Would you give XP for this?

[hammymchamham]

If you just blunder into the trap the trap overcame you and no XP should be gained.

If the trap overcame you, you'd be dead and would get no XP. But if you overcome the trap and survive, the you gain XP

 

[Shard O'Glase]

If the trap overcame you, you'd be dead and would get no XP. But if you overcome the trap and survive, the you gain XP

disagree most traps aren't powerful enough to kill a PC and they aren't meant to. If it was triggered because you blundered into it, the trap overcame you. Just as if a thief stole some of your money overcame you, he doesn't have to take everything including the gold filings in yout teeth to overcome you. Which to me is very much like giving xp for a blunderd into trap. You wake up in the moring and your bag of gold is gone. 500 xp for the enoer with the rogue. It's just seems silly to me to get xp for an encoutner you blundered through and which actually overcame you.

Now if you suspected a trap, and said the power of pelor/my spells/ my great fortitude/ my insane rage will protect me from these feeble traps, waha I kick the door in/charge down the corridor/shatter the symbols I'd be willing to give XP. You are taking action and overcoming the trap. Unkowing blundering into a trap to me is the very difintion of the trap overcoming you. I'd likely give bonus XP, the more knowingly, and the better handled the trap was.(the paladin stepping up to handle runes they suspect to be runes that inlfict a horrible disease, cause fear etc)

 

[Pielorinho]

It's just seems silly to me to get xp for an encoutner you blundered through and which actually overcame you.

Well, that's cool. As long as you recognize that not awarding XP in this situation is a house rule (because you think the actual rule is silly), then I guess we got no argument anymore . It's a reasonable house rule, I think, although I'd be happier in a game without it. But since in my own campaign I don't use experience points at all, it's not an issue.

Daniel

 

[mystraschosen]

Let me just begin this by saying IN MY HONEST OPINION,I have noticed some harsh words directed at hammy by a source I will not name and I wish to avoid this myself.

Just because the paladin is immune to those traps,does that make the intent of the trap any less? It was meant to harm whoever tripped it,so just because the paladin happened to be the one and had immunities to this particular effect,why should he not get xp for it? He did expend resources to gain the immunities as I have heard expressed early on in this thread,he has to adhere to his code of conduct which prevents him from taking actions or acting in a manner that another character may take.
Meaning he is prohibited from acting in a manner unbecoming to his alignment.So this restriction is the resource he expends to gain his immunity.

Again let me say,does the intent of the trap change just because it was unfortunate enough to be activated by a character who has immunities to this trap?
No it doesn't......ok so the trap is a threat to anyone who trips it by casting contagion on them,....oh no... now it is a threat no longer because fate happened to put a paladin in the path of the trap. Just doesn't make sense to me.The intent remains,it was meant to harm the person that tripped it.

So IN MY HUMBLE OPINION it is a threat overcome.

Thank you all for allowing me to state MY HUMBLE OPINION.

 

[Caliber]

That's the most moronic rule(IMO ). The simply surviving damage part. Blundering into things and taking damage shouldn't get you XP(neither should blunding into damagind thins to which you are immune). Doing something to overcome the encounter should. If you just blunder into the trap the trap overcame you and no XP should be gained.

Here here!

I agree. Why should setting off the trap give XP, when if they had simply stepped in a different square not?

I didn't mention it thought, because I didn't want to take the thread too far OT.

 

[hammymchamham]

disagree most traps aren't powerful enough to kill a PC and they aren't meant to. If it was triggered because you blundered into it, the trap overcame you.

If a party fights a monster, and the monster wins, then the monster overcame the PCs. But if they fight the monster and win, the monster did not overcome the PC's. Same way with the traps.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Unkowing blundering into a trap to me is the very difintion of the trap overcoming you. I'd likely give bonus XP, the more knowingly, and the better handled the trap was.(the paladin stepping up to handle runes they suspect to be runes that inlfict a horrible disease, cause fear etc)

I think you have found the key stumbling block in the discussion. Common sense says that "losing" to a trap should not give xp.

In actual play, common sense is wrong because:

(1) Detecting and even attempting to bypass a trap is extremely dependent on party composition. Party A with a skilled Rogue bypasses all traps, takes no damage, gains piles of xp. Party B without the dungeon crawling skills gets hammered again and again, and gets zero xp. The punishment for tripping a trap is the trap itself, adding xp penalties on top of that is not good for game play.

