I'm GM'ing a party w/out a rogue and intend to have some villains using traps to guard their wilderness lair. The party is:
Human Cleric 1 (Erastil)
Human Monk 1
Dwarf Fighter 1 (unbreakable arch)
1/2 Elf Wizard 1 (Abjurer)
We've got great Perception skills in the party but no one to disarm the traps at this time. Should I offer skill-challenge bypass mechanics?
Ex: party comes to an area of the bog, rolls perception, and can tell that there's something off - vines don't usually grow so taught where they hit the ground. They suspect a trap but other than throwing rocks all over the place they don't know how to proceed.
Skills to use to bypass would be Survival (see tracks of monsters that bypass), Knowledge: Nature or Geography to see EXACTLY what's out of place, and finish up with an Acrobatics or Climb to go over/around the afflicted path.
Does this make sense? Does it break the game since it basically nullifies the usefulness of a rogue? Please advise.
How to disarm traps: trigger them. Try summon monster.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your idea works fine, whatever let's your group have fun. Make things more difficult for them without disable device but not impossible. If they find the trap and can skirt around it maybe that causes some problems for them.
They could also just put ranks into disable device just won't get the class skill bonus. In fact there might be a trait or two that makes it a class skill for one of them and gives a small bonus to the roll.
But 100% agree that sometimes other skills like survival should be able to sub for disable device.
There are several ways to deal with traps. Have summons trigger them, detect magic, have the big guy in front, etc. Those are some ways that low levels can deal with traps. Also remember that perception usually makes it easy to get around traps. Your party might struggle a little with traps but who cares? It'll just be more of a challenge for them.
I am not clear whether you are intimating you know this or not, but anyone can find traps with a successful Perception check (rogues are just better at it because they get a bonus). So in the case of the trapped vines, the party won't know "Something's up" with the vines, they will know there is a trap there.
If they Perceive the trap well enough (the cleric can help with find traps at higher levels), they should be able to see what it is and what triggers it.
For example, if they see a trip wire that leads to a rockfall trap, then they know all they need to do is step over or cut the trip wire, or trigger it deliberately and jump back since that's the kind of trap that doesn't really need a complex way to disable it.
If it's a complex trap that you don't think they should be able to immediately recognize the trap's nature, I'd allow appropriate Knowledge checks -- say Engineering (which the Fighter has in addition to the Wizard) or Arcana (Wizard and Cleric have) or Dungeoneering (Fighter and Wizard again).
They may not be able to disarm it but they should be able to figure out other ways to circumvent it if they are clever.
And as for disarming...
As Paraxis notes, nothing is stopping any of your players from training Disable Device. They won't get the class bonus, but there's Skill Focus to help with that, if it's felt to be an issue. Remember in Pathfinder there there is no a halved limit on skill points you spend in any non-class skill. Class skills just give you a bonus, that's all.
The only thing really special about the trapfinding class feature (beyond its bonuses) is that rogues (and a handful of archetypes) are able to disarm magical traps with Disable Device. So magic traps are an issue--but not too much at 1st level, I would think. In many cases, once your wizard and cleric are high enough level to get it, dispel magic can help deal with the issue. Depending on the nature of the trap, a counterspell might work. Or they and you could get creative--for example, if the magical trap is necromantic in nature (discernible with detect magic), you could allow the cleric to cancel it out with a few expenditures of her channel energy ability, or a powerful positive energy spell, or some such.
Trapfinding is a neat ability but there's a lot of extant ways around it that you don't really need to finagle all that much to manage anything. It's not really what makes rogues that unique or special (that would be sneak attack and rogue talents, IMO).
So getting back to something Tim said: you have to be actively sweeping for traps and it's a move action? Those points I DIDN'T know.
So, unless my players state "we're moving slowly enough to try and spot traps in the swamps" then I should just make them start rolling saves?
Ok, that makes more sense. After the first couple snares I'm sure they'll get the hint and start checking.
As to detecting the trap; the perception check COMPLETELY outlines the trap? That's another point I didn't realize. So in the case of this trap example the party would come along, say they're searching for traps make a roll, and then I would announce: there's a net of vines buried beneath a bunch of leaves and debris crossing the trail. More vines are tied to taught branches so that, when you enter the afflicted area the net will scoop you up.
