D&D 5E Traps: yay or nay?

[generic]

I use traps when it makes sense for a trap to be there, and the traps that I use make sense for who might have set that trap.

If you go into a goblin lair, there will be traps that are easy to spot if you have darkvision,easy to bypass once you notice them, need to be reset manually once triggered, and that tend towards crippling and noise making, rather than fatal. They will also not be on obvious thoroughfares (unless they are manually triggered). They are there to draw attention to intruders, and if they happen to kill someone who isn't a goblin, great!

If you go into a demilich's lair, you'll get traps that are very hard to spot, hard to bypass, incredibly fatal and horridly unfair. They are there to make sure that anyone who found the lair dies or is utterly discouraged from proceeding, all without the demilich being disturbed. If you do get far enough to disturb the demilich, expect them to evacuate and leave something nasty behind: you've proven yourself a threat to them, and they've got millenia of unlife ahead of them. No sense risking things.

In between you've got variations based on how competent at using safeguards the normal denizens of the area are (ie - goblins aren't going to have many fatal traps, because the consequences and chance of screwing up are too high, but the demilich literally never walks through his dungeon, so traps can be fatal and easily triggered by accident), what the denizens are immune to (ie - an Azer base is probably full of environmental fire, with some deliberate fatal poisons thrown in, since azers are immune to both, while their foes the Efreeti, are not immune to poison), and how much time, effort and skill at trapmaking the denizens have (ie - azers are highly disciplined master craftsmen, constantly in a state of war, so expect traps).

I agree with your reasoning. Kobolds have crude traps that are saplings covered in daggers, Efreeti would erect permanent wall of fire traps that they can just walk through.

 

[5ekyu]

I don't entirely agree with any of this.

I'm not designing the dungeon as a "game" and traps are one of the areas where that really shows up. Traps are placed by intelligent creatures in intelligent locations. They are created for a certain purpose, and usually that purpose is related to something other than PC adventurers.

For example, traps to prevent thieves in the city are tailored to protect against the typical thieves of the city. Probably 1st to 3rd level thieves. Wealthier individuals would have more elaborate traps to protect more valuable things, and they would be harder to detect and/or disarm, and more disabling.

On the other hand, the tomb of an ancient wizard that wants to keep his stuff for eternity. Traps galore, magical and mundane, and very hard to detect and/or disable, and most of them designed to kill. The "foreshadowing" is the fact that the characters are choosing to enter a tomb built for/by an wizard of some power. Oh, and the fact that it has remained unsuccessfully plundered for thousands of years by other foolish adventurers just like them.

Now there may be some similarities in the traps, because the same trap-maker made them. But any decent trap-maker will also use that as a gotcha, with one being different for no reason (and any high level tomb robber will be expecting that).

The "split second to react" is called a saving throw. Depending on what they are doing, it could be more than that. But there's no "should be" about it. Again, it's all dependent upon who the trap was built by, for what purpose, and the skill of the creatures they expected to trigger the trap.

In many cases, the only reason the PCs survive (actually, they are involved in one such dungeon right now), is because the traps have either been sprung, or the tomb is so old they aren't functioning properly anymore. In this case it's both - many tomb robbers have attempted (and failed), but in the process set off more and more of the traps. Those traps that they could get around, or that reset continued to cause difficulty for later ones. But a portion of the tomb has been compromised by the elements. What was once sealed and dry now has a stream running through it, and hundreds of years of humidity have caused the wooden portions of the tomb to rot away, and iron and steel portions to rust, and poisons have lost their potency. The traps are often still dangerous, but not anywhere close to the degree they once were.

The second part of the tomb was more protected from the elements although it too had been plundered. The foreshadowing was the dead corpses they found, some of them still impaled a la "Indiana Jones"

Because the world is full of tomb robbers (adventurers, monsters, etc.), magic, and the elements, a great many tombs are in this state to one degree or another. But none of this has anything to do with designing for the PCs. It's all based on a world-building approach and what makes sense. And the players have to consider that when they decide they're going to enter someplace or not. Right now they are leaving the tomb because they've decided it looks too dangerous to continue. They will return later, possibly in a year or more (in-world and game time) like they've done before.

I tend to agree here. The approach that you took issue with feels to me like a playstyle i have seen,employed in indie type games, in diceless games etc. In those types of games, in my experience, you have way way less a mechanical foundation. The "resolution" mechanics are much more a collaborative come to agreement on good scene together process and less on any mechanical representation. Key is, those are fine, great, enjoy them, but the chargen, focus, development etc is all geared around those foci too.

What the above feels like is applying that resolution system on top of and already existing resolution system, so everything is double helpful or maybe even the existing mechanics are tossed aside or put in the closet most of the time.

