Detecting magical traps
- Thread starter Kalendraf
- Start date
Hey Thannee.Thanee said:Well, of course!
- saves time, which is always a good thing
- makes trapfinding ability more useful without having to annoyingly search every square actively
- doesn't remove the need to search actively, since you never know when you didn't find a trap
- it resembles an actual mechanic in the core rules
My auto-search rule should be core, really!
Bye
Thanee
Did you also add some penalties for movement? Similar to the hide skill:
- move up to half your normal speed at no penalty.
- move up to full normal speed, -5 penalty.
- -20 while attacking, running or charging.
Kalendraf
Explorer
A rogue in one of my previous 3e campaigns came up with a suggestion for a custom feat to allow trapsensing. I believe he modeled it from either a prestige class or a similar feat he had seen, but changed it slightly to allow him to get it sooner, but without as good a search capability. I agreed to try it and it didn't seem too unbalancing, however its mechanics left something to be desired.
IIRC, that version allowed a free check anytime the rogue came within 5' of a trap, but with a small penalty. Unfortunately, it meant that the DM had to continually roll dice whenever he moved, else it easily gave away the existance of a trap nearby. Of course, I would tend to forget rolls more often than I should have, and the dice rolls probably gave away more traps than they should have. When the character died, the feat died with him.
Using a static number instead of a roll would eliminate the need for those rolls. The idea didn't dawn on us at the time, probably because it just seemed like traps needed to be rolled for. But now that I understand that searching for traps can use the take 10 or take 20 rules, assigning a static value for that trapsensing ability seems logical.
So the question is, if a rogue is moving half-speed, what number should they get? The equivalent of a take 10? That means they'll spot some obious traps, but miss the hard ones unless they take time to search. However, it seems like 10 is too much, since that would be the result of a 1 minute search which is quite a bit different than a half-speed trek thru some squares.
IIRC, that version allowed a free check anytime the rogue came within 5' of a trap, but with a small penalty. Unfortunately, it meant that the DM had to continually roll dice whenever he moved, else it easily gave away the existance of a trap nearby. Of course, I would tend to forget rolls more often than I should have, and the dice rolls probably gave away more traps than they should have. When the character died, the feat died with him.
Using a static number instead of a roll would eliminate the need for those rolls. The idea didn't dawn on us at the time, probably because it just seemed like traps needed to be rolled for. But now that I understand that searching for traps can use the take 10 or take 20 rules, assigning a static value for that trapsensing ability seems logical.
So the question is, if a rogue is moving half-speed, what number should they get? The equivalent of a take 10? That means they'll spot some obious traps, but miss the hard ones unless they take time to search. However, it seems like 10 is too much, since that would be the result of a 1 minute search which is quite a bit different than a half-speed trek thru some squares.
Nail
First Post
I've only found "telegraphing because the DM rolls a dice" to be a problem when I had to ask the player: "So, what is your Spot check, anyway?"
I've solved the problem by having a few of the relevant scores written down behind my DM screen (Ability Scores, Saves, Spot, Listen, Sense Motive, Search; that's it!). Now I just say: "Roll a d20"...then I add the check and determine the outcome...the player can't very easily meta-game, as the roll could be any number of things.
I've solved the problem by having a few of the relevant scores written down behind my DM screen (Ability Scores, Saves, Spot, Listen, Sense Motive, Search; that's it!). Now I just say: "Roll a d20"...then I add the check and determine the outcome...the player can't very easily meta-game, as the roll could be any number of things.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
