Design & Development: Traps is up!

[kinem]

On a second look at the article, it sounds like you can still search for traps. The take-10 is only assumed if you don't say anything. In that case it's OK; all traps will have DCs above the take-10 but below take-20.

 

[Cadfan]

If the trap is encountered alone, in a non combat situation, then yes. Its auto-pass or fail.

But try this.

DM: You charge through the door into the kobold nest. Its a large cavern with high ceilings, about 30 feet across, and about 60 feet deep. It slopes upwards towards an altar, behind which is the kobold chief cleric. Kobolds are... here, here, and here. *places miniatures* They've clearly prepared for you, as evidenced by the spikes here, and here, behind which their archers stand. *points* Roll initiative.
Players: *roll dice*
DM: Ok, the order is, Ranger, Wizard, Paladin, Kobolds, Warlord. Before we begin, here. *DM passes a note to the Ranger, who he knew in advance of the session had a high enough Perception score to notice the traps in the room*
Ranger's Player: OH GEEZ! Guys,
DM: WAIT! You can't show them the note. If you want to tell them something, do it in character on your initiative. And don't refer to specific squares on the board. Use words.
Ranger's Player: Oh, ok. Uh, I'm first, right?
DM: Yeah. Go ahead when you're ready.
Ranger's Player: Ok. Um. I quick draw my bow and send two arrows at the kobolds behind the spiked barricade, one arrow per kobold. I move here, *moves miniature* and yell, "'ware the center staircase!"
Paladin's Player: Heh, so much for charging the altar, I guess. I need a new plan.
Wizard's Player: I've got one... I cast a cloud of noxious, choking fumes targetted here, and here, leaving only the center staircase as a route for the kobolds to escape...

 

[Voss]

So, there's no point whatsoever to traps, right?

The DM simply decides whether the party spots the trap or not, by setting the DC for perception either above the party's max or not above it.

But he can't set it above their max, because that would just make him a jerk who deals arbritrary damage to the party.

And he can't set it not above their max, because then they would automatically avoid it and it would serve no purpose.

Sounds to me like the old system is much better. (And the even older system was even better IMO.)

Not... exactly. Though it strikes me as a large problem.

Clearly, traps as an element of a bigger encounter (with fighting) is going to be a big thing.
Second, splitting the party.
Third, possible environmental modifiers. Though, there is really only so many times you can pull this on a party.
Fourth, verisimilitude. If the trapped pyramid of al'Khalef doesn't have traps, its going to feel weird. And the party may well be in a hurry on the way back out...

But yeah, it is a problem. But its been a poorly handled problem in every edition I've played since '85. Its just that this time, instead of being tired of bad die rolls, we're going to be tired of fighting at the edge of a pit with enemies that like to bull rush. (Or, possibly, Flying Buffalo Tackle).


@RyukenAngel- it sounds like monster hide checks will still be rolled. For what its worth.

@kinem- can you pull a quote of the bit thats suggesting active Perception checks? I'm not seeing it.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I think it is too early to say that there is nor point to traps...

Ideally, there would only be a few traps, that guard specific paths that the PCs must pass through in order to reach the objective. Traps don't make much sense if they are scattered randomly, after all. This easily removes the "just walking around every trap you notice" issue.

The difference between noticing a trap and not noticing a trap is how prepared the party is to deal with it when it springs. I imagine that the point of disable device will not so much be "stop the trap before it activates, so we don't take any damage", but rather "turn off the trap after it has already activated, so we take less damage". As a whole, I see it as a movement from traps being either triggered for full damage or completely avoided, to traps having a widely variable amount of danger within a single trap. In this case, I don't think static DCs will be much of a problem.

It is probably better to think that the DC for noticing a trap is set by the level of the challenge, and it is up to the PCs, not just the DM, to put enough effort into Perception to keep up with the escalating challenge of the traps. If the PCs put effort into Perception, tehy will spot the traps. If they don't, the won't spot the traps.

 

[Reaper Steve]

Rechan... where can I get one of those 'pleasure plates?"

 

[Reaper Steve]

Cadfan... nice example! Felt like I was there!

 

[Magus Coeruleus]

If, as a DM, you don't like static DCs for objects etc. then you can roll for them like you roll Hide checks for creatures. That way you still get the randomness but you don't tip off the players by telling them to roll. Functionally it's the same as if they (or you, knowing their Perception score) roll a Perception check.

 

[Rechan]

Rechan... where can I get one of those 'pleasure plates?"

The Pleasure plalace.

 

[Rechan]

Also, I want to note for folks.

In R&C, it says that there still are the 10ft pit trap and the poison needle on the treasure chest. Just that those are outside the norm.

 

[kinem]

@kinem- can you pull a quote of the bit thats suggesting active Perception checks? I'm not seeing it.

I may be reading too much into this, but

characters have a passive Perception score that represents their Take-10 result for searching

would seem to imply that taking 10 is not the only possibility.