Last night I did the first chunk of the Tomb of Horrors 3.5 adaptation. I was glad that the traps had save and disable DCs, to make the Tomb more playable and a little less arbitrary. But I wasn't really prepared for the rogue to just take 20 on all the search checks! This means they automatically find virtually all the traps, which takes a bit out of the Horrors. In an adventure I wrote there would be things preventing spending 8 hours on searching a hallway (patrols, time pressure, etc), but the Tomb has none of these, and I don't particularly want to add an arbitrary wandering monster table. I suppose this is partially a general problem with traps and taking 20. Any thoughts?
Running the Tomb of Horrors in 3.5
- Thread starter BigCat
- Start date
GlassJaw
Hero
Celebrim
Legend
If I understand right, the point is that he is using the adaptation.
To be perfectly frank, I think its a pretty crumby adaptation. It doesn't in any way capture the spirit of the original. In the original, most of the tomb was accessible to a clever 1st level character. The Tomb was mostly a test of player problem solving ability and of a player's ability to both be cautious and act desively in a crisis, and not the character's abilities. The monsters in the original were fairly weak and for the most part easily dispatched. In the adaptation, based on play experience, the worst horrors appear to be the monsters.
In the original, with a good group of players, you couldn't expect to catch them in any but the first few traps. As soon as a good group of players figured out that this was a different sort of adventure than they were used to, they'd adapt. You are supposed to realize that you are under no time pressure at all and act appropriately. For example, we started out searching for traps in every square. The first time my 12th level thief failed his find trap roll and ended up in a pit, we altered our search procedure so that it didn't depend on a die roll. Effectively, that's what your player's have done too, but the point is, "I take 20." is a lot less interesting of a solution to finding pit traps and a lot less demanding on the player's imagination than, "I fill a couple large sacks with dirt, tie a ropes to them, and have the barbarian and the fighter throw them ahead of us." or, "I quaff a potion of flying, and then gingerly put my weight on the floor to see if it gives beneath me.", or, "I summon some medium sized animals to walk ahead of us." or whatever your favorite solution is.
Creative solutions like that involving rope and 10' poles and normally unused utility spells is what 'Tomb of Horrors' is all about. If you don't experience that, you really haven't experienced the module IMO. And the adaptation is a pretty horrible recreation of the experience of the module.
You are correct to assert that the problem is with the 'take 20' and the abstract search method. Exactly what should be done about that is a matter of opinion. There are some here who will argue that the way you see things playing out is exactly how they should play out, and that adventures are meant to be tests of character ability and not player ability. I think they are robbing themselves of alot of fun.
To be perfectly frank, I think its a pretty crumby adaptation. It doesn't in any way capture the spirit of the original. In the original, most of the tomb was accessible to a clever 1st level character. The Tomb was mostly a test of player problem solving ability and of a player's ability to both be cautious and act desively in a crisis, and not the character's abilities. The monsters in the original were fairly weak and for the most part easily dispatched. In the adaptation, based on play experience, the worst horrors appear to be the monsters.
In the original, with a good group of players, you couldn't expect to catch them in any but the first few traps. As soon as a good group of players figured out that this was a different sort of adventure than they were used to, they'd adapt. You are supposed to realize that you are under no time pressure at all and act appropriately. For example, we started out searching for traps in every square. The first time my 12th level thief failed his find trap roll and ended up in a pit, we altered our search procedure so that it didn't depend on a die roll. Effectively, that's what your player's have done too, but the point is, "I take 20." is a lot less interesting of a solution to finding pit traps and a lot less demanding on the player's imagination than, "I fill a couple large sacks with dirt, tie a ropes to them, and have the barbarian and the fighter throw them ahead of us." or, "I quaff a potion of flying, and then gingerly put my weight on the floor to see if it gives beneath me.", or, "I summon some medium sized animals to walk ahead of us." or whatever your favorite solution is.
Creative solutions like that involving rope and 10' poles and normally unused utility spells is what 'Tomb of Horrors' is all about. If you don't experience that, you really haven't experienced the module IMO. And the adaptation is a pretty horrible recreation of the experience of the module.
You are correct to assert that the problem is with the 'take 20' and the abstract search method. Exactly what should be done about that is a matter of opinion. There are some here who will argue that the way you see things playing out is exactly how they should play out, and that adventures are meant to be tests of character ability and not player ability. I think they are robbing themselves of alot of fun.
darjr
I crit!
Wow that is my very exp with the tomb in 3.5. Perfect.
And I think leads to an Idea on how to fix it. Make the take 20's come with an explanation or description. Something akin to using sacks of dirt or beasts of burden. Without it not even taking 20 should work. After all taking 20 involves all this kind of thing anyway, doesn't it?
