Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whizbang Dustyboots" data-source="post: 3810585" data-attributes="member: 11760">Although some people decry 3E for setting RULES for doing everything, I still DM the way I DMed in 1E: If you're in a party without a rogue (or a cleric, in this case), and you want to disable a trap, obviously it's riskier than if you had a rogue (witness Ragglus' bang-up method of trap detection), but it's still got to be possible. Saying "nope, sorry, the RAW say you automatically fail to disarm the trap" is not just silly (although I'm not sure the RAW actually says that, so don't punch me in the neck), but it stops play for no good reason.This was the first time anyone in the campaign had hit a whole slew of traps (other than Renraw almost willfully getting hit by the ray of frost trap in Fibber's Cairn), and it kind of pissed off the players a little bit, in large part because the traps were one right after another. While realistic, it's not terribly rewarding unless there's a rogue along.There's another trap-laden module in the campaign's future -- they haven't hit it yet -- and I will probably remove the less interesting ones and replace them with either a wandering moster of the same CR as the trap or nothing.</blockquote>