Using traps against a party with no rogue


Advice

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions how I can still use traps as non monster encounters without having a rogue who can deal with them.

I really like when in dungeons pitting players against traps and puzzles but its hard to justify using them if no one in the party can do anything about them. Sure one or two that the party either falls victim to and has to tread more carefully as to avoid more are ok. But I like having traps that the only choice is disarm or spring it. Weather it be on a chest with extra loot. Or something blocking the way forward.

So what I am aiming for is an alternate means to deal with traps, locks ect. I could make Disable D a class skill for all or make anything dealing with traps a straight dex or int check. But I want to know if anyone has any better or more creative ideas.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

You could make it an actual puzzle of some sort for the players to figure out, if you want them to be able to disable traps without a rogue.


Having Disable Device as a class skill isn't really a huge deal in PF, even if you do want to actually disable traps instead of Summon Nature's Ally-ing them. It's just three skill points, which is a nice boost but not that big of a deal. (How often to people take Skill Focus (Disable Device)? Not that often, because three points is nice, but not that big of a deal.) You can just use slightly easier (and non-magical, since you don't have trapfinding on anyone any longer, most likely) traps, and you're good to go. (Assuming that someone's willing to swap out one of their skills for some ranks in DD.)


Anyone can find a trap -- magical or not it doesn't matter anyone can find it. Anyone can disable a mechanical trap. Only someone with trapfinding can disable a magical trap with the disable device skill. This doesn't mean that a magical trap cannot be disabled by other means (such as dispel magic) only that if you want to simply use a skill you have to have trapfinding.


Does anyone have Perception as a skill? They can find the trap. If noone has Perception there is no hope for the party... :)

Does anyone have Detect Magic? They can find the magical trap.

Now they just avoid it.

No problem.

Or even better they get really creative and trigger the trap with cunning so as to take no damage - much better than "I roll my +16 Disable device and get a 26" - SUCCESS.

In fact I might go as far as to say that traps can be even mroe fun WITHOUT a rogue.

Dark Archive

Everything above is true and solid. I would take a different track. Have the group find a intelligent magical item. It can be anything from an ioun stone to a lucky rabbits foot, a sword or weapon all that is flavor left up to you.

Intelligent Items

:
Magic items sometimes have intelligence of their own. Magically imbued with sentience, these items think and feel the same way characters do and should be treated as NPCs. Intelligent items have extra abilities and sometimes extraordinary powers and special purposes. Only permanent magic items (as opposed to single-use items or those with charges) can be intelligent. (This means that potions, scrolls, and wands, among other items, are never intelligent.) In general, less than 1% of magic items have intelligence.

Item has 5 ranks in one skill* +2,500 gp

Item has 10 ranks in one skill* +10,000 gp

Not to mention they have Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma
- also alignments

Low level ones can be very cheap on gold but +'s on favor RP aspect depending on what alignment you pick vs groups alignment and how powerful you make it so Its Ego can come into play if it wishes to go against the PC's decisions. It could be sneaky and relay info through character using it... so it appears as if the PC is really beating the traps or it can be a NPC floating Sword giving sarcastic info to the group on how bad they need him...

tons of fun!

PF SRD

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:
Anyone can find a trap -- magical or not it doesn't matter anyone can find it. Anyone can disable a mechanical trap. Only someone with trapfinding can disable a magical trap with the disable device skill. This doesn't mean that a magical trap cannot be disabled by other means (such as dispel magic) only that if you want to simply use a skill you have to have trapfinding.

I suppose that is true. I just want a simple to use but still based in rules way of using traps with the absence of a class that is given the ability to deal with such things. The only person in my group atm with any decent amount of skills is the Ranger/Druid.

I just like they idea of a 2-20ish floor dungeon littered with traps and treasure created by some mad man(or woman) where other than a few rooms the party can lock themselves in and hope they are safe where there are no breaks from encounters.


You can do that and it sounds awesome.

The druid summons a bear to trigger the trap, the.fight fires an arrow to set of the next one, the barbarian starts ripping the stone apart to get to the control rope of the.next.

All you lose is the rogue rolling a skill check. What you gain is.fill roleplaying potential. :)


make sure to throw magical traps in there. they're really easy to find with detect magic/arcane sight, and a summon will generally get rid of them for you. no need for a rogue at all.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
WhipShire wrote:

Everything above is true and solid. I would take a different track. Have the group find a intelligent magical item. It can be anything from an ioun stone to a lucky rabbits foot, a sword or weapon all that is flavor left up to you.

