D&D 5E Question on Ranger's and traps

[ScuroNotte]

Any trap designed to injure or tap an animal would be very simple to safely trigger with a stick. I think the trick would be noticing them in time.

Any trap that requires Thieves tools to disarm is not meant for beasts, but for the slaying of undesirable humanoid intruders.

At least that's the guideline I use.

But there are traps that are universally for both, which can lead to an argument to what requires thieves's tools.

 

[ScuroNotte]

Its not homebrew - read XGtE again... About countermeasures it says the following:

"If the characters discover a trap, be open to adjudicating their ideas for defeating it. The trap’s description is a starting point for countermeasures, rather than a complete definition."

I missed that. Thank you. Though I still wish they left it open vs placing the requirement in the description of the trap. Additionally, one could argue that regardless, you may not need to be proficient but still require the "tools" to disarm the trap

 

[5ekyu]

I missed that. Thank you. Though I still wish they left it open vs placing the requirement in the description of the trap. Additionally, one could argue that regardless, you may not need to be proficient but still require the "tools" to disarm the trap

A GM could by the rule allow or disallow countermeasures as they see fit for the trap. As long as it makes sense given the trap and their setting, thats not a problem, is it?

 

[Rya.Reisender]

Doesn't "disarm" mean "making it not function anymore without triggering it"? Poking a trap with a stick is just triggering it and not disarming, no? At least if someone told me he's going to disarm a bomb I wouldn't expect him to hit it from safe distance until it explodes.

 

[Nailen]

Any trap designed to injure or tap an animal would be very simple to safely trigger with a stick. I think the trick would be noticing them in time.

Any trap that requires Thieves tools to disarm is not meant for beasts, but for the slaying of undesirable humanoid intruders.

At least that's the guideline I use.

This is what I would have posted, if it hadn't been done already.

 

[Nailen]

Doesn't "disarm" mean "making it not function anymore without triggering it"? Poking a trap with a stick is just triggering it and not disarming, no? At least if someone told me he's going to disarm a bomb I wouldn't expect him to hit it from safe distance until it explodes.

I guess it depends what you want the end result to be.
a) simply to get past the trap without being caught - stick will do the job
b) pass by the trap without it being obvious that you've done so, or wish to rearm it - stick won't do the job

It's all pretty contextual and situational, imo. Why might the ranger in the OP wish to disarm the trap, rather than walk around it?

 

[S'mon]

Bear traps are to me an example trap that would not need thieves tools to set off or disarm if found without triggering.

I'd think a low DC Survival check (or appropriate* description) would be fine to set it off without being caught. To disable it without triggering a Thieves' Tools check seems appropriate.

*"I poke the trigger plate with my staff" would work - but cross off one staff.

 

[5ekyu]

I'd think a low DC Survival check (or appropriate* description) would be fine to set it off without being caught. To disable it without triggering a Thieves' Tools check seems appropriate.

*"I poke the trigger plate with my staff" would work - but cross off one staff.

This comes down to the reference from XGtE i quoted above - about the Gm being open to a variety of options for "defeating" a trap.

The official XGtE bear trap that is causing the Op so many questions gives as its defined *countermeasure* "A successful DC 10 Dexterity check using thieves’ tools disables it." That of course is in addition to the broad statement prior about this not being complete, just one example countermeasure.

So, as others want to consider the different wording and definitions of disarm vs set off or whatever, it boils down to XGtE used defeat and disable - not specifically set-off or disarm and leaves it wide open for the Gm to adjudicate those as they see fit.

Since a typical bear trap does not reload, i am good with set-off counting as defeating and disarming.
I also do not think you would need tools to set it again after you were safely past.

But, again, this is open to the Gm and open to the description and type of trap they describe.

 

[BookBarbarian]

But there are traps that are universally for both, which can lead to an argument to what requires thieves's tools.

Do you have an example?

In my mind traps for beast vs traps for adventurers serve different purposes. In the first case I want restrain or otherwise incapacitate while damage as little meat and/or hide as possible. In the latter I could care less.

I'm struggling to recognize an example that suits both.

 

[ScuroNotte]

Do you have an example?In my mind traps for beast vs traps for adventurers serve different purposes. In the first case I want restrain or otherwise incapacitate while damage as little meat and/or hide as possible. In the latter I could care less.I'm struggling to recognize an example that suits both.

I guess Rangers would also set traps for Favored Enemies.Examples could be a covered pit with spikes, a trip wire that either causes a cage to fall or cause a crossbow/log with spikes to harm the victim, a pressure dependent trap that causes victim's legs to be caught in a noose and hung upside down