(2) A trap is not fundamentally different from any monster from a resource POV -- so creating a whole new set of xp rules for traps is not a benefit to the game. An nth level party can either encounter a CR n monster or a CR n trap in the corridor. It should be the same deal for both. Why make it more complicated when it doesn't need to be?

(3) For game enjoyment it is better to give the PC the option of just walking on the traps to keep the game moving. If the DM decides to add metagame punishments for this tactic, then he is encouraging tedious, boring play.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

disagree most traps aren't powerful enough to kill a PC and they aren't meant to. If it was triggered because you blundered into it, the trap overcame you. Just as if a thief stole some of your money overcame you, he doesn't have to take everything including the gold filings in yout teeth to overcome you. Which to me is very much like giving xp for a blunderd into trap. You wake up in the moring and your bag of gold is gone. 500 xp for the enoer with the rogue. It's just seems silly to me to get xp for an encoutner you blundered through and which actually overcame you.

If the traps aren't supposed to kill PCs, what are they supposed to do? Make the PCs say "Gee, this place was trapped by a bunch of incompetents; let's take advantage of their poor tactics, kill them and take their treasure"? This is one of the major problems I have with how a lot of people design traps.

As I see it, traps generally have several purposes:
1. Kill intruders. A hail of darts with wyvern poison on them can do this. A hail of darts with greenblood oil might do this. A single dart with greenblood oil on it won't. Neither will a single clvl 1 magic missile. That makes the last two really stupid traps.

2. Incapacitate intruders until they can be dealt with. Sepia Snake Sigil does this. A single needle or dart with purple worm venom might do this. A single needle with Shadow Essence won't. (Which makes that a stupid trap to build). The same for Cause Fear or Hold Person in most cases.

3. Alert guards to the presence of intruders. A bell or a glyph of warding (blast) set to sonic damage do this nicely. A targetted dispel magic, glitterdust, faerie fire, or invisibility purge triggered by invisible characters is another trap of this type.

4. Punish thieves while giving them a chance to repent of their ways. Bestow Curse does this. So does Mark of Justice. (This is a pretty weak kind of trap since Removing Curses is easy in D&D land but I retained it because the Curse of the Mummy's tomb is a classic which deserves representation).

5. Keep out certain classes of people. Holy Smite, Unholy Blight, Holy Word, Circle of Death, Undeath to Death, Slay Living, Antipathy, Anti-life shell, all fill this role.

6. Alter the battlefield, luring attackers into a disadvantageous situation or creating a defensive position for defenders. A pit trap does this pretty well. A hidden pit trap filled with skeletons or ghouls in front of a low wall manned by rogues (who may sneak attack anyone climbing out of it) is even better for this.

As I see it, traps of categories 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 are overcome by surviving the damage and/or removing the effects.

Traps of category 5 that are not meant to keep people of the PCs' type (good, living, elf, etc) out are non-encounters (unless they're designed by morons who think "I want to keep evil people out, let's put a Dictum spell in this trap.") Otherwise, they're traps of category 1, 2, 3, or 6 (depending upon what they do).

Traps of category 3 are about the only ones that aren't overcome by surviving the damage. That's because they're not designed to do anything with damage; they're designed to let the bad guys know there are intruders in the area. If the bad guys are alerted, the PCs haven't overcome the trap.

Now if you suspected a trap, and said the power of pelor/my spells/ my great fortitude/ my insane rage will protect me from these feeble traps, waha I kick the door in/charge down the corridor/shatter the symbols I'd be willing to give XP. You are taking action and overcoming the trap. Unkowing blundering into a trap to me is the very difintion of the trap overcoming you. I'd likely give bonus XP, the more knowingly, and the better handled the trap was.(the paladin stepping up to handle runes they suspect to be runes that inlfict a horrible disease, cause fear etc)

Did the trap do what it was supposed to do? (Which is certainly not nothing--traps cost money to build and undetectable traps which do absolutely nothing are free). If it didn't, the PCs overcame it whether they knowingly set it off, made some brash statements of braggadicio and then knowingly set it off, or blundered into it.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I think you have found the key stumbling block in the discussion. Common sense says that "losing" to a trap should not give xp.

