How does perception work when finding traps?
When do I give players perception rolls to find traps?
As soon as they could possible perceive the trap,
right before they trigger it,
or
only when they ask for one.
From reading this:
Creatures that succeed on a Perception check detect a trap before it is triggered. The DC of this check depends on the trap itself. Success generally indicates that the creature has detected the mechanism that activates the trap, such as a pressure plate, odd gears attached to a door handle, and the like. Beating this check by 5 or more also gives some indication of what the trap is designed to do.
I've come to the conclusion that it would require the players to ask for one.
In which case how do I do a perception roll for the whole room?
What if there is more then one trap in the room?
I know this is an old question and I certainly don't want to start trouble but I wanted to gather ideas.
I'm looking for RAW answers.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Generally, if something is hidden, it needs to be actively searched for. Something out in the open (like a stench or an ongoing noise) or that "happens" (like a sudden noise of a vase falling over in the next room) gets a freebie Perception check.
Also note that the Rogue Talent "Trap Spotter" allows a secret, automatic check to notice a trap. Characters without this talent must search to find a trap.
Also note that the Rogue Talent "Trap Spotter" allows a secret, automatic check to notice a trap. Characters without this talent must search to find a trap.
This clears things up pretty easily.
I always try to tell my players that if one character/class has to go out of his way just to get an ability you can't get if for free.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Also note that the Rogue Talent "Trap Spotter" allows a secret, automatic check to notice a trap. Characters without this talent must search to find a trap.This clears things up pretty easily.
I always try to tell my players that if one character/class has to go out of his way just to get an ability you can't get if for free.
Additional information, if you want it.
Additional information, if you want it.
You know I always do.
But lets say no one has "Trap Spotter":
Do I give them one perception roll for the entire room?
or
Do I give them one perception roll per perceivable thing?
Say I have a 8 by 8 room.
Two of those squares have a trap each.
there is also hidden treasure hidden in the rafters.
and some faded writing on the wall.
Does the player have to make 64 perception checks, 4 perception checks or 1 perception check to find all the secrets to the room.
I'm still not quite clear on how it works when you don't have Trap Spotter. How much room can you search with a single Perception check? Does the complexity of the room affect that search? Does a 300-square-foot barren cavern with no rubble piles or other notable features take the same number of Perception checks and the same amount of time to search as a heavily furnished 300-square-foot room with dozens of goofy pendulum clocks hanging from the walls? In either case, how many checks would it take to cover that area?
I kind of handwave it as a "where you searching?" query for large, complicated rooms at the moment, but the question becomes increasingly relevant during, e.g., time-limited adventures.
First, they still get a reactive perception check to notice it when they come in the room. I tack on the +5 for distracted unless they specifically say they are looking for the trap. They also get +1/10 feet (2 squares) distance to the trap. If the room is dimly lit, I'll tag on another +2 unfavorable conditions. +5 for terrible if its smokey, hard to see, etc.
Those with trap spotter I consider to always be looking for traps. They get a non-distracted check everytime they are withing that distance from the trap. Perception checks can be retried as long as the thing is still there, so, if they come near a trap, don't see it, go back to the party to say "I think its all clear." Then come back near the trap, they get another roll.
Lastly, as far as how long it takes.
"Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."
It depends on what they're looking for. Give them 1 check per room when they first come in, and move actions to look for things specifically. "Is there a hidden door in this square?" "Is the chest trapped?" "Do I see anything valuable?"
If they want to search a 300square foot room, I would say at a minimum, a move action check per square they want to look for things that aren't obvious. Jeweled crown on top of the rubble? No check needed. Dig through the rubble to look for the scepter that goes with it? Move action.
First, they still get a reactive perception check to notice it when they come in the room.
I don't think you get this by RAW.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But lets say no one has "Trap Spotter":
"No one has Trap Spotter." There, said it. ;)
Do I give them one perception roll for the entire room?