It is not required obviously one use any piece of the rules of course. If i were going to use say the dnd combat system for our fights but indie resolution for out of combat stuff, that would be great... But i would also marry that with say the Ability Score Proficiencies no-skills or tools DMG options or some other easier to chargen, loosey goosey system choices.

Want the mechanics to marry with the playstyle, not one pushed into background, hidden away like the "cousin" nobody talks about until they get out of the cellar.

Sent from my VS995 using EN World mobile app

 

[Ristamar]

"Yay" with a major caveat: use passive scores (perception, investigation, etc) to adjudicate the bulk of simple trap finding. Throw in circumstantial modifiers (lighting, secondary skills, etc) to add some variance. If nothing else, just roll a stealth DC for traps.

Simple or instant effect traps are typically obfuscated, inert, and don't deliver much of a bang in success or failure. Their potential discovery relies almost exclusively on player action, so many DMs will offer clues to the nature of nearby traps, but these clues will often be too obvious or too vague to offer any real entertainment to the players at the table.

You don't need to turn every trap finding opportunity into a mini puzzle. Most traps don't require subtle clues or clever foreshadowing. Save subtle and clever for complex traps that are worth developing into full blown encounters. What little value simple traps can add to game is not worth the risk of destroying momentum. Each one has the potential to grind the game to a halt if the players get overly cautious or paranoid.

One or two obvious signals near the start of a large area or complex is more than enough to send a message to the players that the act of exploration is not safe. Alternatively, use a mix of rumor and hearsay away from your sites if you need to create a sense of imminent danger ("You're going to the abandoned tower west of the town? I hear it's littered with booby traps. Ol' Gristle went there in search of treasure and he barely escaped with his life!").

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[redrick]

Yay.

Traps as puzzle and atmosphere are certainly the best — well telegraphed that encourage the players to find creative solutions to disarm or avoid. I love reading about traps that others have used in their adventures and campaigns to give me ideas.

That being said, I'm not above using more simple attrition style traps in a straight dungeon adventure. They're not overly thrilling, but they don't take up much table time either, and they reward players who have made choices to be particularly observant, be it in character choices or play choices. (Using a real light source in a dungeon instead of relying on dark-vision, for instance.) These traps should be minor — they are meant to hinder invaders, but not kill or maim the inhabitants who might accidentally trip one while going about their daily business. A dungeon crawl should have a constant low-level threat of danger. I think it helps to ground the players in the actual space, instead of just fast forwarding between encounters. Traps, hazards and wandering monsters provide this.

 

[Cyrinishad]

Yay.

Traps, traps, and more traps... A DM should be ready, willing, and able to use every tool in the tool-box.

 

[Blue]

Do you use traps?

I use traps when they are fun puzzles rather than just a tax on hit points.

I use traps when I have a character that has invested in being able to disarm traps, so they get to use that part of their character and show it off.

I use traps to set the tone, show places that are dangerous, and give a feel for the inhabitants (a simple beartrap vs. a clockwork blowgun trap built into the walls, a trap to capture vs. a trap to kill smeared with poison, etc.). Sometimes this means there are traps just because the inhabitants would put some.

I use traps as hazards in combat to make it more dynamic and exciting. Often the primary purpose is the conditions they inflict, not the damage they do. (Sometimes they will be leading into combat instead, and then a big area blast of damage is what I'm looking for as it changes the assumptions of an encounter and pushes it out of the PCs comfort zone.

I use traps when time is short so the characters need to choose to go fast and take some lumps or go slow and burn up precious time.

I use complex or multi-part traps as puzzles. These most often protect some objective needed to move forward. These can do as much (or more) damage as a combat encounter, they are a pivotal scene. I might also do these when the party is getting pursued by a force they don't want to engage so they are short on time.

In most cases, I don't use traps as a significant portion of daily attrition like an encounter would be.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Traps are great, puzzle traps the best as it gives the players a prime chance to use their noggins.

 

[Stalker0]

I use traps...but significantly deadlier than the base ones.

If a trap is a by itself encounter, then it needs the sting of all monsters encountered rolled into one. I’m not saying auto death for a character...but at least the possibility.

Otherwise they are just boring speed bumps.

Now if they are a part of an encounter, then they are fine as is

 

[Sunseeker]

Traps are useful in gauntlets, and moreso when time-constrained. When the choice is between taking 1d6 HP from some darts or taking all the time in the world to open the trap, the trap is meaningless. When the choice is take 1d6 from darts while you're running from a giant boulder and maybe getting lucky disarming something on the fly, then traps are useful and matter.