Finding Traps Stinks - Or Am I Doing It Wrong?

[TarionzCousin]

So, as others in this thread have pointed out, keep in mind that:

• just because passive perception notices something amiss, it doesn't necessarily reveal the entire trap.
• active Perception checks can always role low.
• And just finding a well-placed and designed trap does not mean the entire encounter is ruined, it means the trap has become a hazard to be dealt with

.

So is it legal to set one Passive Perception DC to notice "something isn't right in this square"and a second Active Perception to notice the actual trap?

 

[MerricB]

It should be noted that the factor that really affects how traps work is time. There's nothing that says that you can only make one perception roll to find a trap: you can roll every round if you like. Thus, eventually, given enough time, you should find any trap you're skilled enough to find.

Adding a time constraint makes things more interesting, though.

That's why traps in combat is a feature of 4E: The thief has to make a decision. Does he attack the monsters or disable the trap? Does he use his minor and move actions to find the traps in the first place?

Once you lose that time constraint - searching for traps on a chest after a combat - then finding the trap is no longer such an issue. Instead it goes down to whether you can disable it successfully... as a poor check will trigger the trap (mostly).

Cheers!

 

[TikkchikFenTikktikk]

So is it legal to set one Passive Perception DC to notice "something isn't right in this square"and a second Active Perception to notice the actual trap?

Of course!

If you read most 4E traps, they have at least two Perception DCs. There's a lower one that is pretty general and brings attention to the area, then there's a higher one that is more specific about the nature of the trap. (Of course, to attempt the higher one you may have to risk setting off the trap!)

There's another bullet point I missed:

• "Other skills might play a role in allowing characters to notice traps or hazards, such as Arcana, Dungeoneering, and Nature. An exceptional trap or hazard might even be undetectable to Perception."

(Emphasis mine. The first sentence is in the DMG, but the second is added in the new Rules Compendium, p182.)

 

[Arlough]

I'm pretty sure there's a mechanic for finding traps by spending a healing surge...

Its a martial practice called Thorough Search [Martial Power 2, pg 152]
Basically, you spend an hour preparing, and one healing surge, and you get to perform a check perception+20 "to search the room".
At that point, you supposedly do or don't find everything there is to find.

I never use this because it always takes more than one perception check to search a whole room in the games we are playing, but there it is.

 

[Zaran]

For example: In my game, only when a PC takes an action to look for traps (ie. there is a conflict between the PC and the environment) do we need to roll.

The problem then is that once they are bitten by the first trap , the rest of adventure is spent inching along poking at things with a 10 ft pole. This was one of the main reasons why passive perception was put in the game.

 

[Argyle King]

I believe that there are two methods of finding traps in 4E:

1. A passive Perception check; or
2. A perception roll.

This doesn't seem like much fun to me.



Either the DM sets the DC low enough that the PC can always find the trap, or sets it high enough that the PC has at best a 50% chance to find it--because passive Perception equals rolling a "10" on a Perception check.

Is that right?

That doesn't seem like much fun to me. One of my long-term players always plays rogues because he loves searching for traps, disabling them, and doing other sneaky "rogue" things. The 4E approach definitely turns him off and now that I examine it, I see why.

What if Rogues/Thieves got some bonus to finding traps? Maybe they could:

A. Expend a Healing Surge for a +2 on the Perception check; or
B. Take feats to increase their chance to see traps; or
C. Expend an Encounter or Daily Power for a +3 or +5; or
D. Something else.



Thoughts? Comments? Snark?

The rogue could always take skill training in perception or skill focus. I know some people may view my recommending to take a non-combat feat as blasphemy, but it's an option.

From the DM side of the table, there is no reason every trap needs to be a 50/50 thing. Depending on the type of trap, some may be extremely obvious to spot; others may be very difficult to spot.

An example of an obvious trap is a floor glistening with oil. Someone with a low perception (I've had this happen in a game I GMed) could still not notice on a passive check. The active check would have far better odds than 50/50.

 

[Stoat]

So is it legal to set one Passive Perception DC to notice "something isn't right in this square"and a second Active Perception to notice the actual trap?

Take a look at some of the traps in the compendium.

Dart Trap (lvl 1)
Perception DC 20: The character notices the dart firing mechanism.
Perception DC 25: The character notices a trigger stone.

Pendulum Scythes (lvl 4)
Perception DC 17: The character notices thin slots in the floor.
Perception DC 22: There are slots in the ceiling too! (a DC: 15 Dungeoneering check tells you this is a scything blade trap).
Perception DC 22: The character spots the pressure plate that activates the trap.
Perception DC 27: The character spots the trap's control panel.

Flame Jet (lvl 8)
Perception DC 24: The character notices the nozzles (that shoot firey death).
Perception DC 28: The character spots the trap's control panel.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

I'd prefer that rogues get a +4 to using Perception for trapfinding. Finding traps should be as much a part of thieving skill/training as is disarming them. In fact, as there are many traps that one can simply avoid once they are discovered, it is more important.

 

[Celestian]

I come from an age were rogues (thieves) were the folks that detected and disarmed traps... thus my problem.

Why is it perception is a wisdom based ability and yet is not a ability that most rogues will have much of. Does it make much sense to depend on the cleric to find the trap (not by casting the find traps spell mind you) for the rogue? Sounds silly to me.

I let the rogue use his thievery to detect and disarm traps. I have a varying DC on traps (some harder/some easier) to find/disarm.

I really don't get that detect traps has been religated to the cleric(or some other wisdom based class) because it just doesn't make much sense to most people that have played D&D more than just 4e.