Intelligent Items
** spoiler omitted **

Item has 5 ranks in one skill* +2,500 gp

Item has 10 ranks in one skill* +10,000 gp

Not to mention they have Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma
- also alignments

Low level ones can be very cheap on gold but +'s on favor RP aspect depending on what alignment you pick vs groups alignment and how powerful you make it so Its Ego can come into play if it wishes to go against the PC's decisions. It could be sneaky and relay info through character using it... so it appears as if the PC is really beating the traps or it can be a NPC floating Sword giving sarcastic info to the group on how bad they need him...

tons of fun!

PF SRD

Sounds like alot of fun. But throwing an expensive magical item at a 2nd level party is a tad irresponsible XD will think about that too.


Nicolas Paradise wrote:

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions how I can still use traps as non monster encounters without having a rogue who can deal with them.

I really like when in dungeons pitting players against traps and puzzles but its hard to justify using them if no one in the party can do anything about them. Sure one or two that the party either falls victim to and has to tread more carefully as to avoid more are ok. But I like having traps that the only choice is disarm or spring it. Weather it be on a chest with extra loot. Or something blocking the way forward.

So what I am aiming for is an alternate means to deal with traps, locks ect. I could make Disable D a class skill for all or make anything dealing with traps a straight dex or int check. But I want to know if anyone has any better or more creative ideas.

Perception to detect the traps before they run into them and then have non-disable means of circumventing them (like smashing or jamming them or allowing climb, leaping or acrobatics checks to avoid them). Reflex saves for half damage.

That's what I'd do if I liked traps. Our party doesn't have a rogue, but we do have a Master Summoner with a skill mule eidolon who fills in nicely. You could always have an NPC rogue but that kind of defeats the purpose I suppose.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Wiggz wrote:
That's what I'd do if I liked traps. Our party doesn't have a rogue, but we do have a Master Summoner with a skill mule eidolon who fills in nicely. You could always have an NPC rogue but that kind of defeats the purpose I suppose.

A skill mule eidolon is such a waste of the eidolon. No offense.

Ok I have some ideas now. Am still open for suggestions tho.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Traps shouldn't ALWAYS be set off.

Sometimes the trigger is an alarm, sometimes its an area effect or a summons or triggers locking devices etc.

Take Indiana Jones and the lost Ark and make it a Pathfinder game. Indy is now an Archeologist Bard

First Trap - breaking the light? Sounds like a magical trap. Indy finds it... He *THINKS* he knows what it does and triggers it from a safe location... spiked gate comes out and scares his torch bearer.

Second trap? - Steps on the floor shoot poisoned darts. Indy demonstrates by triggering one of the floor stones. He could have used a summoning to trigger as well but hell, there are LOTS of triggers and he couldn't be sure he got them all and there is no chance of disarming the entire room. The DM gives him a bonus to the Reflex save to avoid setting off the traps and Indy moves on.

Both times he's triggered the trap.

Now he's at the gold idol - he KNOWS there is a trap, he's read about it and knows to prepare for it. He does not want to set it off. Maybe he knows that it will collapse the place and seal the thief inside, maybe he doesn't but there are times you do NOT want to trigger the trap.

Goonies? One Eyed Willie set up a trap that would collapse the cavern - I doubt his intent was to free the ship but its a kids movie and its bad business to crush children under tonnes of rock. The Piano trap? Triggering that could send you to a fatal drop AND make it harder for you to get to the keyboard to complete the challenge.

I for one would ensure that there were magical traps that triggered different effects or larger consequences if my players response to every magical trap was to send a summoned critter into it... If the players can figure it out, then Wizards who set up these traps would also be aware this is a common "solution".


Nicolas Paradise wrote:

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions how I can still use traps as non monster encounters without having a rogue who can deal with them.

I really like when in dungeons pitting players against traps and puzzles but its hard to justify using them if no one in the party can do anything about them. Sure one or two that the party either falls victim to and has to tread more carefully as to avoid more are ok. But I like having traps that the only choice is disarm or spring it. Weather it be on a chest with extra loot. Or something blocking the way forward.

So what I am aiming for is an alternate means to deal with traps, locks ect. I could make Disable D a class skill for all or make anything dealing with traps a straight dex or int check. But I want to know if anyone has any better or more creative ideas.

It depends on what kind of dungeon they are delving into. I'd say put the same number of traps in there as if there was a rogue. The only thing I'd caution against is filling it to the brim with traps. If none of the players are rogues, they might be able to spot afew if they are being really careful but they are still going to get torn up by the other traps they didn't notice. This is in no way to punish them but to make it clear that every party has a set of things they are vulnerable to. In this case, this party has a vulnerability to traps. Whether you want to award them xp for surviving the traps or they have to sucessfully get around it to earn the xp is a separate matter. I wouldn't make disable device a class skill for all. That would feel like stealing thunder from the rogue class.


