he/she has the time and isn't under duress. Just wanted to make sure this was true, because it seems like a PC with just a few levels of Rogue can have a very decent result on a Take 20, rendering many traps pretty easily detectable.
If you're going slowly you can assume that they'll find all the traps. It's when you try rush that traps can surprise you out of nowhere.
Also remember that the search check is just the apetiser. Disable Device is the main course.
Quote:
Here's my question-- would the Search skill reveal the fact that a trap exists no matter where the skill was attempted down this particular hallway? Or would it only reveal that a trap exists if the door itself was checked? To put it another way, can you detect a trap at both the location where the trap is triggered and where the effects happen?
(The following is merely my own personal opinion, which I value highly but others may not).
You can detect a trap when searching any square that the trap interacts with, be it the trigger or the effect. At DM discretion you may also be able to detect it at any square between the two points if it is logical that a mechanism would extend between them. This is one of the disadvantages that creating a trap with multiple points of activity.
Quote:
Would the Rogue then in essence get 2 chances to detect the trap, at the effect point AND the activation point?
Yes. Think of it this way....
If I'm in a room with a lightswitch and a lightbulb it's easy to spot one and deduce the other must be around. If I'm in a room with just a touch activated lamp I might miss it a bit more easily.
Quote:
And I guess I might as well ask, can the Rogue use Disable Device at either the effect or the activation point to successfully disarm the trap??
MichaelK, I would have to say that I do agree with your point-of-view on the matter, logically it makes sense. The others seem to agree on this as well-- that is how I ended up ruling it, but it was a circumstance that quite honestly hadn't come up before (before that, all the traps seemed to have the same trigger/effect point).
I do agree that a Rogue can take 20 on a Search, that's pretty plain in the rules-- it does give an average Rogue quite a good chance to find out if anything is trapped, as the DC for detecting traps usually easily be beaten when taking a 20-- I don't think this makes the game unbalanced though, that's the advantage to having a Rogue in the group, so that particular damage can be avoided entirely.
As far as taking 10 on a Disable Device check, I think I'm gonna have to side with SKR on this one... but with judicious consideration of "threatened and distracted"... that being said, since most Disable DC's I have seen tend to be higher, the Rogue should be pretty confident in his Take 10 check if he wants to exercise this option...
Part of it was that I was being lazy and not bothering to look up the exact terminology.
But another part of it is also that I guess I'm more harsh on taking 10 than the RAW allows.
Well, then 'nuff said. I hope I didn't come off as too much of a jerk. I happen to be a big fan of the Take 10/20 mechanics, so I can easily overreact to people who don't share my enthusiasm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StreamOfTheSky
If a character is caught in a violent storm and in the water, but is otherwise not in combat and completely focused on swimming...he can take 10?
Actually, if you read the Swim skill description, you'll see that: "You can't take 10 on a Swim check in stormy water, even if you aren't otherwise being threatened or distracted."
Which only goes to reinforce my point: the rules don't normally treat inherently dangerous activities as "being threatened or distracted." (Those that do are specifically called out.) That's what I like about the Take 10 rules. I frickin' hate when I've maxed my ranks in a skill, and otherwise created my character to be good at something (whether it be swimming, climbing, jumping, or whatever), yet when I actually try to do what that character should be reasonably competent at doing, I roll a natural 1 and fail embarrassingly. The Take 10 rules ensure that that doesn't happen, and the only time my competent character fails is when (1) the task is difficult even for him, or (2) there's an obviously good reason he might screw up.
Some people prefer more randomness, though, or just like rolling dice. And that's cool. I don't mind if they don't play by the RAW. I just get annoyed when they misstate the RAW.
Oh, I didn't think you were being a jerk. And it's odd. I HATE more randomness normally, and I like that take 10/20 mechanics exist. I've been in games where my character could succeed a check on a 1 and the DM refused to just let me say, "I auto-win, moving on..." and been really irritated by that. Yet I guess I demand more randomness than the RAW expects when it comes to taking 10...
My online gaming group, Torch of Spirit (Contains all information for the current game I'm co-DMing as well as lots of houserules I'm using or considering for the future. Feel free to check it out.)
We use a rule that I think was inspired by True20. Not only can people take 10 when not threatened and 20 when there's no consequence for failure but people can take 5 under any circumstances whatsoever.
Whenever a DC is 5 or less over the PC's skill we declare it an auto-success and move on.
P.S. Oh... although we haven't specified that you can't do this for attack rolls, no one has ever used it for that because it just seems a little silly.
We also let people declare that they are assuming an average result when rolling damage or to increase HP when leveling up. Just multiply the number of D6s by 3.5 and assume that's what they rolled.
P.S. Oh... although we haven't specified that you can't do this for attack rolls, no one has ever used it for that because it just seems a little silly.
The problem with trying to use with attack rolls and saving throws is that a 1 is an automatic failure and by using this rule you eliminate that specific issue. I wouldn't allow it because of this one.
Rules that use Action Points also specify that you can't use them to modify a nat 1 on an attack or saving throw.
The problem with trying to use with attack rolls and saving throws is that a 1 is an automatic failure and by using this rule you eliminate that specific issue. I wouldn't allow it because of this one.
Well in terms of Saving Throws, 1 has a specific negative consequence as well (loss of equipment). I think having a save within 5 of the D.C. is enough of an achievement to justify avoiding this consequence.
Attack rolls... we might try it, but it just feels wrong. So even though we've never specifically prohibited it, no one wants to be the first to take 5 on an attack roll. If we end up ever trying it, we'll see how it works out and ban it if it's a problem.
) or was in fairly calm waters. I guess that's not RAW, but that's how I choose to interpret the take 10 rules. Maybe I should go easier on that, but none of my players have had a problem with it so far.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