In actual play, common sense is wrong because:

(1) Detecting and even attempting to bypass a trap is extremely dependent on party composition. Party A with a skilled Rogue bypasses all traps, takes no damage, gains piles of xp. Party B without the dungeon crawling skills gets hammered again and again, and gets zero xp. The punishment for tripping a trap is the trap itself, adding xp penalties on top of that is not good for game play.

(2) A trap is not fundamentally different from any monster from a resource POV -- so creating a whole new set of xp rules for traps is not a benefit to the game. An nth level party can either encounter a CR n monster or a CR n trap in the corridor. It should be the same deal for both. Why make it more complicated when it doesn't need to be?

(3) For game enjoyment it is better to give the PC the option of just walking on the traps to keep the game moving. If the DM decides to add metagame punishments for this tactic, then he is encouraging tedious, boring play.

1: not giving XP I don't see as a punishment. I'd see giving XP as giving unearned XP(and yes this is a house rule), I wouldn't want it as a player and I wont give it as a DM. I'd hate to be kept artifically alive by GM fiat, and I hate getting leveled up by GM Fiat. Further more if the party doesn't have a rogue, and they decide to go into trap infested dungeons, there asking for a beating why give them bonus XP for it, there are plently of non trap intensive adventures where this wont be an issue.

2. a trap is not fundamentally = to a encoutner with a monster. 1. the monster sticks aorund until you do something about it, if you just stand there dumbly your dead. A trap once sprung is frequently harmless, and if it isn't and you just stand there dumbly well your dead so don't worry about XP, and if you actively get out of the ongoing trap, your no longer just blundering into it so you'll get XP. And 2, a traps CR is largely based on its concealability, if your just saying oaky-doakey no searching for us, a large part of its CR is irrelevent so at best the XP should be vastly reduced.

3. there are better ways of keeping the game moving than just saying, we'll walk on traps unawares. If you want to just stumble over traps a spart of the parties standard operating procedure, they deserve too get hurt, and they don't deseve XP. (note a simple SM1, running ahead spinging traps is taking an active involvement in avoiding traps and so you'd get XP). To me giving XP for purposefully walking blindly around without searching for traps, because lo and behold they stepped on one, would be like giving bonus XP for getting into fights naked, weaponless and blinfolded.

 

[hammymchamham]

1: not giving XP I don't see as a punishment. I'd see giving XP as giving unearned XP(and yes this is a house rule), I wouldn't want it as a player and I wont give it as a DM. I'd hate to be kept artifically alive by GM fiat, and I hate getting leveled up by GM Fiat. Further more if the party doesn't have a rogue, and they decide to go into trap infested dungeons, there asking for a beating why give them bonus XP for it, there are plently of non trap intensive adventures where this wont be an issue.

edit: yep house rule. Thanks Ice

2. a trap is not fundamentally = to a encoutner with a monster. 1. the monster sticks aorund until you do something about it, if you just stand there dumbly your dead. A trap once sprung is frequently harmless, and if it isn't and you just stand there dumbly well your dead so don't worry about XP, and if you actively get out of the ongoing trap, your no longer just blundering into it so you'll get XP. And 2, a traps CR is largely based on its concealability, if your just saying oaky-doakey no searching for us, a large part of its CR is irrelevent so at best the XP should be vastly reduced.

Some traps can reset themselves. But according to the rules, a trap is fundamentally = to an ecounter based upon using the CR and EL system

3. there are better ways of keeping the game moving than just saying, we'll walk on traps unawares. If you want to just stumble over traps a spart of the parties standard operating procedure, they deserve too get hurt, and they don't deseve XP. (note a simple SM1, running ahead spinging traps is taking an active involvement in avoiding traps and so you'd get XP). To me giving XP for purposefully walking blindly around without searching for traps, because lo and behold they stepped on one, would be like giving bonus XP for getting into fights naked, weaponless and blinfolded.

Perhaps a few distigrate spells would stop the party from walking around blindly? Or pit traps that lead into a pool of lava. Not all traps are "A ray of frost jumps out, take 1d3 damage" Some are nasty. Some can compose of maiming a charecter "The blade chops off your right hand." or to kill "A ray of light burst forth from the chest, and the Rogue who was opening the lock now lies at your feet as a pile of dust."

Yes if they go blindly, the desrve to get hurt, maimed, and possibly killed. But they desrve XP. You're free to lower the EL of such things, but the CR stays the same.