Make it a trapped dungeon, but there are ways, not always the clearest or most obvious of going around traps, and drop that hint to the players. Give them some idea, when a trap is nearby.

Make it something to figure out, that doesnt require dcs and that can be bypassed without a rogue.

Dark Archive

Nicolas Paradise wrote:
WhipShire wrote:

Everything above is true and solid. I would take a different track. Have the group find a intelligent magical item. It can be anything from an ioun stone to a lucky rabbits foot, a sword or weapon all that is flavor left up to you.

Intelligent Items
** spoiler omitted **

Item has 5 ranks in one skill* +2,500 gp

Item has 10 ranks in one skill* +10,000 gp

Not to mention they have Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma
- also alignments

Low level ones can be very cheap on gold but +'s on favor RP aspect depending on what alignment you pick vs groups alignment and how powerful you make it so Its Ego can come into play if it wishes to go against the PC's decisions. It could be sneaky and relay info through character using it... so it appears as if the PC is really beating the traps or it can be a NPC floating Sword giving sarcastic info to the group on how bad they need him...

tons of fun!

PF SRD

Sounds like alot of fun. But throwing an expensive magical item at a 2nd level party is a tad irresponsible XD will think about that too.

1. I did not know they were 2nd level.

2.
Int - 10
Wis - 10
Cha - 10
- Telepathy +1,000 gp (speech is only 500)
- Item has 5 ranks in one skill (disable device) +2,500 gp
- Ioun Torch
*** Price 75 gp

Description

- This item is merely a burned out, dull gray ioun stone with a continual flame spell cast upon it. It retains the ability to float and orbit, and allows the bearer to carry light and still have his hands free. It may be in any crystalline shape common to ioun stones (ellipsoid, prism, sphere, and so on).

Total Value: 3575 gp /
- Half value if sold: 1787 gp
(divide by number of players say... 4)
= 447 gp

PC Wealth by Level*
2 - 1,000 gp
3 - 3,000 gp

Not sure that qualifies as an expensive magaical item...

Just so you can see the math.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lightbulb wrote:


The druid summons a bear to trigger the trap,

I really don't like the idea of druids summoning animals to set off traps. Animals are supposed to be a druid's allies, not expendable resources. Combat's a bit different because the bear's defending it's ally and itself.


Yeah that I agree with, seems cruel, easy and un-druidic.

Dark Archive

A useful summon trap springer... this is a good feat.

Skeleton Summoner

Prerequisites: Spell Focus (necromancy), ability to cast summon monster.

Benefit: Add "human skeleton" to the list of creatures you can summon with summon monster I and "human skeletal champion" to the list of creatures you can summon with summon monster III. Once per day, when you cast summon monster, you may summon a skeletal version of one of the creatures on that spell's summoning list (apply the skeleton template to that creature to create this monster).


WhipShire wrote:

A useful summon trap springer... this is a good feat.

Skeleton Summoner

Prerequisites: Spell Focus (necromancy), ability to cast summon monster.

Benefit: Add "human skeleton" to the list of creatures you can summon with summon monster I and "human skeletal champion" to the list of creatures you can summon with summon monster III. Once per day, when you cast summon monster, you may summon a skeletal version of one of the creatures on that spell's summoning list (apply the skeleton template to that creature to create this monster).

using it for the free DR/bludgeoning and poison immunity? smart.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Like alot of the ideas thanks guys. Still open to suggestion.

Dark Archive

Use traps that aren't lethal but just use up resources of the party.

A trap that summons two earth elementals can be fought through, and a pit trap can be avoided. A big rolling boulder trap is more interesting if there's no one to disable it before it starts chasing the party.

Traps should be encounters in and of themselves, they shouldn't kill the party if there's no one to disable it. You have an advantage here, as any trap you create likely will involve more than just one member of the party rolling a die.


trap detection without a rogue.


Nicolas Paradise wrote:

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions how I can still use traps as non monster encounters without having a rogue who can deal with them.

You could just not include magical traps. Anyone can find and disarm regular, mundane, mechanical traps. Only rogues can disarm magical ones. Translate magical traps into equal CR mechanical traps. Make sure someone in the party, not necessarily the same guy, has a decent Perception and Disable Device.

Alternately, give XP for creative solutions to magical traps, like just running through and hoping for the best. Don't put in any magical traps that are lethal or reset themselves. As long as, when they set the trap off, they aren't killed by the ensuing damage and can be assured it won't go off again, all is copacetic.


