Rogues, Spot, and Searching for Traps

[Grayhawk]

Taking 10 or 20 assumes that the PC rolled a 1 at least once.

Taking 10 gives the same result as if the PC rolled a 10, nothing here about going through the numbers from 1 to 10.

Even if taking 20 means that you 'roll' all the numbers from 1 to 20, it doesn't matter, as a 1 doesn't indicate failure on a skill check anymore than a 20 indicate an automatic success.

 

[Eye Tyrant]

Even if taking 20 means that you 'roll' all the numbers from 1 to 20, it doesn't matter, as a 1 doesn't indicate failure on a skill check anymore than a 20 indicate an automatic success.

Unless you've decided to use the variant: automatic hits and misses(DMG25)
as I have...

I still don't assume that taking 10 or 20 means that a 1 or 20 will result... only numerous failures before success.

 

[Urbannen]

Even if the DM rolls the Search/Spot check to search for traps (which is completely appropriate), the party is still wasting huge amounts of game time taking their 10s and 20s while searching every single square space for traps.

Searching for traps seems to be a completely visual activity. We know this because there is no penalty for failure. If finding a trap also required touching or prodding the target area, then there would have to be a chance the trap could go off. Since there is no chance of this happening, it really must be visual.

The visual clues that tell a rogue that a trap is present are the same whether he is close to the trap, far away from the trap, actively searching, or passing casually by. The slightly extended stone that's actually a pressure plate, the trace of burn from a fireball trap, the glyph that should really be visible to anyone - a rogue passing casually by would see these things, or have a chance to see them. Why does he have to spend 6 seconds just for his brain to register, "Oh, a trap!"

But wait, I'm wrong, Search is not a completely visual activity, since according to the rules you can make Search checks while blind with a mere -4 to the check. While blind and groping around in darkness, you can search for a glyph of warding and find it but not set it off. While blind you can find a pressure plate and not set off the accompanying pit trap. How, umm, well, I wish I could say "realistic", but I can't. The Search skill mechanic is badly conceived and its game functions could easily be subsumed by other skills, namely Spot and Disable Device.

Either that or it could be redefined to apply to all active uses of the senses, including active Listen checks, and be usable from a distance and as a move action. Thus redefined, a rogue could move at half speed and say "I'm looking around for signs of traps," and get a check for any space he can visually detect, with penalties for distances.

Hmm, actually, I like that solution quite a bit. That way we keep a sacred cow, the Search Skill, but parties can make decent progress through dungeons at half movement (which is as fast as they should be moving anyway), but not missing traps. You can "search" the horizon, which right now entails a Spot check, even though the activity is the same as a Search check, just farther away. Hmm.

 

[Legildur]

Just because I'm bored, I'll say it once more (my emphasis):

Stonecunning: This ability grants a dwarf a +2 racial bonus on Search checks to notice unusual stonework, such as sliding walls, stonework traps, new construction (even when built to match the old), unsafe stone surfaces, shaky stone ceilings, and the like. Something that isn’t stone but that is disguised as stone also counts as unusual stonework. A dwarf who merely comes within 10 feet of unusual stonework can make a Search check as if he were actively searching, and a dwarf can use the Search skill to find stonework traps as a rogue can. A dwarf can also intuit depth, sensing his approximate depth underground as naturally as a human can sense which way is up.

That should deal with most pit traps in a dungeon environment. A dwarven rogue or ranger would suffice

 

[Pax]

Situation: Halfling Rogue creeping down a tunnel as point man... "I'm looking for traps and whatnot (MS and Hiding)"...

The Rogue is not actively Searching any given 5' square...

Then he only finds them immediately after he TRIGGERS them. If he doesn't Search ... he doesn't find. It's just that simple.

