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

[Saeviomagy]

2 minutes sure, but 2 minutes searching every 5' X 5' square? That is a bit much if you don't think there are traps or things to find.

For a typical good sized room (say 30' X 20') we're not talking about two minutes looking around, we are talking almost an hour dutifully searching every square foot. That's a bit much if there is nothing expected.

I said it was ridiculous to say that a rogue should get an XP bonus for "roleplaying" by spending 6 seconds looking at a potential trap when he's not in a rush.

I also don't think that spending an hour turning a room over is unreasonable if there are no time pressures, and you're looking for valuable treasure. Assuming of course that there is something to search...

Remember - this is the JOB of adventurers. They do this for a living.

 

[isoChron]

But is it reasonable to get the XP for the trap if you search every single room in a dungeon taking 20 ???
Where the sense ?
"OK, guys ! Another room, get out your lunch and start a fire for coffee.
Rogue ! Search ! Search !"

It's not fun to die because of a trap, but it happens every now and then. It's simply unrealistic to search every 5 ft square of a room taking 20. It's even unrealistic to search every single square of a rooms floor. I don't look 6 seconds before I make a step in a natural cavern, do you ?
I don't search places for traps if I never have the intention to go to that specific place. Imagine a room 30 ft x 30 ft. There is nothing in there just bare floor, wall, ceiling. Now you see a door to the left and a door to the right. Do you search the wall to the front because there could be a trigger for a trap ? I think you straight walk to one or the other door, search there, open it and walk through.
If you engage the whole party with low Search skills to search the room, it is most likely that you trigger the trap because you (the party) searched for it, not because you accidently triggered it.

As a DM I place traps where they are not expected. In the middle of a 5ft hallway or the like. (I hate playing NPC-wizards as dumb commoners.)
But the first character moving near the trap gets a spot-check (rolled by me, the DM). He has the chance to notice something unusual and then it's on the party to work it out. The rogue will most certainly search this specific area. If the search check says there is nothing special to see there he tells the other characters and moves on. Most of the time he will detect the trap. If not he gets a save or AC vs. the trap (nearly always doing the save and not getting harmed because of Evasion). In very few cases he will take the damage because of no save, no attack traps. And what ? The next fireball in a fight will equal this damage out with the fighter (who will most certainly take at least half damage).

 

[Tatsukun]

I see where you are coming from, but I have two questions for you.

If you engage the whole party with low Search skills to search the room, it is most likely that you trigger the trap because you (the party) searched for it, not because you accidently triggered it.

You mean only if it's a proximity / location trap right? You know that searching will not, by itself, set off a trap. For example if you search a door trapped to explode when you open it you will not set the door off simply by searching it.

Probably you know that, but maybe someone doesn't.

As a DM I place traps where they are not expected. In the middle of a 5ft hallway or the like. (I hate playing NPC-wizards as dumb commoners.)

This is why you don't like traps. They are random damage with this method. You could also make invisible ogres standing in the middle of a field; ready to attack anyone who comes through. Would you award Exp for a party that encountered such an ogre?

A trap in an area that has no reason to be trapped is essentially not going to be found. If you put a trap in a place the characters have no reason to search, that probably deserves a higher DC (just as the invisible ogre would be a higher DC).

Now, if you give a clue, like a story about a ball where someone wandered out of the ballroom and into the cellar and died of a trap; then the characters should be searching (at least taking 10 on each square) when they go to the cellar. If they don't, too bad for them.

-Tatsu

 

[knifespeaks]

That's an interesting point, re: the psychology of traps.

Trapsense is another way of saying 'expecting the unexpected' - a character who invests in spot/search etc becomes more intuitive, shall we say, about potentially dangerous inconsistencies in the world around them.

I think traps are valid wherever they are placed, but most certainly I firmly believe that the more dangerous the enemy, the more devious the trap location and possibly the more deadly the trap. Although I would still only ever place lethal traps in areas where they are more consistent - traps mostly should be found where monsters aren't. This is the first clue to detection.

 

[Orm]

Traps are meant to protect. The contents of a chest, a doorway or whatever. As I´m playing the party´s rogue (lvl 18, total search bonus +25, disable device bonus +20) I tell the DM that I want to search a door or chest whenever I suspect it to be trapped. Well, sometimes I forget about that but that´s another story. That said, taking twenty on a specific target is perfectly reasonable as far as the psychology of traps goes.

