Traps are way too hard to disarm

[Gort]

I ran a pendulum scythes trap as part of an encounter with a trio of spectres today, and it raised an issue that I think needs errata. It's really hard to disarm a trap using thievery now!

To disarm a pendulum scythes trap requires first a DC 27 perception check to spot the control box, which is pretty tough at level 4 (the level of the trap). Once you've done this, your would-be trap disarmer has to disengage from the encounter and carry out a skill challenge, in which he needs 4 successes before 2 failures, at DC 22!

Even if you're trained in thievery, and you have +4 dexterity (the highest the default array will allow at this level), you've only got +11 in thievery - chances are you're going to fail the skill challenge, after wasting about 4 rounds of the encounter.

Then, to add insult to injury, the trap goes into some kind of overload mode, where instead of a single pendulum blade, you get between two and five instead! So not only did you waste at least one minor action to spot the control panel, then at least two entire rounds attempting to disarm the trap fruitlessly, you actually made your situation worse! How on earth does this system make any sense? Why do traps get worse when their controls are tampered with? Why don't they just go at the "overload" speed whenever they're triggered?

My suggestions to fix this:

Lower the DCs for the skill challenge - bring the challenges in line with the suggested DCs for a hard skill challenge elsewhere in the book (so this trap would become a DC 17). Possibly medium DCs for normal traps, and hard DCs for elite traps would work better. They're only supposed to be as hard to deal with as a monster or two, after all.

Increase the number of failures allowed to 3, to bring the challenges in line with the normal skill challenge rules.

Instead of having the normal trap speed up when the challenge is failed, have a secondary trap on the control box which targets the disarmer personally, such as a poisoned spike, or glyph of warding or suchlike. At least then his party don't pay for his bad luck, and it makes a bit more sense.

As it is, there's not a lot of reason to attempt to disarm a trap using thievery - you're far better off using normal countermeasures, even if you're trained.

 

[Dalzig]

I've actually changed trap disarming to where you only need to succeed on 2-3 rolls, with little to no penalty for failure. The fact that the trap is still going should be penalty enough.

 

[Victim]

Hmm, I'm surprised the broad skill DC errata didn't apply to the example traps, since traps work sort of like skill challenge monsters. I thought the DCs before usually matched up to DCs from the table on p 42.

 

[doctorhook]

...Stalker0! Where are you?

Why do I always wanna hear from Stalker0 when the conversation turns to skill DCs? Oh, right; because he knows wtf.

Should traps have lower DCs? Should there be a different system of trap resolution? If so, how different?

 

[Stalker0]

Why do I always wanna hear from Stalker0 when the conversation turns to skill DCs? Oh, right; because he knows wtf.

Maybe I should put this in my sig

Gort, the problem your experiencing is a problem with the skill challenge system. Its design is simply too challenging for most parties to succeed regularly.

Now WOTC has errataed skill challenges. At the very least, you should raise the number of failure to 3. Further, WOTC has a new skill DC chart based on level, you may want to pick the hard DC for 4th level for your trap.

All that said, many people including myself do not feel WOTC's errata has really fixed the skill challenge system. There are several variants out there, I have created two that have met with some popularity. You can find those in my sig.

 

[Mr. Teapot]

Once you've done this, your would-be trap disarmer has to disengage from the encounter and carry out a skill challenge, in which he needs 4 successes before 2 failures, at DC 22!

Even if you're trained in thievery, and you have +4 dexterity (the highest the default array will allow at this level), you've only got +11 in thievery - chances are you're going to fail the skill challenge, after wasting about 4 rounds of the encounter.

With a +2 from using thieves tools, unless the rogue is an idiot. So he's at +13, which is okay. If he's still worried that he's not certain to disarm the trap, he could get some help via Aid Another (another +2, so +15) and/or Delay the Trap rather than Disarm (for a whopping +5!). So I'd say having a +18 or +20 vs a DC of 22 isn't bad at all.

