Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
NEW TRAPS article!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Magus Coeruleus" data-source="post: 4432728" data-attributes="member: 1704"><p>That's why I'm thinking the best of both worlds may be to have an active check mod and a static passive DC for the trap. </p><p></p><p>Sure, active trap vs. passive PCs means you'll normally never have a less perceptive character notice the trap while the more perceptive one doesn't, but that's true for all uses of passive perception, insight, etc., and so totally consistent with 4e's design.</p><p></p><p>Once you get to active checks, if you use the static DC and active perception checks I don't think you need to worry about the fact that the probability of at least one person perceiving the trap gets very high given the number of attempts, because now you are assuming a party of PCs all spending actions to investigate the place, just like active checks for everything else. There is an opportunity cost involved in everyone making those checks, and I think they should earn the benefits.</p><p></p><p>I don't think it's much different than a scenario where a party ambles into a potential ambush (active stealth vs. passive perception) and gets into a fight with some stealthy foes who try to hide to get combat advantage or other benefits (active stealth vs. active perception). The only difference is that I don't I like active for both the trap and the PCs the way I'm okay with it for creatures using stealth, perhaps because I think there ought to be a bit more consistency in how effective a trap is at "hiding." A trap usually has one context and one set of circumstances that should prevent it from being exceptionally well or poorly hidden for a given encounter. I don't mind the roll for the passive scenario because really you're just throwing one d20 into the mix; doesn't matter whether you call it the trap's roll or a roll for the party as a whole. In fact, that's another idea. One could just use a static DC but instead of a passive check for the PCs or active checks for each PC, one d20 modified by each PC's perception. Again, 6 of one half a dozen of the other.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Magus Coeruleus, post: 4432728, member: 1704"] That's why I'm thinking the best of both worlds may be to have an active check mod and a static passive DC for the trap. Sure, active trap vs. passive PCs means you'll normally never have a less perceptive character notice the trap while the more perceptive one doesn't, but that's true for all uses of passive perception, insight, etc., and so totally consistent with 4e's design. Once you get to active checks, if you use the static DC and active perception checks I don't think you need to worry about the fact that the probability of at least one person perceiving the trap gets very high given the number of attempts, because now you are assuming a party of PCs all spending actions to investigate the place, just like active checks for everything else. There is an opportunity cost involved in everyone making those checks, and I think they should earn the benefits. I don't think it's much different than a scenario where a party ambles into a potential ambush (active stealth vs. passive perception) and gets into a fight with some stealthy foes who try to hide to get combat advantage or other benefits (active stealth vs. active perception). The only difference is that I don't I like active for both the trap and the PCs the way I'm okay with it for creatures using stealth, perhaps because I think there ought to be a bit more consistency in how effective a trap is at "hiding." A trap usually has one context and one set of circumstances that should prevent it from being exceptionally well or poorly hidden for a given encounter. I don't mind the roll for the passive scenario because really you're just throwing one d20 into the mix; doesn't matter whether you call it the trap's roll or a roll for the party as a whole. In fact, that's another idea. One could just use a static DC but instead of a passive check for the PCs or active checks for each PC, one d20 modified by each PC's perception. Again, 6 of one half a dozen of the other. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
NEW TRAPS article!
Top