If there's something that can be noticed (and doesn't need to be searched for), then give them a perception check as soon as it becomes possible to notice it. I.e., when they gain line of sight to it, when they open the door to the stinky room, etc.
If there's something to be searched for, then wait for them to announce that they're spending a move action to search. Once they do, they make a check, and apply the result to everything that could be perceived from that spot, remembering to apply DC modifiers due to distance.
So let's take a sample room: there's a freshly-discarded cigarette behind the couch (DC 0 to smell it), there's food on the coffee table (DC 5 to notice it's spoiled), there's a mutant mole man pacing back and forth (DC 10 to hear a creature walking) just outside the concealed door (DC 15). There's also a trap on the windowsill (DC 20 for this particular trap). The room is 20ft x 20ft.
In the party we have Bob the Dense Fighter (7 WIS, net -2 to Perception) and Sneaky McSneakerson the rogue (12 WIS, keen senses, 5 ranks, class skill, total +11).
Bob opens the door to the room. You read them the description, including the couch, food on the coffee table, and a window. You ask for a Perception check.
Bob rolls an 8, getting a 6. He notices the smell of smoke (DC 0 +1 for distance, and just barely notices that the food is spoiled (DC 5 +1 for distance). He fails to notice the mutant mole man outside (DC 10 +5 for being on the other side of a door, +2 for distance).
Sneaky rolls a 20, getting a 31. He notices the things Bob noticed, but also hears the Mole pacing outside. However, despite getting such a high check, he fails to notice the concealed door or the trap, because those must be searched for.
Having heard the mole, Sneaky suspects a hidden door and starts searching that wall. He spends a move action and makes a perception check. Assuming he moved next to the wall first, the DC is 15; he Takes 10, gets a 21, and finds it.
Meanwhile, Bob looks out the pretty window. He also activates the trap, and blows himself up. The Mole hears this and burrows beneath the room (DC 25 to notice). So you ask both Bob and Sneaky for perception checks to notice. (Bob is incapable of getting that high, though.) Sneaky chooses to take 10 again, but the resulting 21 isn't enough, so he notices nothing.
TLDR: One check per point in time that a check is warranted (either to notice something or because someone chose to search). Their result gets them everything with a DC of that much or lower that's possible for them to find.
Hope this helps.
"Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus."
Do they have a chance to see the trap? They get a check, the DC increases based on distance, being distracted, and the conditions.
Unless they then spend a move action to specifically ask, they do not get another check.
Trap spotter rogues (or other similar abilities) automatically get a check when coming within 10feet. In case they missed it the first time (almost all classes will).
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I'm still not quite clear on how it works when you don't have Trap Spotter. How much room can you search with a single Perception check? Does the complexity of the room affect that search? Does a 300-square-foot barren cavern with no rubble piles or other notable features take the same number of Perception checks and the same amount of time to search as a heavily furnished 300-square-foot room with dozens of goofy pendulum clocks hanging from the walls? In either case, how many checks would it take to cover that area?
Remember, a single check of active searching is done as a move action (see my above example as well), but doesn't have to "target" a particular area.
So in your example of a 300ft room, someone standing on one end and searching (once) will make a single perception check, and apply the result to everything to which they have line of sight (or that's making noise or producing odor). However, something on the other end of the room has a +30 distance modifier to whatever its base DC is. Also, if light sources don't reach all the way to the other end of the room and the character doesn't have darkvision, then it's impossible to spot something no matter how high a check they get.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
"Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus."
Do they have a chance to see the trap? They get a check, the DC increases based on distance, being distracted, and the conditions.Unless they then spend a move action to specifically ask, they do not get another check.
Trap spotter rogues (or other similar abilities) automatically get a check when coming within 10feet. In case they missed it the first time (almost all classes will).
See my earlier link. For things like traps, they don't get a check at all unless they're actively searching or have Trap Spotter (or a similar ability).
"Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus."
There has to be some perception checks that aren't reactive.
I think that traps fall under the few perceivable things that don't get reactive check because there stimulus isn't reactively observable.
Perception isn't a pre-saving throw.
Trap Spotter really clears this up for me.
If one character has to go out of his way just to get an ability you can't get if for free.
From your link.
2) The trap spotter talent lets a rogue make a perception check to notice ALL traps he comes wihtin range of. Normally, you have to tell the GM that you're looking for traps.
Just taking what he said, it sounds like as long as I say, "I'm looking for traps", I now get reactive checks to see traps as soon as I could possibly perceive them?
The way I see it working is like this:
Fighter opens the door, party makes perception checks. The rogue notices the DC 20 swinging axe trap just after the doorway. The fighter moves out of the way, and the rogue disarms it.
They get to the door on the other side of the room.
With trap spotter, upon coming within 10', he gets a perception check the GM makes. Upon success, the GM tells the rogue that he notices a camoflaged pit trap (dc 25) just in front of the door. He hadn't seen it before because of the distance penalties, but thanks to trap spotter, he got an immediate check before the fighter fell in.
Without trap spotter, unless someone took a move action to make a check prior to stepping on the camo pit trap, no one would have noticed it.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
You keep getting half right, half wrong.
Given that the Perception skill separates itself into two types of checks - "reactive", which you've already quoted, and "intentionally searching" - it's pretty obvious that when James say you have to tell the GM you're searching for traps, you're using the "intentionally searching" method, not the reactive one.
If you enter the room and everyone says "I'm searching for traps", the only difference between a "reactive" check and the normal searching rules is the expenditure of a move action.
But the idea of giving everyone a check automatically and just applying a penalty to everyone who didn't say "I'm searching" is completely your own invention.
That which can be noticed gets a free check without the player having to ask. That which must be searched for requires an announcement and a move action.
EDIT:
But you have this part right:
With trap spotter, upon coming within 10', he gets a perception check the GM makes. Upon success, the GM tells the rogue that he notices a camoflaged pit trap (dc 25) just in front of the door. He hadn't seen it before because of the distance penalties, but thanks to trap spotter, he got an immediate check before the fighter fell in.
Without trap spotter, unless someone took a move action to make a check prior to stepping on the camo pit trap, no one would have noticed it.
I'm just looking for anywhere that it states that "hidden" things require a move action perception check.
In 3.5 there was the search skill, and the spot skill. Spot was for stealthing creatures and reading lips. With try again as a move action if you missed it on the reactive check.
Search was for checking an area for hidden items/traps. You had to be within 10' and it took a full-round action to search a 5'x5' square.
Search was not reactive, so you couldn't get free-checks on traps.
Pathfinder combined the 2 into perception. Keeping the spot reactive, but also using it for finding hidden items/traps.
From the Traps section in Pathfinder, "Creatures that succeed on a Perception check detect a trap before it is triggered. The DC of this check depends on the trap itself. Success generally indicates that the creature has detected the mechanism that activates the trap, such as a pressure plate, odd gears attached to a door handle, and the like. Beating this check by 5 or more also gives some indication of what the trap is designed to do."
Perception does not require an action except when intentionally searching for stimulus. I appreciate James Jacobs clarification on how it *should* work. I wish the RAW would be changed to match said clarification. They could just change the traps section to state "Traps can only be detected by creatures intentionally searching for them." Allowing trap spotter to override it.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
From the Traps section in Pathfinder, "Creatures that succeed on a Perception check detect a trap before it is triggered. The DC of this check depends on the trap itself. Success generally indicates that the creature has detected the mechanism that activates the trap, such as a pressure plate, odd gears attached to a door handle, and the like. Beating this check by 5 or more also gives some indication of what the trap is designed to do."