"OK, guys ! Another room, get out your lunch and start a fire for coffee.
Rogue ! Search ! Search !"

To avoid such szenarios, our group normally just walks through rooms and hallways.

BTW, we use a variant rule that disallows taking ten or twenty. And a natural one is allways a failure whereas a natural twenty is allways a success. All that adds a lot of suspense to trapfinding as well as the DM rolling the skill check hidden. So you never know, even with a search bonus of +25
But when I´m pretty sure that there is a trap (e.g. three similar chests, two of them were trapped) I tell the DM I want to search more thoroughly.

Orm

 

[hong]

How many ruins have you ever been in hong?

None. How many ruins have you been in?

2 minutes is NOT a long time. 2 minutes in a place you've never been in before is not that long to spend looking around. I've been in ruins, that have been excavated, renovated and safety approved.

How many of these ruins had traps designed to kill?

I still easily spend a couple of minutes just looking around for things of interest.

Hello in there. Taking 20 on a Search check does not mean 2 minutes per room. It means 2 minutes per FIVE-FOOT-SQUARE.

Taking 2 minutes per room is eminently sensible. Taking half an hour or more is just wasting time, unless you've been brought up on a diet of the Tomb of Horrors and other such pathological dungeons.

Remember - this is the JOB of adventurers. They do this for a living.

This is the job of SOME adventurers. For others, dungeoneering is an incidental pursuit.

 

[hong]

I also don't think that spending an hour turning a room over is unreasonable if there are no time pressures, and you're looking for valuable treasure.

No dungeon I've been in, whether in p&p, computer games, or anywhere else, has consisted solely of empty rooms with nothing but traps and treasure. Some dungeons I've been in have literally had no reason for existence except to give PCs a location to ransack, and even then, there have been monsters to fight. The archaeological dig scenario you seem to have in mind, where you have unlimited time and no opposition to worry about, simply isn't relevant.

Assuming of course that there is something to search...

Moving the goalposts, I see. How do you define "something to search"?

 

[isoChron]

I see where you are coming from, but I have two questions for you.

You mean only if it's a proximity / location trap right? You know that searching will not, by itself, set off a trap. For example if you search a door trapped to explode when you open it you will not set the door off simply by searching it.

Probably you know that, but maybe someone doesn't.

Sorry. I didn't mean that the use of the skill search will trigger a trap but walking all around the room to search each square will trigger most traps if you don't notice them (because of the bad search skills of most characters).

This is why you don't like traps. They are random damage with this method. You could also make invisible ogres standing in the middle of a field; ready to attack anyone who comes through. Would you award Exp for a party that encountered such an ogre?

A trap in an area that has no reason to be trapped is essentially not going to be found. If you put a trap in a place the characters have no reason to search, that probably deserves a higher DC (just as the invisible ogre would be a higher DC).

Now, if you give a clue, like a story about a ball where someone wandered out of the ballroom and into the cellar and died of a trap; then the characters should be searching (at least taking 10 on each square) when they go to the cellar. If they don't, too bad for them.

-Tatsu

OK, this example was a bit stressing. But I don't see why a villian would always only secure the door, not other key locations. If he knows the party must come through this narrow hallway he is free where to plant his surprise. Most traps have a switch or another mean to circumvent them (the villian don't want to suffer from his own trap). These may be found by a spot check (see spot to notice something unusual).
The invisible oger on the field can also be spotted. The footprints end at someplace in the gras. A butterfly hits the oger and drops ... the stench of an oger is a hint to. But that is not the point.
Most traps I place can be anticipated because I told the players via NPC that the place is full of traps. A skeleton lies in the middle of the hall way. The last trap in the same dungeon was on the seventh step of the stairway and the next may be, too.

All is just my opinion and as a DM you are always free to grant a save or an Attack/AC for a trap that normaly has none. I just don't see why the PC deserve a white satin glove . Instakillatraps with no clue or hint are a bad thing but moderate damage or stunning or something like that is no problem for me.

 

[qaaral]

In regard to all this taking 20 and searching every 5 foot square, my dungeons tend to be in use locations. Guards come and go from their posts, lackies come to supply rooms to fetch stuff, etc. Even if the area is nominally abandoned there tend to be monsters that have taken up residence that come and go, that notice the oders of new intruders etc. So if the party is taking too long in anyone location they almost guarentee that there will be intruders and the sounds of combat will likely bring even more. It's not exactly time pressure but it does mean the party doesn't want to spend too much time fiddleing around in one spot.