Nicolas Paradise wrote:

I suppose that is true. I just want a simple to use but still based in rules way of using traps with the absence of a class that is given the ability to deal with such things. The only person in my group atm with any decent amount of skills is the Ranger/Druid.

I just like they idea of a 2-20ish floor dungeon littered with traps and treasure created by some mad man(or woman) where other than a few rooms the party can lock themselves in and hope they are safe where there are no breaks from encounters.

I nobody is willing to multiclass into rogue, just make the relevant class abilities available as feats. Their problems with traps will balance it out in the end. Either they find it useful to spend a feat or they don't. It's their decision that won't hard their concept all to much (not as much as dipping into rogue anyway).

Abilities to consider as feats: trapfinding (or any of the archetypes version) and trapspotter.


Don't change the rules. There's plenty of ways around traps. A reasonably competent mage can get you through 80% of them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
meatrace wrote:
Nicolas Paradise wrote:

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions how I can still use traps as non monster encounters without having a rogue who can deal with them.

You could just not include magical traps. Anyone can find and disarm regular, mundane, mechanical traps. Only rogues can disarm magical ones.

Only people with trapfinding can disable magical traps with the disable device skill. You can still disable them with other means no matter your class.

(for the sake of clarity)

@Nicolas:

Let your party review archetypes. There are several archetypes for different classes that give the trapfinding ability. Rangers have two -- Urban Ranger and Trapper Ranger. Trapper changes out the ability to cast spells for trapfinding and the ability to set trap quickly.

Silver Crusade

Traps are no match for creativity or insanity.

The (raging) barbarian with trap sense could just walk into the fort/ref trap and be healed up later. Somebody with high strength can throw something on/at the trap. Alchemists do well against traps, for varying reasons.

If you are not playing one of those classes, use spells or items creatively. Projectile coming out of slit in wall ?
Throw a tanglefoot bag in it, freeze the slit closed.
Gas traps ?
Well, you have a bottle of air, don't you?
Sonic effects or bad smells ?
Ear- and nose plugs are not part of the adventurer's kit, but they should be.


Just tell your players it's going to be an "old school" game, where you have to actually say what you're doing to look for the traps and so forth.

In early editions of the game, at least in the groups I played with, you were expected to deal with traps in more ways than simply rolling a skill and disarming them. Collapsible Plank? It's on the gear page for a reason: because if you can press on a floor trigger with a 10 foot pole and find it, you can simply put the plank together and walk over the trigger (also works great for pits).

The creative method of dealing with traps is why traps eventually became worth XP. Because dealing with them like this actually was a challenge, and when you overcame it, you deserved a reward. Certainly more then anyone has ever deserved one for the rogue rolling on a maxed out skill.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

DreamAtelier, my players always have to say they're looking for traps, and they have to describe how they are going about doing it (if they tap the doorframe to check for an odd sound, and tapping the doorframe itself is the trap trigger, then...). The Perception check just alters the detail of how much they see when they find it, and how certain they are it's a trap. And if they describe very well how they are searching for the trap, I lower the Perception DC to find it.

The existence of the skills does not eliminate creativity or descriptiveness. What it does allow you to do is speed up certain aspects of resolution when you need to.

(What I find odd is the players who often want to speed through the process and just roll, and I have to pull teeth to get them to describe anything, are "old school" players who've been playing since the 80s.)

Nicholas Paradise:

What's your party makeup? I didn't see it.


I make my players declare when and where they are looking for traps. My party's Rogue was wise enough to select Trap Spotter early on, and it's been a big help for the whole group as well as a reason for her to be in front of the party (rather than the equally perceptive Ranger that prefers to stay back).


DeathQuaker wrote:

DreamAtelier, my players always have to say they're looking for traps, and they have to describe how they are going about doing it (if they tap the doorframe to check for an odd sound, and tapping the doorframe itself is the trap trigger, then...). The Perception check just alters the detail of how much they see when they find it, and how certain they are it's a trap. And if they describe very well how they are searching for the trap, I lower the Perception DC to find it.

The existence of the skills does not eliminate creativity or descriptiveness. What it does allow you to do is speed up certain aspects of resolution when you need to.

(What I find odd is the players who often want to speed through the process and just roll, and I have to pull teeth to get them to describe anything, are "old school" players who've been playing since the 80s.)

Nicholas Paradise:

What's your party makeup? I didn't see it.

A fair comment, and I should not make broad assumptions about everyone's group or game. It simply seemed that the OP's concern was that no one would be able to roll disable device, and my point was that the game could be played without that skill entirely (and was, for a time).

