Does the Trapsense ability, for a Rogue, come into play in this situation?

[AuraSeer]

The point was: if a character CHOOSES to do something "stupid" that would hurt them, they SHOULD get hurt.

The DM's idea of stupid is not necessarily the same as the player's idea of stupid. If there's a clear and trustworthy sign saying "door #3 is the safe one," then perhaps you could call it 'stupid' to open a different door.

Simply failing a Search check is not in any way 'stupid.'

 

[knifespeaks]

The DM's idea of stupid is not necessarily the same as the player's idea of stupid. If there's a clear and trustworthy sign saying "door #3 is the safe one," then perhaps you could call it 'stupid' to open a different door.

Simply failing a Search check is not in any way 'stupid.'

I think an earlier poster pointed out that the rogue could have taken 20....hence making the detection certain. Not taking 20 would therefore qualify as stupid, I'd reckon.

The irony of me posting about taking 20 in a positive way is hilarious

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Very.

EDIT: Of course, it's possible that he was under time pressure - or there was a combat nearby - which prevented him from having the composure / time to Take 20.

In which case, the above situation becomes an excellent example of how to "prevent" your players from Taking 20.

 

[reveal]

Of course, it's possible that he was under time pressure - or there was a combat nearby - which prevented him from having the composure / time to Take 20.

In which case, the above situation becomes an excellent example of how to "prevent" your players from Taking 20.

No time pressure. No combat. They all had the time they needed to open the hatches.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Excuse me?

Are you trying to tell me that there is a rogue player in existence that _doesn't_ take 20 on every single check he makes outside of combat? I have never seen a rogue fail to detect and disarm a trap, just because taking 20 is guaranteed win.

Seriously, most parties crawl through these dungeons at like 5 feet per minute thanks to the take 20 rules. I think the rogue should get a verisilimitude XP bonus for acting in a realistic fashion by taking a quick look instead of getting out the magnifying glass and examining every nook and cranny of the potentially trapped object. But I also agree that he should take 3d6 damage for putting his hand on a live metal object. I encourage any of you to try it and see how many times out of 20 you don't get shocked. By the book, it should be at least 1, probably 2 if you've got a few levels of Commoner or Expert. If you get shocked 100% of the time, it means there's no reflex save, because otherwise you'd eventually roll a natural 20 for your save.

 

[Scion]

Hey dr awkward, allow me to fireball you a few times, lets see how often you dont take any damage

Still, I was only posting to say that you cannot take 20 on most disarm attempts, there is generally a penalty for failure (or rather, you can take 20, and 'disarm' is just another word for 'set off').

 

[Saeviomagy]

Seriously, most parties crawl through these dungeons at like 5 feet per minute thanks to the take 20 rules. I think the rogue should get a verisilimitude XP bonus for acting in a realistic fashion by taking a quick look instead of getting out the magnifying glass and examining every nook and cranny of the potentially trapped object.

You ARE taking the piss here, right?

"Hi. I'm an adventurer. I go looking for trouble. Often, I will come across something that I think may possibly KILL me if I touch it. However it would be silly of me to spend 2 minutes to ensure my safety, so often I just glance at it for 6 seconds and assume that I must have seen anything that is there".

I'm sorry, but I can't imagine spending less than about 2 minutes in each room of a ruin that I'm exploring for the first time.

I certainly can't imagine walking through each room in less than 6 seconds unless I know where I'm going and I'm in a hurry.

And I most certainly am not touching anything without first thoroughly examining it.

And I'm not even talking about a place that I KNOW to be full of monsters and traps. I'm talking about an old mineshaft or the like.

But I also agree that he should take 3d6 damage for putting his hand on a live metal object. I encourage any of you to try it and see how many times out of 20 you don't get shocked.

Actually that would be "how many times do you get shocked a little bit, and how many times do you die".

People survive minor contact with electricals quite often. You could put that down to hitpoints and low damage rolls, or you could put it down to reflex saves.

 

[xazil]

Just to add a voice to the "traps can be dangerous" was the last place my party cleared was a liches tower and his main treasure was stashed in three chests, each with a Wail of the Banshee trap on it. I was very happy to have the cleric sitting behind me with a revivify incase I failed my disable roll.

 

[hong]

I'm sorry, but I can't imagine spending less than about 2 minutes in each room of a ruin that I'm exploring for the first time.

This must be a very strange world of yours, where the incidence of traps in ruins is high enough to mandate such a paranoid approach to adventuring. I surmise it is related to the spectrum of the ambient solar radiation, which coincidentally also results in 1) a different colour of the sky, and 2) reduced levels of testosterone among players.

 

[Fester]

There's a reason the writer doesn't just kill off James Bond ten minutes into the movie. It has nothing to do with the intelligence of the villain. If you don't understand that, you probably shouldn't be DMing.

That's pretty rude and adds nothing to the debate. Although knifespeaks has differed in his opinion to yours and been prepared to challenge and respond to your points, not at any point has he been rude to you in doing so.

Personally, I think if you're unable to have a reasoned debate with someone, without stamping your feet when they don't accept your argument, you probably shouldn't be role playing at all.

Returning to the point of this thread, I personally would have made a touch attack for each of the shocking grasp traps (giving the rogue a +1 Dodge bonus to AC), as this is in the spell descriptor and (from the SRD) "...a rogue gains an intuitive sense that alerts her to danger from traps..." when they acquire trapsense. The touch attack would have simulated the rogues ability to react intuitively (and pull his hand from the metal in time) or not (and take the damage).