Then that's it then?
I never have traps unless I think through how they work and what they do. The disable device roll is for when a player feels like being brainless and just rolling a die. Most mechanical traps, if found and described by the gm, can be overcome with thinking.
No skills are for people who want to ROLEPLAY a character they are not in the real world.
If a player of a rogue who has a 16 int and tons of points in disable device, just throws his skill check it is because in real life the player does not have an engineering degree and doesn't live in a world with magic traps.
If a player of another rogue wants to charm a barmaid or con a king out of a ton of treasure and has all the social skills maxed out, yes it is just a single roll or series of rolls because that is what the rules are for and the real life player might not be able to talk to girls, is anti-social, and the only con men he knows are from watching Leverage.
Plus it sucks when the guy who is an engineer but is playing a druid without any skill as such talks his way past a trap without spending any in game resources knowing how to do it. Or the guy who does a lot of social stuff in real life but is playing a dwarf with a charisma of 8 and no skill, just talks his way through the game.
Skills and d20 rolls matter nothing else, this is a game with rules.
An actual bigger problem that occurs to me is Disable Device is also what you use to pick locks, so that could be an issue.
@ DeathQ: no no, that's what the dwarf fighter is for.
@ Paraxis: Hear Hear! That is one of my biggest pet peeves with folks who say "don't roll play; roleplay!" In real life I've attended Toastmasters for years, GM'd a ton and am the defacto trainer at work - I talk A LOT and am very comfortable with it. When I pick up my dwarf fighter NPC with the 9 Cha there's NO WAY he's going to chat nicely at the bar; he belches his approval and the snorts that the busty wench should go get him another.
The flipside to that is when the players ARE stuck at a mechanical trap or puzzle and say "can I try THIS with my Acrobatics skill..." and make some totally implausible plan. I say "sure, give me a roll" looking at their +6 Acrobatics and thinking "there's no way." Then the natural 20 hits and something amazing happens.
And then for a couple more gaming sessions that character is referred to as THE GUY THAT CAN BACKFLIP OVER A DOUBLE REAPER TRAP WHILE RINGING A BELL.
Bottom line: my FANTASY character can do things that are fantastic; I'm lucky to break average in real life. Their ranks in their skills, plus their feats and powers represent this fantasy and guage it's effectiveness.
So what I'm getting from all your input is that I shouldn't just tell the players what the trap does but rather suggest the probability of a trap and what might trip it, then just simply let the party do whatever they want to try and get around it in place of just disarming it (until the monk takes a rank in Disable Device).
|
There's two competing schools of thought about traps in RPGs, and there's something to be said for both of them.
The "Roll it!" way - this is what Pathfinder mainly uses. There's a rule for detecting a trap, and then a rule for dealing with it. This is good for players without a lot of engineering ideas or genre savvy. Your character can be good at finding traps even if you're clueless as a place, if you spend the points. But if you don't spend the points, it's gonna be hard, even if you're a clever player.
The "RP/puzzle it!" way - this is an old school thing, mostly seen in 1st edition D&D, but a lot of people like it. There aren't any explicit skills for finding traps. Instead, the DM describes the room, the players ask questions about what they see. They get a stick to prod the floor, examine the chest with a mirror on a stick, and so forth. If the players play it well, they'll find the traps. Then they have to think of a way to bypass it. This way of doing it depends a great deal of the skill of the players, not the characters. It also matters how well you know your DM's tricks.
Now, the second way isn't entirely absent in PF. If the DM planned a trap with a pressure plate, and you send something ahead of the party that would trigger that, that would work and you'd find the trap. However, the players have to come up with these ideas. Some people think this is metagaming (using player intellect instead of the character's skills), others think it's the height of good roleplaying/gaming.
If your players lack a rogue, they could blend both ways. If they see a suspicious piece of ground, they can roll Perception to notice the trap (and gain more info with better rolls), or the wizard can use Mage Hand to pull on the vines and see if anything happens.