Perception does not require an action except when intentionally searching for stimulus. I appreciate James Jacobs clarification on how it *should* work. I wish the RAW would be changed to match said clarification. They could just change the traps section to state "Traps can only be detected by creatures intentionally searching for them." Allowing trap spotter to override it.
I don't see how the two contradict each other. The rule you cited from the Traps section does not GRANT a perception check, it just tells you what happens if a creature succeeds on a perception check. That completely works with James' clarification. They do not conflict in the slightest.
You elect to search for traps, and therefore spend a move action to make a perception check. If the check is successful, you detect the trap before it's triggered.
I think you're imagining a conflict that doesn't exist.
Are traps somehow not observable without making a move action? Where is it stated so in the Rules?
I do agree that automatic trap checks shouldn't be given without an ability. I don't see any rule support for it however.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Are traps somehow not observable without making a move action? Where is it stated so in the Rules?
If you "zoom in" too close on the rules, sometimes you can miss the plain-english meaning (something I've done myself more than once).
Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus.
If something is "reactive", then there's got to be something to react to. Same with "made in response". With a trap (or other similarly hidden subject), there's nothing to react to.
If someone knocks on the door, you "reactively" notice it.
If there's a bad smell in the room, it comes to you - you don't have to go looking for it.
A false brick with a switch behind it is not something you can react to. Neither is a fake bookcase, or a pressure plate.
A knock on the door (or other sudden sound) is a disruption to which you could react.
An odor or ongoing noise is taking the "active" role in being noticed, allowing you to respond without effort.
An object that's deliberately hidden puts forth no stimulus. You have to go and find that stimulus yourself.
That's what the perception rules mean if you're not zoomed in too close. :)
Are traps somehow not observable without making a move action?
Well, that goes without saying doesn't it.
A false brick on the wall does not look like a normal brick. Therefore you should get a reactive perception check to notice that it isn't a real brick.
Same with a fake bookcase or pressure plate. The perception DC represents how hard it is to notice that it doesn't look exactly right. The light is hitting these objects, and bouncing into your eyes (or however darkvision works) and thus you are reacting to seeing the object. If you make your DC, you see it for what it is, a false brick/bookcase/plate. If you don't make the DC, you think its normal.
Are traps somehow not observable without making a move action?Well, that goes without saying doesn't it.
No, it really doesn't. Traps should say it. But they don't.
I stand firm that RAW traps give you a reactive check. RAI they shouldn't, but it should specify it somewhere.
I stand firm that RAW traps give you a reactive check.Okay, according to what?
Perception: "Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."
Traps are observable. They have an observable stimulus (the way they look). Therefore, perception allows you one reactive check once you are able to observe that stimulus.
Thereafter, you can use a move action to retry, or to intentionally search for one.
|
@Jiggy,
Although I like parts of your interpretation, I'm struggling with
An object that's deliberately hidden puts forth no stimulus.
How would traps allow for a perception check at any difficulty, if there were no perceptable clues at all?
Essentially, every trap with a Perception DC (I think that's all of them) has a small to miniscule detail that is a telltale sign of danger.
If it's a false brick, perhaps its color or texture is slightly off.
A fake bookcase may have a half-circle area of cleared dust extending from one side, indicating previous rotating movement.
A pressure plate may have corners or edges that are too sharp, or is marginally higher or lower than the rest of the floor surface.
Odor, noises, unusual air flow, these are the things that make it possible to find traps without stumbling into them.
Of course, the exception is (usually) anything that is not in line of sight; you don't get a chance to notice the switch hidden behind the false brick until you notice and move the false brick.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@Jiggy,
Although I like parts of your interpretation, I'm struggling with
An object that's deliberately hidden puts forth no stimulus.How would traps allow for a perception check at any difficulty, if there were no perceptable clues at all?
Essentially, every trap with a Perception DC (I think that's all of them) has a small to miniscule detail that is a telltale sign of danger.
See below.
If it's a false brick, perhaps its color or texture is slightly off.