The Perception DC is higher, but can be made by everyone in the party instead of a single rogue. I still wonder if it's too high, but I'm also less concerned by this.

 

[Aservan]

What about parties without a rogue? The idea in 4th was that you weren't supposed to be forced to take any one class. There were to be alternatives for each role. Warlock is the only other class that has thievery as a class skill but I don't know any Warlocks with a Dex of 18. Does that mean you need a Ranger with a feat spent as he is the only other class likely to have an 18 Dex? Maybe heavy blade/flail fighters should be forced into the thievery role as they usually have a good Dex? What if your party is a paladin, warlock, warlord, wizard, & sword mage? By the rules this is a well balanced party, but none of them are likely to have Dex at 18+.

 

[napoleonbuff]

What about parties without a rogue? The idea in 4th was that you weren't supposed to be forced to take any one class. There were to be alternatives for each role. Warlock is the only other class that has thievery as a class skill but I don't know any Warlocks with a Dex of 18. Does that mean you need a Ranger with a feat spent as he is the only other class likely to have an 18 Dex? Maybe heavy blade/flail fighters should be forced into the thievery role as they usually have a good Dex? What if your party is a paladin, warlock, warlord, wizard, & sword mage? By the rules this is a well balanced party, but none of them are likely to have Dex at 18+.

Just use a hard or even moderate DC and remove the chance of failure (as mentioned above, the trap continuing to harm the party is the failure).

To let players with high thievery really shine, just make DC+10 = 2 successes.

 

[Audrik]

What about parties without a rogue? The idea in 4th was that you weren't supposed to be forced to take any one class. There were to be alternatives for each role.

You're exactly right. You DON'T need a Rogue, or any other character with Thievery. In that case, I would expect the DM not to use this trap; at least not as written, or without some alternative method of defeating or avoiding it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I believe that there are a few problems with traps. One is the bizarre "conduct a skill challenge that doesn't follow the rules or pursue the goals of skill challenges" mechanics that some of the traps have. A skill challenge is supposed to involve the party, not make them stand aside while one party member makes 5 rolls.

The second problem is that you can simply smash them. Destroying the blades of the example trap one-by-one is a comparitively trivial act that guarantees success in disarming the trap, and is far, far more effective than trying to disable it with thievery.

My suggestion is to change the trap descriptions so that wherever they require a thievery skill challenge to disarm, they require a single thievery check. Take the critical failures right off. For the pendulum trap, thievery checks to disable each blade individually would also seem very appropriate.

If you really want the critical failures, then put them in as a penalty for not disarming the trap quickly. Have the specified critical failure occur a set number of rounds after first tampering with the trap (attacking it's components, failing to disarm components etc).

These changes mean that, in the absence of enemies, you can either
a) Run the gauntlet of the trap to the control panel and disable it quickly
b) Methodically destroy the blades one at a time
c) Methodically disarm the blades one at a time

Sure the trap itself isn't much of a threat on it's own - but that's part of the new edition to - most solo encounters won't be all that interesting: you have to build an interesting encounter using different elements.

Using the rules I gave above, we put a monster near the control panel, some spaces between the pendulum lines, and a bunch of monsters who have push and move-hindering attacks in those squares. Both players and monsters will aim to pin foes in the pendulum paths, but the monsters will switch the trap on and off to avoid it's effects, and will coordinate to trigger it where they need it. The players can destroy the pendulums one at a time as though they were foes, make thievery checks to disable the pendulums (which will probably be a bit quicker if they succeed), or attempt to get the thief to the control panel as quickly as possible to disable it there, and keep him alive until he succeeds.

The skill makes success easier, but the challenge can certainly be overcome with force of arms and tactical play.

Oh, I'd probably also have a rule that says "if you smash a control panel to a trap, you just ruin the ability to control the trap - it remains either on or off, you don't disable the trap itself". That means that a valid tactic in the above encounter is to get someone to the trap panel and smash it, putting the monsters and players on even ground with respect to trap attacks. If you just want to smash your way through a trap to stop it working, you have to smash the triggers or actuators.