 

[Eye Tyrant]

Just because I'm bored, I'll say it once more (my emphasis):



That should deal with most pit traps in a dungeon environment. A dwarven rogue or ranger would suffice

So then, forget the fact that this particular rogue is a halfling and figure that all future rogues in my game will be dwarves? Or give all rogues stonecunning, which should only apply to Dwarves? And what about all the other types of traps that don't involve stonework?

Doesn't really seem to address the issue, but I'm probably missing the point :\

 

[Grayhawk]

Unless you've decided to use the variant: automatic hits and misses(DMG25)
as I have...

I still don't assume that taking 10 or 20 means that a 1 or 20 will result... only numerous failures before success.

My apologies if the following seem overly nitpicky.

The variant where a 1 is calculated as a -10 has to do with attack rolls, not skill checks.

Even if you applied it to skill checks, a roll of 1 still wouldn't indicate an automatic failure. You could have a Search of +20, roll a 1 and still notice something with a DC of 10.

And there's nothing in the take 10 mechanic that indicates that you get 'numerous failures before success'. Taking 10 takes the exact same amount of time as a normal skill check, you just choose to settle for an average result.

I really don't want to sound pedantic, but by the rules there's no risk associated with Searching for traps. I can see why you'd want to change that, but that would be a house rule. (Not that there's anything wrong with that...)

 

[Eye Tyrant]

I really don't want to sound pedantic, but by the rules there's no risk associated with Searching for traps.

I agree with that for sure, unless the trap has a location or proximity trigger, in which case it seems logical that a Rogue that uses Search and misses the Pit Trap will probably fall in (provided that the pit actually encompasses the entire area that the Rogue has to get across).

 

[jgsugden]

We've seen it stated a few times by various WotC folk - there is no penalty for failing a search check.

If there were restrictions on taking 10 with search, they'd be mentioned in the search skill description. Taking 10 is fine. It takes no longer than normal.

Similarly, taking 20 is allowed. I don't have my book with me, but IIRC, it is even used as an example of taking 20.

As a house rule, I added a fourth option for skill checks. By taking thrice the normal amount of time, a careful check may be performed with the PC rolling a d10 and adding 10 to his result.

The game is designed so that incredibly careful PCs will pretty much never set off traps, but those PCs will suffer from lost durations on spells and role playing ramifications of taking 20 on searching every sqaure of the dungeon (ie; 15 wandering encounters instead of 2). PCs showing average levels of attention will miss hard traps and find easy traps (taking 10 or rolling for average). Careless PCs that blunder through a dungeon wll set off all traps. Remember: traps are not supposed to be avoided every time they are present. PCs are supposed to set them off sometimes. If they don't, then the traps are meaningless.

Also rememeber that PCs can find other ways to locate traps and to avoid their effect. A charm spell can be used to get an enemy to reveal the location of traps. A domination spell can force a foe to set off traps for you. A summon spell can be used as a 'trap locater'. Cleric's have a spell to help them locate traps like a rogue. Some PCs ignore traps - I know of a dwarven monk that used to rely upon his high hit points, high saves, high AC and SR to avoid traps.

Using the system I outlined in a post above and with the expectation that PCs will set off some traps unless unreasonably careful, I have no problem with traps in my game. If you're having problems, give it a try and see if it works.

 

[Legildur]

So then, forget the fact that this particular rogue is a halfling and figure that all future rogues in my game will be dwarves? Or give all rogues stonecunning, which should only apply to Dwarves? And what about all the other types of traps that don't involve stonework?

Doesn't really seem to address the issue, but I'm probably missing the point :\

Not at all. I was just reinforcing that dwarves have a natural advantage in this area in that they don't need to spend time searching for stonework traps, which would certainly account for a significant proportion of dungeon traps in most games.

However, since you have a halfling (which I had a lot of success with in a previous game), then you need to get stonecunning to make things easier for yourself. The 3.0 Songs and Silence had the Dungeon Delver (granted stonecunning and darkvision at different levels) and I think the Compete Warrior's Dark Hunter (stonecunning and darkvision again I believe) would also meet your needs.