As a DM, if the players come up with ingenious ideas, I'd say "Okay, that's interesting, you make a Disable Device check, but you get a +X bonus for having a good tool/trick." The bonus gives them a chance, but also signals that having the ability would make them even better at it. If they later take Disable Device, they can of course still use such tricks for a bonus; you've just taught the players to be creative, which is a good thing :)
The flipside to that is when the players ARE stuck at a mechanical trap or puzzle and say "can I try THIS with my Acrobatics skill..." and make some totally implausible plan. I say "sure, give me a roll" looking at their +6 Acrobatics and thinking "there's no way." Then the natural 20 hits and something amazing happens.
Natural 20s (and 1s) only apply to attacks and saving throws. They do not apply to skill checks. If you roll an acrobatics check with a +6bonus and roll a 20 the DC better be 26 or less. Otherwise you just failed.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I got a similar situation... I recently bought "The Wurst of Grimtooth's Traps" (I mostly bought it just 'cause it seemed interesting, not to make heavy use of it, but it's a great book.), I mentioned this to one of my players. His answer was "Why torture your self? The party has no rogue", to which my reply was "Well, I fail to see how that is MY problem."
Sometimes the party will face challenges they are not completelly prepared, not everything in the world plays to their strength. Some challenges may be harder or easier, traps just happen to be the (supposedly) harder ones.
That said, of course, I will never spring traps and more traps everywhere just so I can say "I told you so! , but I made it clear that traps are not off the table, and depending on their location, they may be very common and very well hidden. (If you decide to enter a dragon's lair on one of those anciet temples, you better bring your 10ft-pole!)
There are lot of ways to detecty traps. Character with high Perception modifiers (Rangers, Druids, Inquisitors) have a pretty good chance to spot them and simply avoid them ("That door is trapped. Let's find another entrance"), summons can be used to trigger traps. And anyone can put ranks in Disable Device. There are no penalties for assigning ranks to cross-class skills.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
You could do a skill challenge, you could let them puzzle it, whatever seems fun.
I'm homebrewing a Trapfinding feat to allow other characters to find magic traps, not sure how/if I want the bonus that rogues get to translate. Probably a stunted form.
Anyone can find a trap with a Perception check. If Disable Device is not a class/feat/trait skill, it's a Dex check to disable it. Unless it is a magic trap, that requires Trapfinding, I believe. Rogues get Trapfinding as a class skill.
Side note- the fighter/rogue in our Serpent's Skull campaign tripped many, many traps at low levels on Smuggler's Shiv. And not that deadly- swung up into the trees and was stabbed by sharp sticks via the old hook-and-branch trap. Use traps, they present another challenge, but don't make them deadly if the party cannot disable them with a degree of success.
Rogues can disable a trp, but that is not the only way to get around traps.
Once a trap is detected, there are several options:
- disable it;
- trigger it;
- bypass it.
Only the first option requires a rogue, the others don't. As long as your players notice the trap, they should be able to find a solution:
- they can trigger a mechanical trap by throwing stones or using a stick;
- they can trigger any trap by summoning a monster or sending in a prisoner first;
- they can disable a magical trap with dispel magic;
- they can bypass a trap by using a skill like survival (the orcs always walk on the left side of the corridor to avoid the trap, let's do the same) or knowledge skills (engineering or arcana might inform them how the trap works and provide an answer on how to avoid it) or acrobatics (jump over it) ...
Just use your imagination!
Atarlost: Why? Non-rogues can detect traps too. Not having a rogue with trapfinding is no longer the penalty it was in 3.5. Anyone with perception can do so. And as MrVergee stated you do not need a rogue to deal with a trap.
- Gauss
Our group has had many a chuckle by coming up with crazy and/or stupid ways of bypassing traps. We had a cleric summon a bear once just so it could take up the whole hallway and trigger anything. This worked ok until the wizard got turned to ash from the fireball trap because he wanted to follow right behind the bear. Fun times.
Carn, can you cite the location where it states searching is a full-round action for a 5ft square? I see actively using perception listed as a move action not a full-round action. There is no statement anywhere in the book that I can find that lists searching for a trap as a full-round action.
This means 3 squares can be searched every two rounds.
