"Standard Thief S***"

[James McMurray]

An SOP combined with taking 10 greatly reduces the DM's work and speeds play incredibly. In other words, I'd be pissed at a DM that didn't allow it. I'd just write my list down and read it to him every ten feet until he got the idea that I wasn't going to give him his gotcha and we could move on to the funner parts of the evening.

 

[Pbartender]

I've yet to found a party that enjoys exploring a dungeon at 2.5ft per round especially if you are asking the other other players what they are doing while the rogue searches for traps. Every single round he searches. More often than not the Barbarian or fighter will get annoyed at the pace and stroll off ahead of the rogue.

That's why everyone is suggesting Taking 10 or Taking 20 on Search checks in those areas (this is exactly the sort of situation those two options are supposed to address)... Or you boil the whole thing down to one skill check for an entire room so you don't have to roll for every for every 5'x5' square.

Now you can simply say, "It takes you two minutes (twenty minutes) to do a quick (very thorough) search of the 5 foot wide, 50 foot long hallway -- you find no traps or secret doors. Meanwhile, everyone keeps an eye and an ear out for bad guys," the rogue makes one search check, everyone else makes a spot and listen check, you roll for a random encounter, and then you move along.

 

[GreatLemur]

Watch Conan the Barbarian, and you'll see why! Most fantasy barbarian-types have danger-sense that would make Spider-Man feel like a dullard.

Sure, but I'd call that a good reflex save. I'm not really seeing why an illiterate, rage-driven wilderness dweller would have a particular focus on trap-evasion.

 

[James McMurray]

Because not only are traps great for killing food animals, they also make great April Fool's Day jokes. And when you can't read a calendar, every day is Arpil 1st.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I ask how the thief is moving during the adventure. This can apply to other PCs as well.

"Stealth mode" does not mean extra vigilance in searching, except for the floor (I assume they are being very careful about their footing). They can combine stealth with searching, but it isn't assumed unless they tell me.

A "normal" level of caution is looking somewhat carefully at the floors, walls doors etc. and give them a "take 10" on their search checks.

"Cautious" means they are moving at about half speed and are taking extra care to inspect things. I will make some rolls as needed.

"Paranoid" means they are moving a crawl, testing their footing before each step, opening doors with a pole or something from a distance. Many rolls. I hate this mode since it slows things down too much and so try to avoid ever putting them into it.

"Quick" means they are moving fast with nothing more than a cursory inspection. Things would have to be pretty noticable or unusual to spot it before they trip it.

If they want to give me more specifics, like they are being extra careful about doors, but the floor just normally, that is fine.

I assume they maintain that same mode until told otherwise, or circumstances are changed (e.g. they leave the catacombs they were exploring and enter the city itself).

I apply a similar thing to searching rooms. It can be anywhere from grabbing obvious loot (no search), to looking in the more obvious places (take 10) to completely tossing the room (I never heard the phrase "greyhawk the room" before, I like that).

Ultimately I try to apply some logic to traps. I see them like the ADT Alarm signs posted on the lawn of houses, or the flashing light on the dashboard of a car. They are meant more as a deterrent or to slow someone down rather than a (usually inefficient) way to kill or disable someone, and they won't do much against a determined person.

 

[EricNoah]

Thanks for the many insightful replies.

One thing I might try is if my party's rogue wants to have a SOP -- have him write it down on an index card -- so we can both refer to it during play if something unusual or outside of the SOP happens. I'm not a big fan of "Oh, I never would have done XYZ" after the fact.

Another problem with SOP is that instead of the player describing what he does, I end up describing what he does. That's kind of a DM no-no (for me personally) if I can avoid it.

 

[Merkuri]

Another problem with SOP is that instead of the player describing what he does, I end up describing what he does. That's kind of a DM no-no (for me personally) if I can avoid it.

See, I expect that would be a problem without the SOP. If the players have a clearly written out SOP (written is a must for this) then you're not really describing what they do, they are. They just did it beforehand. You don't need to add any flavor to it unless something out of the ordinary happens. Heck, you don't even need to mention it at all. One of the points of a SOP is to speed up the description of something you do over and over and over again. Trying to find a creative way to say, "I check for traps, pick the lock, and slowly open the door," just gets tedious and boring after a while.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I occasionally find this irritating -- not the procedure, but the fact that the player feels they can summarize all of this as standard operating procedure and hand it off to the DM and not worry about it.

Most of those rolls are best done by the DM anyways. Its just a time saver. You dont even need to roll for some of them if theres nothing to hear, find, etc.

On the other hand ... I have played rogues before ... I know the tedium of repeating all of that stuff. It only makes sense. Unless speed is an issue, if I'm scouting ahead I'd do all that stuff all the time. If I don't establish a SOP, then it becomes a game of "can the DM catch me forgetting one of my standard steps".

Precisely. I'm not a rogue whose been doing this for years. The character is. Its like requiring fighters to list the order in which they buckle their armor. Its boring, bogs down the game, and is pointless when they have the crap memorized.

Finally, does a procedure like this essentially nullify the fun of traps in a dungeon?

Most traps are never fun. They are irritating zingers if you fail to bog down play and search every 5 foot square. I personally just let people spot traps at search DC +5, so theres no constant "I search 5 feet in front of me".

I hate old school antagonistic DM play. I had very little fun in the 80's with constantly crappy DM's. We were "idiots" for not probing with 10 foot poles. As soon as we started probing with 10 foot poles, we were "idiots" for setting off pressure playes designed to attack 10 feet away. I imagine you can guess what happened when we used 12 foot poles. My attitude became " you, tell me how much damage I take so I can get on it".

How interesting would the first 15 minutes of Raiders of the Lost Ark have been if we watched Indy jack around with each section of the hallway, fiddle with the darts, etc? I mean, it would have been much cooler to not see him race the boulder, right?

An unsprung trap is boring. Zinger traps encourage unspring traps. Its crappy design.

Encounter traps are the only ones I really bother with anymore.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Indiana Jones, Flash Gordon serials, even the Egyptians and their tombs.

Those were encounter traps though. Triggering them created a situation to work around, it didnt just deal damage or kill. The descending ceiling w spikes in Temple of Doom, or the cannonball arm catcher in the goonies are IMO good traps. You get your chance to disable device after they are set in motion, which IS exciting.

 

[Henry]

Those were encounter traps though. Triggering them created a situation to work around, it didnt just deal damage or kill. The descending ceiling w spikes in Temple of Doom, or the cannonball arm catcher in the goonies are IMO good traps. You get your chance to disable device after they are set in motion, which IS exciting.

I agree, most of them were (except for that spears-in-the-sunlight trap, which I'd love to have an explanation for! ) That one was a good "example" of a spot check or search check in motion!