Remember that we're just talking about a move action here. Less than six seconds. When you see a movie with a cautious or curious person walk into an empty room and take a second to look around, that's a move-action perception check.
The "reactive" checks are (since you're not spending an action, and therefore spending zero seconds to perform) something that you didn't even mean to do.
I'm not talking about the difference between a short glance (freebie) and spending a few minutes sticking your face into everything (intentional). I'm saying that the brief glance is the intentional search (move action) and that the reactive freebie is when you just walk by without even looking and something presents itself to you in spite of yourself.
So yes, I think you need to at least glance in the direction of the bricks to notice if the color or texture is off. Is that so unreasonable?
A fake bookcase may have a half-circle area of cleared dust extending from one side, indicating previous rotating movement.
That half-circle is not the hidden object. I'd give a free check to notice that as you walk in. If you spotted it, you might then be inclined to search the bookcase, which would give you the opportunity to find its true nature. Failing that check (after noticing the half-circle) would leave you knowing that there's probably a secret door, but unable to discern its exact edges/mechanisms/details. See the difference?
Think of the classic movie scene: person walks into the room, and the camera gives you their view. You see the spot on the floor (or a disturbed rug, or whatever), then the camera pans over to the secret door. The camera panning over is the move action.
A pressure plate may have corners or edges that are too sharp, or is marginally higher or lower than the rest of the floor surface.
Again, as with the bricks: you need to at least spare it a glance to find that out. Failing to spend a move action means you didn't even break your stride. Something needs to present itself to you for you to notice it without looking for it.
Odor, noises, unusual air flow, these are the things that make it possible to find traps without stumbling into them.
Some of these were even in my examples of things you'd get passive checks for. As another example, I'd give a passive check to notice "Wait a second, do you feel that draft? Where's it coming from?" and then you start looking around (move action) and maybe find the secret passageway.
Interestingly enough: "Secret Doors: Disguised as a bare patch of wall (or floor or ceiling), a bookcase, a fireplace, or a fountain, a secret door leads to a secret passage or room. Someone examining the area finds a secret door, if one exists, on a successful Perception check (DC 20 for a typical secret door to DC 30 for a well-hidden secret door)."
You have to examine the area (I read that as move action perception check) to find a secret door. It says so specifically.
So now we're down to just traps not requiring a check. This makes sense, as whatever triggers the trap would be an observable stimulus.
|
|
My arguement is that PCs with more than a poor Perception modifier have a chance to notice things with even a short glance/"freebie"/passive check.
I'm saying there's no difference between your examples of what requires an active and passive Perception roll, other than DC. At least, that's my impression.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Interestingly enough: "Secret Doors: Disguised as a bare patch of wall (or floor or ceiling), a bookcase, a fireplace, or a fountain, a secret door leads to a secret passage or room. Someone examining the area finds a secret door, if one exists, on a successful Perception check (DC 20 for a typical secret door to DC 30 for a well-hidden secret door)."
You have to examine the area (I read that as move action perception check) to find a secret door. It says so specifically.
So now we're down to just traps not requiring a check. This makes sense, as whatever triggers the trap would be an observable stimulus.
So to recap:
• We have no rules text that explicitly conflicts with the idea of needing to look for traps on purpose;
• We have clarification from Paizo staff that you need to actively search for traps;
• We now have precedent with secret doors needing to be actively searched for;
...And currently the only thing still suggesting you might notice a trap without looking for it is your own very strict/narrow interpretation of a single phrase ("observable stimulus") - a phrase which can just as validly (grammatically speaking) be interpreted in such a way as to mesh perfectly with the bullet list above.
If there are two grammatically valid ways to interpret the text, and one of them meshes perfectly with everything else available while the other creates problems, it seems pretty obvious that the former is the correct interpretation.
So unless you can find something else (another rule, Dev commentary, alternate precedent, etc) that suggests what you're saying, then the only obstacle to clarity is your own (mis)interpretation of a single phrase.
