Pathfinder 1E Concerned about the Rogue's Trap Spotter Talent

[Starfox]

It doesn't need to take much playtime at all. Merely a routine; This is our marching order, rogue first, three rounds each square checking for traps... Takes 1-2 minutes a room, clearly doable and takes no time at the table.

The problem is enjoyment. This sounds more like archeology than dungeoneering. But IMO itis quite old school - stating what you do, approaching the adventure like a battlefield.

Actually, isn't this very much like the speed you had in 1E, 60-120 feet per minute depending on armor.

 

[N'raac]

That model also does not require the rogue to specify he is looking for traps. Of course, if we don't make all three rolls every 10', as soon as the group hears dice being rolled, start thinking of a reason to pick this specific spot to cast Find Traps if the rogue doesn't see one...

There are some locations where taking this extra time is feasible and even desirable (the aforementioned highly trapped tomb, for example). There are others where it is less so (the King's castle, with guards regularly, or even irregularly, patrolling; anywhere if you are under time pressure; hiking through the wilderness). The world does not stand still because the players get paranoid, and want to minimize the chances of ever stumbling over a trap. Hey, why not take 100 checks? One should be a 20 by then!

Mind you, I would allow a player to declare he is Taking 20 - he doesn't know that may be impossible in some area, so all it means to me is start rolling - and keep rolling until something happens - he finds the trap or a low enough roll triggers an adverse result. It beats saying "no traps; 10' on; no traps; 10' on; you can't take 20 here!"

 

[brvheart]

I don't allow the taking of 20 and rarely allow taking 10 and certainly neither in searching for traps. I roll dice randomly for all sorts of reasons so the players never know when I am rolling for traps. If you start searching that often for traps I am going to start rolling wandering monster checks! You spend 2-10 minutes outside a door don't ever think about surprising what is in the room. As you said, the world is not stagnant. Rarely do they ever even check twice at a spot unless they seem to have a reason to do so, very metagaming there.

 

[billd91]

As a DM I agree with Wicht and tend to find that trap spotter speeds up the game especially with old school trap heavy dungeons. It can really slow a game down when the rogue stops every 10' to check for traps.

Absolutely. You should thank the rogue player for making your job and the game as a whole a bit smoother. Now, the dice rolling for traps is up to you (I suggest pre-rolling them out of session and jotting them down next to the trap so you have his auto-check covered) for those cases and you don't have to roll and roll and roll. If his check is too low, you can just describe the pointman of the party blundering into the trap.

With respect to taking 10, in a 3.5 game I was running (and this works for PF too), the party scout said that under normal circumstances, he was going to take 10 searching for traps in corridors as they moved along. We just needed to know what his check +10 was and any traps he found with that score, he found. Any he didn't, he blundered into. It saved us rolling constantly up and down the corridors of the dungeon. Very easy, very slick - exactly what taking 10 and 20 are supposed to do for you, remove the tedium of repetitive checks in favor of a slightly less than expected value roll.

 

[Terath Ninir]

My group has two rogues with Trap Spotter and they use it mainly to speed things up in the game. They don't actively have to search, so they can move through the dungeon more quickly. If you're already giving clues, that makes it somewhat less valuable of a feat, frankly.

 

[captainembewrath]

The way traps are used have changed in a lot of groups; perhaps your player is not a fan of old school traps.

New traps tend not to be hidden at all (making Trapfinding not that useful), instead being part of an encounter and making the whole team have to take them on. I think a lot of rogue players these days give up Trapfinding for that reason.

Uhm how exactly does that work? Because if a GM tried to fiat that I missed a trap when I, or one of my friends, had the skill to find it I can pretty much assure you that there would be a huge argument about it. You're negating a character's class feature at that point, and it seems like you're doing it to railroad the party and to deliberately make the Rogue useless in one of their main party roles.

 

[Starfox]

New traps tend not to be hidden at all (making Trapfinding not that useful), instead being part of an encounter and making the whole team have to take them on. I think a lot of rogue players these days give up Trapfinding for that reason.

This is the 4E guide to traps; not really a part any other edition that I know of. It is not a bad idea tough, giving kobolds the "joyful carousel of death" is fun, just totally separate from the usual kind of trap.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

This is the 4E guide to traps; not really a part any other edition that I know of. It is not a bad idea tough, giving kobolds the "joyful carousel of death" is fun, just totally separate from the usual kind of trap.

That came up in late 3.x, it's not a 4e "innovation".

Link: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20060210a

Uhm how exactly does that work? Because if a GM tried to fiat that I missed a trap when I, or one of my friends, had the skill to find it I can pretty much assure you that there would be a huge argument about it. You're negating a character's class feature at that point, and it seems like you're doing it to railroad the party and to deliberately make the Rogue useless in one of their main party roles.

Were you replying to someone else? Where did I say I was making a rogue miss a trap when I said it should be visible?

 

[billd91]

This is the 4E guide to traps; not really a part any other edition that I know of. It is not a bad idea tough, giving kobolds the "joyful carousel of death" is fun, just totally separate from the usual kind of trap.

I'd have a hard time calling it a trap. It's really more of a construct monster/device to evade/bash to pieces than a trap. It may make for some interesting encounters, but it could get as old as rolling to search for traps every 10 feet (particularly since taking 10 allows us to gloss the heck over the individual die rolls making this a lot less onerous).