Avoiding the passive perception trap.


log in or register to remove this ad

High passive perception should find almost any trap.
Well, getting a high passive perception is not difficult in 4E, which means most groups will include at least one character able to find almost any trap.

I guess this is exactly what the OP does not want.

(Perhaps you should continue this discussion in 4E house rules, Kzach?)
 

In what way is a trap that you do not find interesting? There is no challenge, just random damage. You might as well institute a random damage table and no wand then. A trap that is discovered still has to be bypassed, that's where the challenge lies.

Besides, in 4E, traps are supposed to be part of encounters. Even a completely open and obvious pit trap can be trouble when there are archers on the other side.
 

Make the trap "attack" his passive perception. In other words instead of having a trap with a Perception DC of 20, it has a Perception attack of 9 (subtract 11 from the DC). When the times come, roll the attack for the trap. If it hits his Passive Perception, he hasn't noticed it. The character is still rewarded for having a high perception.
 

The way traps are used in the game has changed. This change started with the introduction of the 3E encounter traps. All things considered I'm in favour of the change.

As others have already mentioned, use traps in ways where it doesn't matter if they're immediately obvious. If traps are simply another element of a combat encounter, they can definitely be great fun.
 

In what way is a trap that you do not find interesting? There is no challenge, just random damage. You might as well institute a random damage table and no wand then. A trap that is discovered still has to be bypassed, that's where the challenge lies.

Besides, in 4E, traps are supposed to be part of encounters. Even a completely open and obvious pit trap can be trouble when there are archers on the other side.
Or something with pull powers
 

My recommendation is focus on traps that are part of a combat encounter, instead of one off incidents.

This way if your sonar guy finds the trap, it makes feel good. But it doesn't stop a monster from pushing someone onto the trap tile and still taking the pain.

I have found traps to be a lot more fun with this mindset.
 

I wouldn't want to punish a player simply for having a good score in a skill.

The problem is that some characters can have such high perception skills that they'll effectively never fail to detect a trap that falls within their level range.
And that's fine. The purpose of a trap is not to go off. It's much better when the characters notice the trap and then have to take measures to disarm/circumvent it. Otherwise it's just "damage from nowhere".
 

Make the trap "attack" his passive perception. In other words instead of having a trap with a Perception DC of 20, it has a Perception attack of 9 (subtract 11 from the DC). When the times come, roll the attack for the trap. If it hits his Passive Perception, he hasn't noticed it. The character is still rewarded for having a high perception.

I like this solution, myself. I also agree with the sentiment that "damage from nowhere" is bad, but a good trap isn't just damage from nowhere; it puts a character in a bad situation that the other PCs then have to work together to get him/her out of.

For example, a pit trap could leave a character down in a pit being swarmed by rats or scorpions. For extra fun, the sound of the trap being sprung attracts nearby monsters and the rest of the party has to fight them off, while at the same time trying desperately to haul their comrade to safety.
 

And that's fine. The purpose of a trap is not to go off. It's much better when the characters notice the trap and then have to take measures to disarm/circumvent it. Otherwise it's just "damage from nowhere".

If this is the case, then why require any check or skill to notice the trap at all? If it's better when the characters notice the trap, why not just have them notice the trap?
 

Remove ads

Top