The other thing to keep in mind, for the OP, is that most traps should (and do) have either a reset time, or a limited number of uses in them. Take the stereotypical "step on a floor tile and get shot by a crossbow in the wall" trap. If there is only one crossbow firing, it means it can probably only be triggered once a round (since the mechanism has to reload the crossbow). An upgraded version to a repeating crossbow is possible, where it would keep firing. In both these (mechanical) instances, the mechanism should have a finite supply of bolts to reload with.

A scything blade? Again needs time to reset, so that the tension in whatever is powering it (probably a spring or system of weights) can store power to make it strike again. Sure, it is effectively an infinite number of uses, but there are moments of safety when it is resetting that the group can use to get past it (or set up something in front of it, so that when it goes off next time the blade breaks).

A hanging pendulum of doom? Despite the popular misconception of video games (I'm looking at you, Skyrim), pendulums are not perpetual motion machines. Without a power source, each swing of the arm is going to be shorter than the one before, until it is hanging and harmless. With a power source, that time period is simply going to be longer (possibly by quite a bit). Even here there are moments when someone can jump through the space it swings through in relative safety.

Now, magic can get you around some of these concerns. The crossbow trap might have returning ammunition, or magically fabricate it. It could be magic that resets the traps, instead of a person needing to come along and do it. But if every trap in a building has a magical component, that gets VERY expensive for a Bad Guy to construct. If you assume his wealth is at a reasonable level and spent reasonably, you should probably only have a few of the more keystone traps be reset magically: for instance, maybe the crossbows in the entry hallway are, because they're the first line of defense and you don't want anyone to be able to just march an army of commoners down the hall to exhaust them all, but when you get a chambers in and there's another hall of arrows? You might have skimped there counting on the previous traps and the first hallway to have thinned your attackers numbers.


I like using traps in relationship to other things.

I've had them chain into an encounter by alerting other enemies if they go off. I've made them make an easy route a hard route by destroying a simple path and making the PCs have to find another way. I like it when they make combat more difficult, particularly if an NPC knows about the traps and the players don't. Think of the traps as extra actions in the action economy.

Another option is to stack a bunch of weaker traps together. If the party just tries to run through them, they might get killed. It might take multiple summons to bust all the traps. Or you could just use disable device + a few minutes and disable them all.

The only time I like individual traps is when they attempt to transport the players to either another plane (prismatic spray has done this) or to another part of the dungeon. Dividing up the party can make an adventure a lot more interesting. . . .

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
DeathQuaker wrote:


Nicholas Paradise:
^
NO H
What's your party makeup? I didn't see it.

Didn't post party makeup.

Ranger1/Druid1 ranger was just a dip in for favored terrain with architype druid is main.
Samurai2
Wizardscrollmaster2
Fighter2
Cleric2

Shadow Lodge

What I would suggest is to ignor the 3E version of traps is to either go back to the original style traps (less skill checks and more puzzles and RP) or to use something like Haunts, which are based off of traps, but designed for non-rogues and so much cooler.

The key is to allow multiple methods of bypassing or disarming them. One option might be a spell, another a class feature, another a puzzle, and along those lines.


Could drop a lot of hints, and have a few different ways through a trap, and then someone makes the choice and hopes for the best.


Nicolas Paradise wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:


Nicholas Paradise:
^
NO H
What's your party makeup? I didn't see it.

Didn't post party makeup.

Ranger1/Druid1 ranger was just a dip in for favored terrain with architype druid is main.
Samurai2
Wizardscrollmaster2
Fighter2
Cleric2

Drop a spell book with knock and unseen servant, and a staff with find traps and find secret doors.


A Ranger 1 / Druid 1 not planning to progress further as a Ranger can switch to the Trapper archetype with no loss except the ability to use spell trigger items that are on the ranger list but not the druid list. There are a few of those, but not many that a druid is likely to want.


Could have them find an npc to join their party, a neutral evil rogue/wizard, who is fascinated by the idea of traps, especially magical ones. He knows his stuff, is specialising in this area and one day hopes to get a great commission from kings, clerics or despots. Problem is, he isn't infallible, but a fun pc to throw in. Makes sense for him to be in a dungeon too.

Silver Crusade

Nicolas Paradise wrote:

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

Problems with the owner of the home, or is it really problems with the person formerly playing the rogue thoroughly disrespecting the home-owner's hospitality?

If it's the latter, plenty of good suggestions on this thread so far. I'd recommend someone picking up some rogue or an archetype that includes rogue-like trapfinding. Although, someone in my game has already pointed out that anyone with 'Detect Magic' can detect the presence of magical traps (although they may not accurately identify that that strange magic aura is in fact a trap, until they set off a few of them accidentally...). If it's really the home-owner who's the problem-- my recommendation is to find a different place to play, and keep the rogue's player in the game.

