Describing Trap Searches

[Tequila Sunrise]

How do you describe a rogue searching for, and finding, a magical trap? Has there ever been a novel in which this is described? I'd love to hear about it.

 

[lukelightning]

Rogue: "I search the door"...(rolls dice, gets a total of 27)
DM: "You find a fire trap."

Yeah, it's boring. I guess you could say that the rogue finds traces of the magic, or remnants of the material components used to cast the spell (e.g. specks of gold dust used to cast fire trap), or perhaps the fire trap has some latent heat so there is a suspicious warm spot, or a strange marking.

For disarming them, perhaps there are special ways to deface a rune or symbol to deactivate them, or special "generic" passwords that might be able to deactivate magical traps if you get them right.

 

[RFisher]

You know, while I like my modules brief with pithy backstories & to-the-point NPC descriptions, this is an area where I would've really like more. Describe how the traps work. Describe how the locks work. Describe how the door works. Describe how the secret door works.

 

[lukelightning]

I like descriptions, but don't make the player make decisions that would better be done by the character. A classic example is defusing a bomb..."cut the red wire! no, cut the blue wire!" Don't make the player have to choose if his character has ranks in disable device.

I've had situations where my thief hada huge remove trap % (this was back in first edition), yet my DM made me describe exactly what I was doing to remove the trap. What a pain in the butt.

 

[robberbaron]

Yeah, I know what you mean. One of our DMs made players roleplay diplomacy, not just for flavour either. Fail to make a good enough argument and it didn't matter what you rolled.

When I DM I shoot for something in the middle. I'd try to make each trap a little different and even interesting but after a while it gets boring for me, having to think up another description of how a thief bypasses another trap. Stopped me putting traps in for a while.

 

[ThatGuyThere]

Yeah, I know what you mean. One of our DMs made players roleplay diplomacy, not just for flavour either. Fail to make a good enough argument and it didn't matter what you rolled.

When I DM I shoot for something in the middle. I'd try to make each trap a little different and even interesting but after a while it gets boring for me, having to think up another description of how a thief bypasses another trap. Stopped me putting traps in for a while.

...if your first complain was sarcasm, it's fallen on deaf ears. I hate it when DMs do that. The player playing a fighter doesn't know how to weild a +5 Vorpal Greatsword. The player playing the bard shouldn't need to be able to cite Shakespear (sp?).

When I DM, I go for something along the lines of, "A disturbance in the dust; there's a sensation of warmth, a tangible *feeling* of magical energy... You're reasonably certain the door is protected by a Fire Trap."

Then, for disarming, "Carefully, with your tools, you wear away at the wood of the door, being careful not to deface the unseen sigil - then, you pop the whole sigil out of the wood at once, negating the trap." That's a pretty definitive success, mind. A much vaguer, "with a little vinegar, you deface the sigil, preventing the trap from detonating" sees much more use - and a lot more Paladins and Barbarians going through the trap first.

But I agree - "do you cut the red wire, or the blue wire" should be - "neither; I roll disable device". When I have a trap that Disable Device can't get by - "mystically sealed" doors, riddle traps, Encounter Traps (from Dungeonscape), they're clearly labeled as such, and Disable Device often gives added tips or suggestions for overcoming the challenge.

 

[lukelightning]

I've never felt cheated out of the roleplaying experience if the DM says "you find a trap... you disable the trap." If I need to, I can visualize the devilish mechanisms and lethal pokey bits.