What do you do to make traps more interesting?

hong said:
Replace them with things that fight back.
That's basically it. I generally don't care for traps as a player or a DM. The only reason I ever put them in my games is to make the PCs with trapfinding feel good about themselves.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Traps are a wierd bunch. Traps are the only encounter thing in the game that is meant for one person to deal with. That usually leads to a series of boring search and disarm checks for the other players. I try to make traps more interactive, allowing multiple ways of disarming with multiple triggers.
 

hong said:
Replace them with things that fight back.

I try not to overuse traps - but on the other hand, if my players put points into searching for (and especially disabling) traps, I want them to feel like they've used them wisely. Traps are often overused and not logically thought out.

Black Moria said:
I also have some traps designed such that they can't be disarmed by conventional means because the trap mechanism is behind a barrier of some sort, like a door or wall. It means that the party has to be creative to bypass or negate the trap.

Koewn said:
The only ones that were of any interest, really, were the ones the party couldn't get around

I find that this is my view a lot of the time, too. The problem with it is that it cheapens or obviates the need for the disable device skill... I'm considering using disable device as a "disable or bypass device" sort of skill. I'm thinking of Raiders of the Lost Ark; when Indy locates the dart trap in the final chamber at the very beginning of the film, he finds the trap, but there's no plausible way to "disarm" it. Instead, he bypasses it, by avoiding the pressure plates, at least for a while. Of course, Indy sets off every trap in the place...

Joshua Randall said:
For a different perspective, I look at traps this way: they are yet another way to force the PCs to use up resources.
...<snip>
So I don't mind that (sometimes) the trap is solved with just a die roll. After all, combat is solved with just a bunch of dice rolls, yes?

True, but I'd really prefer the traps to have as much personality as the monsters. Memorable traps that involve the entire party would be more fun, from my perspective. Both as player and as DM.

Koewn said:
A table from the last room acts as a tower shield to block poison darts. Candlewax seals up exhausts for sleeping gas. All that fun *thinking* gets taken out back and shot by the Disable Device skill. Sure, a good rogue player will come up with that sort of stuff when making his roll, but often times Disable Device is like...Fireball. It's a "spell" the rogue "casts" to "kill" the trap, and the mechanics of the game support doing it that way.

I like that - alternate possibilities in terms of how to bypass traps and challenges. I always try to give the PC's the benefit of the doubt in those cases.

I've tended to reduce the number of traps, but try to make the ones that are there more interesting. I don't do traps a lot; but I do like to run the occasional "heavy trap" dungeon as a change of pace.

DonTadow said:
Traps are a wierd bunch. Traps are the only encounter thing in the game that is meant for one person to deal with.

That sums up my issues with it as well
 
Last edited:


DonTadow said:
Traps are a wierd bunch. Traps are the only encounter thing in the game that is meant for one person to deal with. That usually leads to a series of boring search and disarm checks for the other players. I try to make traps more interactive, allowing multiple ways of disarming with multiple triggers.

I hear what you're saying about traps being something that only one character (i.e. Rogue) can deal with. However, one way that I like to get around this is to design traps that have multiple components. Some of these components are tied to other skills so other PCs need to help the rogue understand and therefore bypass or disarm the trap.

For example, while investigating an unholy tabernacle on the altar of an evil temple, the rogue discovers a complex lock system underneath a series of pictograms / icons that he/she believes is trapped. However, the rogue in question doesnt have any ranks in knowledge: religion, so he/she needs the party cleric to come over and make a knowledge check on the markings. The cleric seems to understand the imagery in the pictograms and remembers that this particular evil faith is fond of protecting their treasures with spells that place enchantments on those of any other faith. The cleric also learns that the evil faith enjoys using arcane spells to achieve this goal, as a way to trick enemy clerics. Therefore, the party wizard needs to come take a look in order to see if, through spellcraft or knowledge arcana, he can lend some information. Lets say he can, then the wizard can cast an appropriate defensive spell on the rogue that counteracts the spell in the trap. THe rogue, then gets a bonus to his/her disable device roll (given by the DM) based on him asking the party for help.

This approach to traps helps to make everyone feel effective in a trap situation, even though only the rogue gets to find it and disable it. Plus, while it may reduce the effectiveness of the traps (by virtue of giving bonuses to the disable attempt) it also has the potential to use party resources (e.g. spells, time), which is a good thing.

Just a thought.
 

I do the hong thing too -- replace them with critters.

But I've always been a fan of the OotS "BBQ Sauce" style of trap. Just haven't had call to use them yet.

-- N
 

The #1 way I have found to make traps more interesting - don't have a rogue in the party!

Really - lacking the ability to simply disarm them, they have to work together to devise a way around or through them. Now, mind you, it means that I have to be careful with traps, as there's basically no chance the party will detect them before setting them off.

Also, many of my traps are not traps, per se. They are more in the way of the dangerous natural penomenon. Rather than have a pit trap, I'm likely to use a rotten section of flooring. Rather than a door with a lock that has a poison needle, the party will face a gap filled with a hedge that has poison thorns, and so on.
 

Kid Charlemagne said:
What kinds of things do you do to make traps more interesting, and to make them involve the entire party rather than just one person...

Put an encounter trap within an antimagic field :D
 

I'm also a fan of the teamwork style trap. For example:

1.) The door is really a large slab of rock that lowers from the ceiling (ala Indiana Jones), and two of the beefcakes in the party have to lift it just a few inches off the floor so the rogue can get to the mechanism. If they lift it too high, they set the trap off. If their muscles give out too early, the rogue might lose his fingers.

2.) The rogue can feel that the mechanism is there, but it's invisible. Call the mage.

3.) My personal favorite. A horde of infinite orcs fills up one exit, and a heavily trapped door blocks the other. The rogue uses his initiative turn to try and disarm the traps while the others have to keep the orcs from getting through.

4.) A door emits a potent aura of negative energy, or has an angry animated skeleton as a door-knocker. The cleric has to "turn off" (get it?? TURN off. Hahahahahaha.) the effect in order for the rogue to search and de-trap the door.

Just a few thoughts I had.
 

My best traps have been those combined with other creatures. It allows creatures extra abilities and battle control which can be quite nasty.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top