@ Tarantula,
You have to examine the area (I read that as move action perception check) to find a secret door. It says so specifically.Actually, it says this is one way to discover a secret door.
Nonetheless, a good bit of text to by for other Perception situations.
Where does it say any other way?
"Someone examining the area finds a secret door, if one exists, on a successful Perception check (DC 20 for a typical secret door to DC 30 for a well-hidden secret door)."Jiggy,
I agree that the INTENT is that you must search for traps. My point is that by the RAW, you get a reactive check upon a stimulus.
"• We have no rules text that explicitly conflicts with the idea of needing to look for traps on purpose; "
We have rules text which explicitly states you get a reactive check for a stimulus. Either traps do not have any stimulus, (and would logically be unfindable), or traps need wording to specify they require actively looking.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy,
I agree that the INTENT is that you must search for traps. My point is that by the RAW, you get a reactive check upon a stimulus.
"RAW" stands for "Rules as written".
"Written" means put down on paper in a language.
"Language" includes the need to interpret words based on context (otherwise it's something more like math). The same phrase can mean two different things based on context.
If you ignore context, you're breaking the language.
Break the language, and you've lost what was written.
Lose what's written, and you no longer have "rules as written".
Thus, if you fail to account for context (and other linguistic constructs besides the words themselves), then you are not looking at the "RAW".
|
|
Looking at the descriptions of Perception rolls in the skills chapter, it does appear that noticing certain things actively or reactively depends on type, not difficulty. Apologies to Jiggy as I didn't find your explination very clear.
Hear, Notice, and Sense seem to be the reactive calls for Perception, while Find, Identify, and Determine would call for PC actions to get a roll.
With this interpretation (essentially defaulting to keywords), PCs don't notice any trap unless they declare they are looking for them or they have the Trap Spotter rogue talent. The same goes for concealed or secret doors.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Looking at the descriptions of Perception rolls in the skills chapter, it does appear that noticing certain things actively or reactively depends on type, not difficulty. Apologies to Jiggy as I didn't find your explination very clear.
I sometimes write my explanations with the idea that the reader has just read the text in question and has it fresh in their minds. Sorry about that. :)
Hear, Notice, and Sense seem to be the reactive calls for Perception, while Find, Identify, and Determine would call for PC actions to get a roll.
Not a bad rule of thumb! I might use that.
Good enough for me. Find is active voice, not reactive, therefore for the "find" actions, PCs must take the move action to find.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think the trap finding and secret door requiring a PC action is dumb. Because it encourages metagaming.
Basically newbie players shouldn't be playing a trapfinder because how would a newbie know where/when to check, whereas a 20 year veteran would be like ha broken statue always search it for traps because the last 8 modules broken statues had traps.
What I think is you should use reactive perception checks to let the player know that there is something that looks out of place.
I see your concern, especially regarding inexperienced players. Let me offer a different solution:
Newbie approaches a door and intends to open it. Instead of (as you suggest) giving him a perception check, tell him "You know, your character is an experienced adventurer, and would probably check that door for traps, given he's in the middle of a dangerous dungeon."
This way, you're (a) still following the rules, (b) teaching him things instead of making him dependent on you, and (c) helping him identify with his character ("what HE would do" instead of "what the PLAYER would do").
Or if you're more into tough love, let him get blown up a couple of times. That'll teach him to check doors for traps. ;)
Well, that goes without saying doesn't it.No, it really doesn't. Traps should say it. But they don't.
They don't because it goes without saying.
A trap isn't suppose to be detected. A trap should look like it's suppose to be that way.
Here is another example this time it's not about traps but about illusions:
All About Illusions (Part Three)
By Skip Williams
At least for illusions to get a saving throw requires that you take some kind of action. Either studying the illusion or interacting with it.
I think that trap are similar. Traps are not simply discolored tiles on the floor.