First off, I want to ask about the decision to keep trapfinding rogue only. Is there any possibility of seeing trapfinding as a feat or bleeding it to other characters (maybe monk and/or bard?) The fact that only one of the core classes can find trapfinding has always been a problem in my group and we have made the ability a feat as a result.

Second, is there any chance of having traps work more like haunts. I really like the way haunts give you an opportunity to notice and avoid the effect. It would be terrific if traps worked similarly, including if there were more than one way to disarm/destroy them.

Interesting idea.. I like the premise.

Second, is there any chance of having traps work more like haunts. I really like the way haunts give you an opportunity to notice and avoid the effect. It would be terrific if traps worked similarly, including if there were more than one way to disarm/destroy them.

I vote this.

Sebastian wrote:

Second, is there any chance of having traps work more like haunts. I really like the way haunts give you an opportunity to notice and avoid the effect. It would be terrific if traps worked similarly, including if there were more than one way to disarm/destroy them.

I vote this.

I agree too (assuming non-superscribers can post in this thread :)

I agree too (assuming non-superscribers can post in this thread :)

Oh, I think that'd be alright ;)

I think this is a swell idea also - not having a rogue in a trap-heavy adventure always sucks, and it would be nice to give non-rogue classes a chance at overcoming the trap. (Plus, it's a pet peeve of mine that players feel that they "have" to play a certain archetype...and this would be a nice way to get away from the "must have X in party" mindset.)

By the gods! I agree with Sebastian twice in one day. I must be getting old or something. ;)

Seriously though. Allow it for Bard, Monk, Ranger, and rogue.

Better though as a feat...an expensive feat, only available to PC's with search as a class skill.

First off, I want to ask about the decision to keep trapfinding rogue only.

So now Rogues get to cast spells but they still are the only ones who can find traps?

I nixed trapfinding immediately from my game. If you can Search you can find a trap ... Rogues just happen to spend more skill points on Search and so are better at it. However, there's no reason a Fighter can't crawl around on his hands and knees looking for trip-wires if he wants to ... and if he spends the cross-classed Skill Points he can become really good at it.

Get real now ...

Rez

I also love the idea of traps as haunts.

Yes to both. Actually my idea is that characters with the disable device skill would get the benefits of trapfinding.

I too would like to see a more intesting trap system more akin to haunts than currently appears in the D&D rules.

What kind of people are you playing with where no one wants to play the rogue? ;)

Cool ideas though. :)

What kind of people are you playing with where no one wants to play the rogue? ;)

Happens in my group a lot, actually.

I like the Feat idea. I want trapfinding to stay, but boxing it into a class ability is a bit much.

Could define haunts? I'm feeling confused. Thanks.

Personally, I'd like to see trap finding as just part of the Search skill. Rogues could also apply their trap sense bonus to Search for finding traps. My reason - in a party without a rogue, the PC who agrees to take on searching for traps shouldn't be "penalyzed" by also having to spend a feat to do so.

But I would be okay with Trapfinding as a feat instead. (Question: In this case, should this feat also make Disable Device a class skill?)

Oh, and I like the idea of traps as Haunts, if that can be made to work.

Could define haunts? I'm feeling confused. Thanks.

Haunts were introduced in first Pathfinder adventure path (Rise of the Runelord, issues #2 and #6), in which there were a couple of haunted sites. Haunts allow for much more interesting "haunting" effects than if a haunting is just an undead critter. Basically, here's the explanation of them, removing the bits that are haunting-specific and wouldn't apply to traps:

Haunts function somewhat like traps, but are difficult to detect since they do not “exist” until they are triggered. When a haunt is triggered, its effects manifest at initiative rank 10 on a surprise round; the haunt effect vanishes as soon as the surprise round is over and things return to normal (haunts never persist into actual round-by-round “combat”). Those in the haunt’s vicinity can make a specific skill check to notice the haunt in time to react — if a character notices it, he may make an initiative check to determine when he acts in the round.

I imagine that traps WOULD often persist into round-by-round combat, depending on the type of trap.

Haunt write-ups include what perception check is required to notice it as it triggers, what someone perceives if they notice it, and then what the effects of the haunt itself are.

I nixed trapfinding immediately from my game. If you can Search you can find a trap ... Rogues just happen to spend more skill points on Search and so are better at it.