HappyDaze wrote:


I make my players declare when and where they are looking for traps. My party's Rogue was wise enough to select Trap Spotter early on, and it's been a big help for the whole group as well as a reason for her to be in front of the party (rather than the equally perceptive Ranger that prefers to stay back).

Well, someone's gotta make sure no nasty monsters are sneaking up behind the party... nothing worse than leaving all your (comparatively) deaf/blind characters in the rear, and having a sneaky threat come along and roll the party up back to front, one backstab at a time.


DeathQuaker wrote:
DreamAtelier, my players always have to say they're looking for traps, and they have to describe how they are going about doing it (if they tap the doorframe to check for an odd sound, and tapping the doorframe itself is the trap trigger, then...).

You would hate me if you asked me to do this. I would move forward 1 room a session.

I check the in the normal way (we would have determined that the normal way is anything I can possibly think of) - how long does that take?

Do you do this for all perception rolls?

I look far ambushers in that tree, and that tree, and that tree, and that tree, and that one and that one and that one. What about that rock? Or that one or that one or that one? Right ok. Now the bushes. That one? That one? That one? Ok... ...hmmm oh! Flying ambushers. 1o'clock, 2 o'clock... ...12 o'clock. How long has that taken? 5 minutes?

Better check them all again because something could have moved into place in that time... Ok so the trees again...

:D

(BTW this is a JOKE and a serious point that this seems a bit unfair on your players)

Seriously though does this not just bog down your games too much? Isn't it just better to roll perception and modify the difficulty on whether they are being hyper careful, careful, normal, quick, rapid, sprinting?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Trapfinding should be a feat, freeing groups from the "felt necessity" of including a Rogue in the party. It'd still be a non-trivial investment to be any good at disabling traps ( maxing out two skills, getting one feat ) and Rogues would still be potentially better at finding and disabling traps.


Like Skill Focus: Perception?

You could add one for trap disabling... Lets call it: Skill Focus: Disable Device. :)

----

I for one much prefer the rule that it just requires good perception to find them and DD to disarm them simply.

The creative part however is far more fun. :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Lightbulb wrote:

Like Skill Focus: Perception?

You could add one for trap disabling... Lets call it: Skill Focus: Disable Device. :)

Assuming that you were responding to me: No, by having rogue talents like Trap Spotter and Quick Disable and the Skill Mastery advanced talent. Hell, I think only Rogues should get the 1/2 level advantage on trapfinding, if it were made into a feat. So Rogues still would have the advantage, but other classes can play, too... and get the Skill Focuses you mentioned, to stand up to Rogues.


I let anyone with knowledge Dungeoneering and Knowledge Engineering spot traps with perception. While there aren't many PCs with all three skills, and those that have them usually aren't great at perception, sometimes I'll have 3 fighters in the group. When they all roll for a DC 15 check, one of them usually spots the trap.

When the trap is spotted, I give them a choice. They can either make 1-3 successive Engineering rolls to disable the device, or I can tell them what they see and they can tell me how they disable it. No roll. I just decide how it works.

For example, a door has a poison needle trap on the handle and lock. They can make two engineering rolls to remove it or get around it, or they can tell me their are using a halogen bar and hammer to rip the door off. If they tell me that, I don't make them roll.

Maybe I decide a chest has a crossbow in it, and opening it will fire the bolt right over the lock. If they tell me they pry it open from the side, the bolt will miss them, no attack roll. Maybe I decided ahead of time it fires left. If they stand to the left or fail to specify, it shoots at them.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

Lightbulb wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
DreamAtelier, my players always have to say they're looking for traps, and they have to describe how they are going about doing it (if they tap the doorframe to check for an odd sound, and tapping the doorframe itself is the trap trigger, then...).

You would hate me if you asked me to do this. I would move forward 1 room a session.

I check the in the normal way (we would have determined that the normal way is anything I can possibly think of) - how long does that take?

Do you do this for all perception rolls?

I look far ambushers in that tree, and that tree, and that tree, and that tree, and that one and that one and that one. What about that rock? Or that one or that one or that one? Right ok. Now the bushes. That one? That one? That one? Ok... ...hmmm oh! Flying ambushers. 1o'clock, 2 o'clock... ...12 o'clock. How long has that taken? 5 minutes?

Better check them all again because something could have moved into place in that time... Ok so the trees again...

:D

(BTW this is a JOKE and a serious point that this seems a bit unfair on your players)

Seriously though does this not just bog down your games too much? Isn't it just better to roll perception and modify the difficulty on whether they are being hyper careful, careful, normal, quick, rapid, sprinting?

