Traps with location/proximity triggers = Rogue killers?

[jgsugden]

Some questions to ask yourself:

1.) Should the trap be discovered? If someone put a trap there, they had a reason. What was that reason? To guard it from thieving adventurers? If so, then the party should need to outsmart the villian by guessing correctly when to search. A trap going off is not a bad thing for the game ... although it can b bad for a PC.

2.) How many rolls are you making? If a rogue wants to search every square in a huge room, do you actually need to roll for every square? Or can you just figure out how many things he might have a chance of finding with a search check, roll the dice that many times (plus a few extra for concealment issues) and then use those results to describe what the PC finds? I use this approach in my games. It causes no problems and allows PCs to search an entire room in a few minutes of game time and a few seconds of real time.

3.) Do your traps make sense? Magical traps in a natural cavern occupied by animals don't make much sense. Make sure you can explain how the trap got there before including it.

 

[Parlan]

Basically, the book left out any mention of the old school traps like those when you open something, and NONE of the sample traps are appropriate.

Basically, I'm frustrated with the traps crap in 3.5 as they are unrealistic and troublesome. I'll just have to go with giving the rogue an automatic roll as a sort of "Spidey Trap Sense" at the trap's Seach DC -10 to sense if something is there, and then let the caller take it from there.

Is it just me, or are people re-enacting a previous thread instead of dealing with the original poster’s actual question?

If I’m understanding this right, the orig poster believes that the DMG only lists “proximity triggers” as the trigger for traps, and therefore, that these traps cannot be triggered by opening a chest, for example.

Unfortunately, I don t have the books with me, and don t really remember the trap section that well. I have a hard time believing that there is no way to trap a chest in 3.5.

Even there weren t, couldn t you just use DM-fiat to say that opening the chest will trigger the trap and searching the chest for traps will allow the trap to be detected?

Can someone else answer this better than I?

 

[Darklone]

Firetrap spell. Glyphs. All these and others can trap a chest.

 

[Pax]

Parlan, if that's the case, than Anubis needs glasses.

Second example trap in the DMG, on page 70, is location triggered ... and a location trigger would be the classic "pressute plate in the hallway that triggers the trap over the door". Directly a la the Arrow Trap on the first level of the Suless Citadel module.

Let's see, in order ... proximity, location, location, touch, location, location, touch, location, location, location, location, location, touch, touch ... well, those're the example CR1 traps, and I only see one proximity trap.

And it has a search DC of 20. Not to mention a disable DC of 20.

So obviously the designers intended Proximity-Trigger traps to be findable with a search check ... and also able to be disabled.

 

[Pielorinho]

Is it just me, or are people re-enacting a previous thread instead of dealing with the original poster’s actual question?

Fair enough -- I'll try not to follow meanderings off the OP .

If I’m understanding this right, the orig poster believes that the DMG only lists “proximity triggers” as the trigger for traps, and therefore, that these traps cannot be triggered by opening a chest, for example.

Unfortunately, I don t have the books with me, and don t really remember the trap section that well. I have a hard time believing that there is no way to trap a chest in 3.5.

Even there weren t, couldn t you just use DM-fiat to say that opening the chest will trigger the trap and searching the chest for traps will allow the trap to be detected?

Can someone else answer this better than I?

Maybe I can: Traps in the SRD

Indeed, looking at the list of traps, I notice several things:
1) Anubis is right that there are too few "touch" traps.
2) He's wrong that "touch" traps don't satisfy what he's looking for (I think): near as I can tell, "touch" just means that the trap goes off due to some form of physically touching the trapped object. You can easily say that the type of touch needed to set off a trapped chest, for example, is lifting the chest's lid.
3) Even if I'm wrong on point #2, there's absolutely nothing preventing a good DM from modifying a trap away from the description in the DMG, such that the trigger changes from "touch" to "open the lid" -- or even from "space" or "proximity" to "open the lid." The javelin trap, the camouflaged pit trap, the hail of needles, the burning hands, the scything blade, and more could all be triggered by opening a chest or a door.

Changing the trigger type doesn't, near as I can tell, change the CR, so go wild without fear of consequences.

Remember, your job is to keep the session interesting, not to adhere like superglue to the DMG.

Daniel

 

[Liquidsabre]

Actually, Liquidsabre, that's part of my point. This is not some big thing at the end of the stage. This is just a little room off to the side with some treasure in it with a single trap guarding it and is not meant to be a climax in any way.

Well good, no worries then. If it isn't a big instant death trap (as "climax" traps only should be for low to mid lvls, and for real dangerous places for mid to high lvls) then you have nothing to worry about. The proximity trap goes off, some rolls made and maybe someone takes some damage. The rogue finds and disables the trap. I'm sorry but where's the problem with this? I see none.

Well traveled corridors will NOT be trapped, often used rooms will NOT be trapped, if they are trapped such places willl have an easy "disable" mechanism for dwelling folk to make use of. The risks of a normal joe that lives and works there far outweights the setting of a trap for security.

Traps are never placed randomly as time and effort go into building and setting up such things. There will always be a reason and often times it is discernable by the PCs from information gathering, the setting, or experience (i.e. they have encountered one trap already and now know that the placed is deviously trapped and will be cautious).

All in all Anubis, I believe your fears are unfounded here. No need to house rule anything. Do player's need a "spidey roll" for a monster ambush? Or how about a freak lightning storm? Answer: No.

Both cases are equivalent to a trap encounter. There'll either be indicators (monster tracks, villager info, scout info, etc/dark clouds on the horizon) or a good reason behind it (PCs angered someone who hired some gnolls to ambush or a powerful druid summons the storm to attack the PCs in retaliation.)

 

[swrushing]

Basically, I'm frustrated with the traps crap in 3.5 as they are unrealistic and troublesome.

While it is not included with the books, much like dice, a GM is a required component for playing DND.

Assuming you don't already have one, you can probably get one at your FLGS or may be able to find one online. Whichever venue you use to try and locate one, they might not have one just sitting on the shelf and so some additional time may be required to pre-order one.

Seriously, did you take the traps section in the DMg to be an exhaustive list of all possible traps one can use or just some example traps and mechanic for them?

If it ever occured to you that "hey, there are other types of traps not covered here" why all the fretting and flustering about how the partial list did not include one you wanted?

Its a side stage room of little import. If putting a challenge in it that wont blow up your game and roast your hamster and crap on your corn flakes is this much trouble and worry and stress for you... the traps write ups are the least of your worries.

stick something in the room and start spending time worrying about your characters and how best to highlight them.