And I think leads to an Idea on how to fix it. Make the take 20's come with an explanation or description. Something akin to using sacks of dirt or beasts of burden. Without it not even taking 20 should work. After all taking 20 involves all this kind of thing anyway, doesn't it?
+5 Keyboard!
First Post
First of all, taking 20 to Search for traps pretty much means you're rogue found them all, and set them all off... and is most likely dead. Next Rogue, please!
Having run both the original years back and the v.3.5 update only a few months ago, I found the latter to be a very good conversion and damn was it deadly. My group never made it past the trapped entrance corridor (ya, know, the real one in the middle - not the two dummy entrances).
Having run both the original years back and the v.3.5 update only a few months ago, I found the latter to be a very good conversion and damn was it deadly. My group never made it past the trapped entrance corridor (ya, know, the real one in the middle - not the two dummy entrances).
Creamsteak
Explorer
I believe the rules are that searching for traps doesn't generally trigger them. It's disable device where the trap would go off if they are taking 20.
+5 Keyboard!
First Post
And thus the debate begins.
So, what you're saying is that if the rogue searches a 5-ft. square in front of him, taking 20, fails to find the trap, he isn't going to "find" the trap by other means (assuming taking 20 wasn't good enough to find the trap - high DC), ya know, like stepping into that square and springing something nasty?
Anyway, all opinion aside, if you play by the rules, here's what you need to know about taking 20:
Taking 20 to Search a room for a secret door or a hidden compartment or something else not readily apparent, is a perfectly viable as a use of taking 20. However, like it says above, if there's a penalty for failure such as accidentally setting off a trap, taking 20 is just a good way to set traps off and get your character killed.
Thus, I say "Bring on the next rogue! This one's dead!"
I hope this addresses your concern. The Tomb of Horrors Revised should be plenty challenging to your player if you use the take 20 rules correctly.
So, what you're saying is that if the rogue searches a 5-ft. square in front of him, taking 20, fails to find the trap, he isn't going to "find" the trap by other means (assuming taking 20 wasn't good enough to find the trap - high DC), ya know, like stepping into that square and springing something nasty?
Anyway, all opinion aside, if you play by the rules, here's what you need to know about taking 20:
SRD said:
Taking 20 to Search a room for a secret door or a hidden compartment or something else not readily apparent, is a perfectly viable as a use of taking 20. However, like it says above, if there's a penalty for failure such as accidentally setting off a trap, taking 20 is just a good way to set traps off and get your character killed.
Thus, I say "Bring on the next rogue! This one's dead!"
I hope this addresses your concern. The Tomb of Horrors Revised should be plenty challenging to your player if you use the take 20 rules correctly.
Last edited:
Creamsteak
Explorer
That's a completely different statement than this:
Your first statement is that taking 20 implies that you take all the potential results, including failure. However, normally, failure for searching for a trap does not imply triggering the trap. Even if someone takes 20 on a search and fails to find the trap because of a high DC, they still wouldn't trigger the trap from the act of searching. What they do later is entirely seperate.
Also note you can search a surface from 10 feet away, as per this line:
Mishihari Lord
First Post
So maybe the problem is with the search skill. Add house rules that the trap is set off you fail and the roll is a 1, and that you incur a -10 penalty if you search without touching. You can then keep take 20 for appropriate circumstances, and the Tomb is fun again.
+5 Keyboard!
First Post
Creamsteak said:
Right. And they still wouldn't know there was a trap there and unless the player was metagaming, the character would move forward thinking it was safe and trigger the trap.
Anyway, there was a lot of snark in my previous post. Sorry. I was in that kind of mood.
To address this issue of in general you can search from 10 feet away, remember that does not mean always or most of the time. It's a general statement that does not imply that it is meant to apply to all situations.
With my above example, taking 20 to Search for a pressure plate, would entail the following:
Pressure plate in a 5-ft. square that activates a swinging pendulum trap when stepped on.
The Search DC is 30.
Rogue with a +anything modifier (even +20) takes 20 to Search that square. By the rules, taking 20 means that you will automatically fail before you succeed. Thus, the rogue takes a look from 10 ft. away, sees nothing... gets up to 5 ft. away... sees nothing... gets right up to the trap... thinks maybe there's something peculiar... Searches each part of that square inch by inch as he scoots forward, but still nothing until BAM! he is right on top of the pressure plate and activates the trap before having a success. Swing.... slash! Badly wounded or dead rogue.
That's how I see it. YMMV.
Similar Threads