Lightbulb, I don't ask for THAT much detail. I can see how you'd assume that from the doorframe tapping example, but I think you extrapolated that out to a far extreme that I doubt anyone--not even in "oldskool" games--goes to. I ask for enough to know are they at risk of accidentally triggering the trap (if the trigger in the description is "touch", then I need to know what they're touching, right?), are they doing something that makes it easier for them than usual to find the trap, etc.

Trapfinding goes like this:
Player: "I check for traps"
DM: "Where are you checking and what are you doing?"
Player: "I'm looking at the door and the area around the door for strange runes--especially runes--panels, or holes that would suggest a trap is there. I don't touch anything yet."
DM: Make your perception check
Player: *rolls* 23
DM: [DC was 25 but...] Since you were keeping an eye out for runes especially, you notice there is a faint glyph on the doorhandle. Probably would be a bad idea to touch or turn it.

Sometimes there's a little more description, and I like specifics because it makes things interesting, but... takes 2 minutes at most, maybe?

If someone starts doing the, "I take off 1 book. Now I take off the next. Now I look under the rug. Now I move the candle. Now I look at the painting. Now I move the painting 1 inch. Now another inch. Now another inch," they get things thrown at them.

It's funny that you post this --- because my answer was a response to someone who claimed -- and they saw what I was saying for what it was and gave a nod that play styles differ -- that describing trapfinding is "oldskool" and people don't do it anymore, they just resort straight to rolls, no descriptions whatsoever.

I've seen other folks make a similar complaint before, going so far as to basically say, Describing good! Straight to die rolls, bad!

Now, apparently describing is bad!

Moral of the story: all gaming is wrongbadfun, so we best go off and do whatever the hell we want anyway.

BACK to topic....

Nicolas Paradise
Your Druid/Ranger should have Perception as a class skill (Samurai might too?). They can be your spotter.

For disabling, if the party finds it an issue: where the Cleric, Druid, Wizard spells cannot find ways around traps (summons, dispels, etc.) and the party cannot safely trigger the trap or break it in another fashion (Fighter sunders the trigger, they jump over the put, etc.)..... I would suggest either the Druid/Ranger or the Wizard trains Disable Device, because they are the ones who will likely have the most skill points. They won't get a class bonus, but they can still train it up (and as mentioned upthread there's the Skill Focus feat that helps with that)


magnuskn wrote:
Lightbulb wrote:

Like Skill Focus: Perception?

You could add one for trap disabling... Lets call it: Skill Focus: Disable Device. :)

Assuming that you were responding to me: No, by having rogue talents like Trap Spotter and Quick Disable and the Skill Mastery advanced talent. Hell, I think only Rogues should get the 1/2 level advantage on trapfinding, if it were made into a feat. So Rogues still would have the advantage, but other classes can play, too... and get the Skill Focuses you mentioned, to stand up to Rogues.

That was again a joke.

However having it work like Survival for Rangers would work really well. Add a bonus to DD and Perception to detect traps based on your level.


DeathQuaker wrote:

Trapfinding goes like this:

Player: "I check for traps"
DM: "Where are you checking and what are you doing?"
Player: "I'm looking at the door and the area around the door for...

No no. Please. It was a joke, it amused me to write that, obviously you wouldn't take it to that extreme - but is it really THAT different?

Anyway I am not saying its badwrongfun.

Its actually a deeper and more involved view on RPG's.

I am saying that if you ask me "where are you looking" I answer - My character is looking for anything suspicious. I don't KNOW where he would look HE'S the one with the adventurers skills. He's the one with the cat like reflexes and sharp eyes.

I don't know where to look. Its not some old school text adventure where you play hunt the verb "open box", "break box", "unlock box", "smash box" *the box smashes*.

If you describe a scene well then I might pick up on some clues that lead me to look for loose stones. By that's MY abilities not my characters abilities.

If I was playing an Int 7 character with no skill points in Perception but described perfectly how to search a murder scene in forensic detail does my character notice the vital clue that leads to the murder?

You play a character who's abilities and statistics lead to a chance of success.

----

I believe the best thing is to describe the room. If I state I am carefully searching for traps I either get a bonus to my roll or I get a roll at all.

If I succeed my perception roll then the DM continues the description "your eye is drawn to a particular stone which seems to be set slightly higher than the rest" or whatever.

If I don't succeed my roll then you say "as you walk down the corridor you feel a stone move almost imperceivably below you foot, a large spike covered log swings down from the ceiling. Roll a reflex save".