I did the same thing, but included 'trapfinding' as a class feature for Rogues that basically just gave them a free +4 to Spot or Search for traps.

Anyone could find traps of any difficulty, just Rogues were always gonna be better at it. Seemed fair.

All or nothing is bad. It's bad when it's a Wizards save or die, and it's just as bad when it's niche-protection-run-amok like this.

I am interested in feedback on the feat I suggested here. It seemed like a good way to make traps noticeable without changing the overall structure of the classes or rules.

Though I do think that an improved trap system would not be a bad thing.

I am interested in feedback on the feat I suggested here. It seemed like a good way to make traps noticeable without changing the overall structure of the classes or rules.

Though I do think that an improved trap system would not be a bad thing.

This feat could work quite well.

I agree with Sebastion. Other classes should be able to find and disarm traps, rogues should just be better at it than the others. Turning the trapfinding ability into a skill bonus is a very equitable solution (as long as the bonus isn't overwhelming).

Thank you, Cintra.

I don't have a definite opinion about making traps like haunts, but I do think that trapfinding should be a general thing.

And since you notice giving a chance to notice the trap:

Since I did away with "only rogues can find traps", which to me always was an unnecessary holdover from earlier editions, I changed trapfinding into this: "when you come within 5 feet of a trap, you get to make a perception check as if you actively looked for it" - just like elves and secret doors, or dwarves and unnatural stonework.

I changed trapfinding into this: "when you come within 5 feet of a trap, you get to make a perception check as if you actively looked for it" - just like elves and secret doors, or dwarves and unnatural stonework.

In addition to letting anyone Search for traps, I also give people the chance to Spot them at +10 DC. The fact of the matter is you can still occasionally notice tripwires, tiny seams in floor tiles or holes in walls without specifically looking for them, it's just a lot harder.

FWIW,

Rez

KaeYoss wrote:

I changed trapfinding into this: "when you come within 5 feet of a trap, you get to make a perception check as if you actively looked for it" - just like elves and secret doors, or dwarves and unnatural stonework.

In addition to letting anyone Search for traps, I also give people the chance to Spot them at +10 DC. The fact of the matter is you can still occasionally notice tripwires, tiny seams in floor tiles or holes in walls without specifically looking for them, it's just a lot harder.

Sounds pretty sensible.

Rezdave wrote:

KaeYoss wrote:

I changed trapfinding into this: "when you come within 5 feet of a trap, you get to make a perception check as if you actively looked for it" - just like elves and secret doors, or dwarves and unnatural stonework.

In addition to letting anyone Search for traps, I also give people the chance to Spot them at +10 DC. The fact of the matter is you can still occasionally notice tripwires, tiny seams in floor tiles or holes in walls without specifically looking for them, it's just a lot harder.

Sounds pretty sensible.

Since search and spot are the same now - in Pathfinder as well as my house rules - the rule doesn't work so well. Though I agree: It is pretty sensible with 3.5 rules.

The fact of the matter is you can still occasionally notice tripwires, tiny seams in floor tiles or holes in walls without specifically looking for them, it's just a lot harder.

I'm not sure about any particular mechanic, but I like the idea that anyone can look for traps, but Rogues are better at it and can do it automatically all the time. Everyone else has to say, "Okay, I'm going to look for traps," Rogues are just assumed to be doing it habitually.

(I feel the same about Rangers and tracking)

(I feel the same about Rangers and tracking)

The track feat has been done away with in my games, too. Everyone can use survival to look for tracks.

I hadn't considered letting rangers (or everyone with the "Tracking" feat) do so automatically, but it's a good choice.

I just gave rangers a bonus to survival.

An interesting idea, and one I use and enjoy, is this:

Trapfinding: When you come within 5 feet of a trap's trigger point, you get a free search roll to notice some clue to the traps existance (arrow holes, acid scoring, dust from falling block, etc). This allows you to stop yourself (and your party) before you trigger the trap.

Basically, make trapfinding work like elven secret doors. This can be used for tracking too, give the ranger the ability to "auto" track.

Obviously, the DM should be rolling these rolls in secret, and a smart party will put the rogue towards the front. Course, your smart rogue probably doesn't like that idea!

*Edit* Didn't even see that this had been posted above me. Call it a second vote of favor then. I R Sheepish.