D&D 5E Would you require a roll for this?

[jmartkdr2]

At a certain point of denying mitigation methods, the player might as well just as if the DM just wants them to assume they got poisoned or eaten by sharks as a punishment for trying things just to save everyone time and die rolls.

Similarly, if you make players roll for flavor, you'll end up with a bland game.

 

[Andvari]

If the trap goes off when the chest opens, the gauntlet would help but not render the thief immune because they're busy picking the lock.

If the trap can be set off before picking the lock, then the gantlet will let them do that and then pick the lock with no danger from the trap. (If I hadn't decided previously, this is what I'd go with.)

The thief would absolutely know which it is, and they could take additional steps that might change the options.

The stated scenario doesn't include a lock, so no picking would be required.

But say we add a lock, and that the trap triggers by messing with the lock. I don't think you would be able to pick a lock while wearing steel gauntlets, although perhaps simply wiggling a lockpick inside the lock might set off the trap. If so, and assuming the trap doesn't immediately reset, you could then remove the gauntlets and safely pick the lock.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I like to reward players for creative solutions. But I also don't want to award an auto-win for any suggestion outside of the box. If I don't think a proposed solution will work, or has a significant chance to fail, I will tell the player just that. The player then has an opportuntiy to convince me that the proposal will actually work, or failing that they can change their approach. I feel that awarding success to any weird proposal cheapens the efforts of players who try to think up solutions that are both creative and supported by the established game fiction.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

At our table, a Rogue interacting with a trapped chest might play out as such (relevant guidance DMG p120):

Wisdom(Perception) ability check to notice the trap (although, if the Rogue specifically said they were looking for a needle trap in the lock, I'd likely grant auto-success. Discovering traps is just one step - and not the most interesting one, IMO)

Intelligence(Investigation) ability check to determine how the trap works.

Dexterity(Thieves' Tools) ability check to disarm the trap.

The example is a bit vague on the details, but sounds like steps one and two were passed. Step three was not even attempted - instead the PC was trying to trigger the trap in a way they deemed it would be harmless. There would be no Dex(Theives' Tools) ability check required. Clever and reasonable enough for this DM: auto-success. Or, perhaps, if this needle trap was particularly dastardly, a DC 10 Dex saving throw to avoid the adamantine needle from piercing their hand, made with advantage due to the gauntlet.

This passage from the guidance on DMG p120 is particularly apropos here:

In most cases, a trap's description is clear enough that you can adjudicate whether a character's actions locate or foil the trap. As with many situations, you shouldn't allow die rolling to override clever play and good planning. Use your common sense, drawing on the trap's description to determine what happens. No trap's design can anticipate every possible action that the characters might attempt.

 

[Reynard]

At our table, a Rogue interacting with a trapped chest might play out as such (relevant guidance DMG p120):

Wisdom(Perception) ability check to notice the trap (although, if the Rogue specifically said they were looking for a needle trap in the lock, I'd likely grant auto-success. Discovering traps is just one step - and not the most interesting one, IMO)

Intelligence(Investigation) ability check to determine how the trap works.

Dexterity(Thieves' Tools) ability check to disarm the trap.

The example is a bit vague on the details, but sounds like steps one and two were passed. Step three was not even attempted - instead the PC was trying to trigger the trap in a way they deemed it would be harmless. There would be no Dex(Theives' Tools) ability check required. Clever and reasonable enough for this DM: auto-success. Or, perhaps, if this needle trap was particularly dastardly, a DC 10 Dex saving throw to avoid the adamantine needle from piercing their hand, made with advantage due to the gauntlet.

This passage from the guidance on DMG p120 is particularly apropos here:

In most cases, a trap's description is clear enough that you can adjudicate whether a character's actions locate or foil the trap. As with many situations, you shouldn't allow die rolling to override clever play and good planning. Use your common sense, drawing on the trap's description to determine what happens. No trap's design can anticipate every possible action that the characters might attempt.

You can't expect people to have read that. It's in the DMG.

 

[Clint_L]

This discussion.

Rogue: "Hmmm...something feels off - I'm going to investigate this corridor... [rolls a 23]."
DM: "Ah-ha - you spot a tripwire connected to a swinging log trap."
Rogue: "Okay, I warn everyone not to trip it."
DM: Fair enough. Everyone roll an acrobatics check to not step on the tripwire, but you can have advantage because you know it's there."
Rogue: "...seriously?"

 

[ezo]

Look, a poison needle trap is the laziest, most predictable trap in the game,

Sorry, I have to disagree. The "pit" is the laziest, most predictable trap in the game. Hence the investion of the 10-foot pole.

and I expect that as soon as a rogue knows it’s there, they’re like, “lol, poison needle. Hand me me something hard.” I’m not going to quibble on the gauntlet. “Well, actually medieval gauntlets blah blah blah…”.

Quibble about the gauntlet? Well, that was part of the OP so seems like an important factor.

Player: “Whatever, Poindexter, point is I trigger it with something other than my flesh.”

Sure, how about your theives' tools? The have "long(ish)" metal picks commonly used for triggering such traps. Player: "I poke my lock pick into the lock to trigger the trap so I can work on picking the lock safely."

Triggering the trap is not the same thing IMO as disarming. Disarming means by passing it without triggering. Since the OP asked about disarming, I agree with @Oofta and posted a roll would be required.

Anyway, in such cases, really finding the trap is the most important point for a rogue.

This discussion.