Asking me as a player to say I am looking for loose stones, trip wires, magic beams, or any one of a number of possible triggers is, in my opinion, going too far and relies too much on MY abilities and not enough on those of my character.

I however break my own rule because I am quite happy for players to come up with ideas on how to safely trigger/disable the traps rather than rolling an intelligence check.

(But then I am only human ;) )

...and anyway that's FUN. Thinking what to look for is not so fun.

----------

The basic version:

Tell me what I SEE. I choose how to react. Don't ask me what I am looking for.


Nicolas Paradise wrote:

My party due to problems with the owner of the home where we play no longer has a rogue.

I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions how I can still use traps as non monster encounters without having a rogue who can deal with them.

Put the traps in and point and laugh when the traps do what traps are supposed to do?

Quote:
I really like when in dungeons pitting players against traps and puzzles but its hard to justify using them if no one in the party can do anything about them.

So the traps Indiana Jones overcomes wouldn't be there if not for Indie? It's harder to justify not using traps just because a rogue isn't in the party.

Quote:
Sure one or two that the party either falls victim to and has to tread more carefully as to avoid more are ok. But I like having traps that the only choice is disarm or spring it. Weather it be on a chest with extra loot. Or something blocking the way forward.

Most traps can be bypassed directly or indirectly. Traps can be survived, their triggers avoided, or just outright destroyed. That trapped door? Well, you can either risk it and open it yourself, open it with unseen servant, mage hand, or some other spell, or tear the door down or try to trigger the trap without being in the radius (such as beating the door down with reach weapons).

Quote:
So what I am aiming for is an alternate means to deal with traps, locks ect. I could make Disable D a class skill for all or make anything dealing with traps a straight dex or int check. But I want to know if anyone has any better or more creative ideas.

Well firstly, you're kind of negating the point. If they want Disable Device let them take it. I mean, why not make all things available to the party just because they don't have a class that uses it? I mean, the logical conclusion to this thinking is a party of 4 Fighters who either A) never encounter anything that they can't directly deal with, or who also have the class features of every other class just in case.

Traps do not exist just to be free XP when disabled. Traps exist to be challenges, and if the party cannot do it the easy way, then they may have to deal with something as a legitimate threat. This includes magic traps. You got a trap that shoots lightning bolts down a hallway? Well they can't disarm the trap without a rogue, but boo-hoo. Either turn back, endure the damage and run through the hallway, or cast resist energy and walk it off.

My advice is continue to use traps, no matter what the party is composed of. If there should be a trap there, let it be there.


Lightbulb wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
DreamAtelier, my players always have to say they're looking for traps, and they have to describe how they are going about doing it (if they tap the doorframe to check for an odd sound, and tapping the doorframe itself is the trap trigger, then...).

You would hate me if you asked me to do this. I would move forward 1 room a session.

I check the in the normal way (we would have determined that the normal way is anything I can possibly think of) - how long does that take?

Do you do this for all perception rolls?

I look far ambushers in that tree, and that tree, and that tree, and that tree, and that one and that one and that one. What about that rock? Or that one or that one or that one? Right ok. Now the bushes. That one? That one? That one? Ok... ...hmmm oh! Flying ambushers. 1o'clock, 2 o'clock... ...12 o'clock. How long has that taken? 5 minutes?

Better check them all again because something could have moved into place in that time... Ok so the trees again...

:D

(BTW this is a JOKE and a serious point that this seems a bit unfair on your players)

Seriously though does this not just bog down your games too much? Isn't it just better to roll perception and modify the difficulty on whether they are being hyper careful, careful, normal, quick, rapid, sprinting?

Dream is doing it old school, and technically correctly. To actually search even a small area for traps, takes time, it slows down the searcher and presumably the party behind the rogue. Now unless the dm asks for more detail on where the searcher searches, they are checking for traps in the limits of what they can see. In a dungeon, that might not be very far. They can of course keep the search on, but that really slows down their progress. Over a large area, spells will run out, monsters may notice or regroup and come down hard on the party (if the searcher is stealthing they have slowed down again unless fast stealth, they are doing two things very carefully at once).

Chatting with the dm and being clear about what you are doing is best. If its, I am going to search everything as I encounter it, then progress will be slow and time will be wasted in areas without traps. If the player doesn't declare such a time wasting but safe option, then they are vulnerable to walking into traps. If they only search suspicious areas, then that is what they are doing, but may quickly proceed forward and blunder into traps without much of a give away. It is all very simple, but for some people with their style of play, they want to be able to proceed quickly and be given the check for traps opportunities when they are required, on no penalties of course.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Using traps against a party with no rogue All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.