"Standard Thief S***"

[Remathilis]

I had made a sign (just black letters on white standard paper) that simply read "Searching for Traps" I would hold the sign up every time the DM described a door.

We were playing Tomb of Horrors, so I got bored saying it every 30 seconds...

As a rogue player, I appreciate the SOP. Scout, Sneak, Search, Repeat. My problem was how much time it took to do in game (essentially 1/5th of a dungeon was me 30 ft ahead rolling dice while everyone else chatted amongst themselves)

 

[Bagpuss]

... they are ahead of the party by at least 30 ft.
... they are attempting to move silently.
... they are searching for traps.

These are mutual exclusive activities.

Either

a) The party catches up with you because you are crawling along. (approximately 2.5ft a round)
b) The party stays 30ft behind you and starts to grumble about how long you are taking.
c) The party stays 30ft behind you and tries really hard to be quiet.

In case b & c the fighter in full plate is making more than enough noise to render your moving silently pretty pointless.

 

[Delta]

On the other hand ... I have played rogues before ... I know the tedium of repeating all of that stuff. It only makes sense. Unless speed is an issue, if I'm scouting ahead I'd do all that stuff all the time. If I don't establish a SOP, then it becomes a game of "can the DM catch me forgetting one of my standard steps".

Finally, does a procedure like this essentially nullify the fun of traps in a dungeon? Frankly, unless I'm running published adventures, traps are the least likely thing PCs will encounter. Maybe it's because I don't find them fun, and maybe it's because any reasonably cautious rogue is going to find them?

I do think there's an intrinsic wierdness to the mechanics of the thief class. Recently been studying OD&D rules -- of course original boxed set had fighter, cleric, wizard; thief only appeared in the first supplement, as kind of a new-mechanics experiment (as I see it). Prior to that, primary class functions were "hit/defend in melee" or "fire off spell resource". Now you've got this new mechanic where you can try stuff outside of melee, that usually fails, that you're not directly opposed in, an unlimited number of times per day.

The "thief stuff" is what fundamentally required the whole Skill system in 3E. I don't think D&D has ever totally digested the difference in mechanics. Sometimes I imagine making all thief abilities auto-functioning (like saving throws or elf vs. secret door), or limited-resource based (like spells).

Now I'm troubled with something like a tripwire over the 48th step in a stairwell... I think "geez, to find that thief will need to be in the habit of searching every step through the dungeon, yuck". Although if you consider the OD&D boxed set it was somewhat more palatable: your only option is to have a cleric turn on "find traps" which automatically works for a number of turns, so they just have to guess about the more dangerous part of the dungeon.

 

[Merkuri]

Personally, I hate the idea of punishing the characters for something the player forgot to specify, but his character would have known/remembered with no problem. IMO, a SOP is a good way to not punish the player for forgetting to do something, like move silently when opening a door, but at the same time making it perfectly clear what he's doing if he doesn't say otherwise.

Without a SOP you either have to punish the PCs for forgetting to mention something ("But you didn't SAY you opened the door slowly..."), without having the DM putting actions in the PCs' mouths, so to speak.

And about boring traps, Secrets of Xen'drik had a section about "encounter traps", which were more than the average trap. They were usually things that made attack rolls and had pieces that had AC, but were a part of the environment rather than a creature. They encouraged the whole party to get involved by attacking and whatnot, but the rogue still comes in handy because some parts of these traps could be avoided much easier and with less pain with a few sucessful DD checks.

 

[Korgoth]

I think that having a designated SOP is fine... the point of it is to not have to say those things that you will be saying in every baseline situation. So it's fine to write it out.

I like the idea of the sheet of pre-rolls. When I DM I constantly roll dice and fiddle with things behind the screen so the players never know what's going on back there anyway. Either way should work.

Of course, they should still make it clear when the SOP is in effect. And they can't complain if something gets triggered that is outside the bounds of the SOP. Also, I think the DM should keep track of how much time each iteration of the SOP actually takes. If it gets too lengthy they'll be using up light sources, etc. at an accelerated rate.

 

[Firedancer]

I too employ SOP, both as player and DM.
However, I do get the players to at least go over SOP for this particular group, as this does vary somewhat from group to group.

I have played games where SOP is not used. Can become boring for the other players, but it has also added to the game; the muscle bound barbarian getting really, really tired of these actions and pushing ahead of Mr. Cautious.

The other issue is in-game time. It takes time to perform the SOP for every stretch of corridor, door, room and staircase, rolling the dice drives this home. When its summarised as SOP the time in the dungeon seems so much less obvious (we the players are not so aware of it). This has impact on spell durations, prep time for foe etc.

 

[GreatLemur]

I've got to support the "traps aren't much fun" camp, here. I can definitely believe they could be used with good effect to surprise and shake up a party, but when they're treated as just a standard and expected feature of every adventure--a style of gameplay supported by all those class features* that specifically address traps--they just seem like a chore. It's especially unfortunate that dealing with them is usually reduced to one character making a few skill checks.


*And I ain't just talking about the Rogue. Can anyone explain to me why Barbarians of all classes get Trap Sense? Do you run into a lot of spring-loaded blades out on the wind-scoured steppes of your homeland, Thargor? WTF, people.

 

[The_Gneech]

*And I ain't just talking about the Rogue. Can anyone explain to me why Barbarians of all classes get Trap Sense? Do you run into a lot of spring-loaded blades out on the wind-scoured steppes of your homeland, Thargor? WTF, people.

Watch Conan the Barbarian, and you'll see why! Most fantasy barbarian-types have danger-sense that would make Spider-Man feel like a dullard.

-The Gneech

 

[Bagpuss]

In games I've played traps in the middle of corridors are rarely discovered and often set off, traps in more obvious places (doors and chests) are what rogue is useful for.

I've yet to found a party that enjoys exploring a dungeon at 2.5ft per round especially if you are asking the other other players what they are doing while the rogue searches for traps. Every single round he searches. More often than not the Barbarian or fighter will get annoyed at the pace and stroll off ahead of the rogue.

Rogue are okay for scouting, but not if they are going to stop every other round to search a 5ft square for traps.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I would weep tears of joy if my players would establish an SOP, instead of arguing about who's opening the door every... single... time....