Rogue: "Hmmm...something feels off - I'm going to investigate this corridor... [rolls a 23]."
DM: "Ah-ha - you spot a tripwire connected to a swinging log trap."
Rogue: "Okay, I warn everyone not to trip it."
DM: Fair enough. Everyone roll an acrobatics check to not step on the tripwire, but you can have advantage because you know it's there."
Rogue: "...seriously?"

Have you ever seen on clumsy some people can be??? If not, there are thousands of videos on YouTube, Tiktok, etc.

Lots of factors can come into play:

How visible is the wire (DC 20?) if the rogue spotted it with a 23?
Is the lighting sufficient for other people to see it easily?
What is the floor's surface like? Slippery, uneven, etc.?
How high is the tripwire?
And so on...

The point is (as DM) you ask for a roll when there are serious consequences of failure. The tripwire might cause a massive collapse of the ceiling, etc. and be a Deadly trap!

Set the DC low, like 5 for "Very Easy". Then with advantage, the chance with no bonus whatsoever for failing is just 4%.

If a player comes up with something, sure go ahead and run with it, but it is really up to each DM individually the exact results (ask for roll or not).

 

[Oofta]

This discussion.

Rogue: "Hmmm...something feels off - I'm going to investigate this corridor... [rolls a 23]."
DM: "Ah-ha - you spot a tripwire connected to a swinging log trap."
Rogue: "Okay, I warn everyone not to trip it."
DM: Fair enough. Everyone roll an acrobatics check to not step on the tripwire, but you can have advantage because you know it's there."
Rogue: "...seriously?"

In my game it could theoretically be:

Rogue: "Hmmm...something feels off - I'm going to investigate this corridor... [rolls a 23]."​

​

DM: "Ah-ha - you spot multiple tripwires connected to a swinging log trap."​

​

Rogue: "Okay, I warn everyone not to trip them."​

​

DM: "Fair enough. If you want to do that, everyone will have to roll an acrobatics check with advantage to not step on or snag on a tripwire. Is that what you want to do?"​

Or we could go about disabling the trap which might require multiple different checks by different characters. While I don't use traps all that often, basically when it's thematically appropriate like going in the secret entrance into a thieve's guild, I try to think of it in two ways. One, it's a fairly simple trap that can be disarmed or bypassed by simply going around or it's a complex trap In the latter case the fighter might need to do an athletics check to hold the log, the wizard might need to do an arcana check, perhaps there's another dex based PC in the party that can assist the rogue. Lots of options, one of the reasons I like DDB is that I can see what their skills are so I can think of how to describe things so that different PCs can contribute.

 

[Reynard]

In my game it could theoretically be:

Rogue: "Hmmm...something feels off - I'm going to investigate this corridor... [rolls a 23]."​

​

DM: "Ah-ha - you spot multiple tripwires connected to a swinging log trap."​

​

Rogue: "Okay, I warn everyone not to trip them."​

​

DM: "Fair enough. If you want to do that, everyone will have to roll an acrobatics check with advantage to not step on or snag on a tripwire. Is that what you want to do?"​

Or we could go about disabling the trap which might require multiple different checks by different characters. While I don't use traps all that often, basically when it's thematically appropriate like going in the secret entrance into a thieve's guild, I try to think of it in two ways. One, it's a fairly simple trap that can be disarmed or bypassed by simply going around or it's a complex trap In the latter case the fighter might need to do an athletics check to hold the log, the wizard might need to do an arcana check, perhaps there's another dex based PC in the party that can assist the rogue. Lots of options, one of the reasons I like DDB is that I can see what their skills are so I can think of how to describe things so that different PCs can contribute.

So what is the purpose of the trap here, and what is the purpose of requiring everyone to roll even after it has been detected? Is this an attrition trap, meant to eat some hp, or are you expecting the players to change tact and engage it as a puzzle? Or something else?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Lots of factors can come into play:

How visible is the wire (DC 20?) if the rogue spotted it with a 23?
Is the lighting sufficient for other people to see it easily?
What is the floor's surface like? Slippery, uneven, etc.?
How high is the tripwire?
And so on...

The point is (as DM) you ask for a roll when there are serious consequences of failure. The tripwire might cause a massive collapse of the ceiling, etc. and be a Deadly trap!

Tripwires are typically near the floor but, regardless, I hope all the pertinent details are then shared with the rogue (who can share with the party) upon discovery of said tripwire.

The other part of ability checks is to only call for them if there is some uncertainty in the outcome. If the rogue has found the tripwire, in this example, presumably they can guide the other characters safely past it. No uncertainty in the outcome, therefore no roll.

Let's apply this to the pit example. Perhaps it is 20' deep and has acid at the bottom. Some potentially serious consequences for falling in, especially for low level characters. However, if the PC in the front of the party marching order discovered it and that pit is only 5' wide, should the DM make them all roll to see if they stumble in b/c... lots of factors?

Set the DC low, like 5 for "Very Easy". Then with advantage, the chance with no bonus whatsoever for failing is just 4%.

Is this worth it though? The trap has been found and there is an easy way to bypass it now. IMO, let them have their victory for the Rogue doing the Rogue-y thing and move on to the next challenge.

Now, if this tripwire situation actually is more complicated than that, then the DM's description should telegraph to the rogue (and/or other party members) that something else will be required to disable said tripwire or otherwise mitigate the danger. Jumping to an ability check here, even one set very low, seems to be skipping over a step in the play loop, IMO.