Since there is no clear description of how trapfinding works this is how I run it:
If you are not actively searching then you get a perception check right at the moment when you trigger a trap.
Success = you are aware of the trap as you are triggering it (this means you keep dex and dodge bonuses to AC).
Failure = you are unaware of the trap (and are thus flatfooted).
If you are actively searching then you do not trigger the trap unless you fail your perception check.
A rogue with Trap Spotter will get a chance to detect a trap before they trigger it the moment they are within 10feet of the trap.
- Gauss
You have a wizard, if they can spot the trap he can trigger almost anything with unseen servant
The thing ot keep in mind, anybody can find traps with perception, and disable most traps with the disable device skill, rogue is just better at it. The real thing rogue brings to the table is that they can disable magical traps with the disable device skill. if your just using mundane and mechanical traps anybody with the skill points can deal with them.
Asta
PSY
How would this work with magic traps then. My monk NPC is planning to be around til level 3; she's already aspoused aspirations at "going rogue" so she'll be able to cover them in a couple levels, but for the next couple sessions then after she's gone they'll have a couple potential magic traps to deal with.
The dwarf fighter of course just says F it and dives in, trusting his high con to deal with whatever, but that should get deadly fast. So my questions are 2 fold:
What does the description of a magic trap look like after a perception check gets made?
How do non-rogues deal with a magic trap?
Ex: Acid Arrow Trap/CR 3
The trigger is a proximity and it casts a spell, so if you actually succeeded at a DC 27 Perception (incredibly doubtful but still) what EXACTLY would you percieve? And for that matter, in a mechanical trap you might get SOME concept of what sets it off; how the heck will you explain the characters perceiving some invisible alarm laser?
Knights of the dinner table told me to buy sheep, create a giant lightning cattle prod and head into the dungeon.
A magic trap is basically a magic item. It can be dispelled if they have line of effect. Of course, that'll only last a little while.
As for perceiving the trigger, I'm not too sure. The alarm spell mentions a very fine silver wire. You might still need this to make a proximity trigger based on alarm.
Natural 20s (and 1s) only apply to attacks and saving throws. They do not apply to skill checks. If you roll an acrobatics check with a +6bonus and roll a 20 the DC better be 26 or less. Otherwise you just failed.
I can't find anything that says they applies to saving throws, just attack rolls.
Aioran: Here you go. :)
Automatic Failures and Successes: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on a saving throw is always a failure (and may cause damage to exposed items; see Items Surviving after a Saving Throw on page 217). A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a success.
- Gauss
There seems to be three possible responses here, depending on which style on the GNS (Gamist/Narrativist/Simulationist) spectrum one falls. (Please, no debates on the accuracy of the GNS model -- it works for an easy examination.)
Gamist: Approaching this from the standpoint that this is a *game*, you would want to cut down on the number of traps, make them weaker, or cut them out entirely, because the character class mainly designed to deal with them is absent.
Narrativist: If "the story" is your thing, you'll want to only use those traps that make the most sense, are the most interesting, or most fit dramatic need. You probably won't want a lot of them, and the ones you have should be mainly useful for creating atmosphere and/or letting the characters learn more about the nature of the enemies who set them.
Simulationist: Going for pure simulation, you'll want to ignore the fact that there is no rogue, since the people/creatures who set the traps don't really think about that anyway. Those traps are there to discourage intruders or flat-out kill them, so the folks who set them are going to make them hard to spot, as numerous as they can manage with their resources and time, and as lethal as possible.
Me, I'd go with a blend of Narrativist and Simulationist.
Oh there it is. Thanks!
Atarlost: Why? Non-rogues can detect traps too. Not having a rogue with trapfinding is no longer the penalty it was in 3.5. Anyone with perception can do so. And as MrVergee stated you do not need a rogue to deal with a trap.
- Gauss
I think the trap DCs are about 50% higher because the Pathfinder rogue with max perception and disable device is about 50% better than a 3.5 rogue with maxed spot and disable device because trapfinding now adds half the rogue's level to the skills as well as enabling their use on magical traps.
Dropping the DCs by 33% is easier than refiguring their DCs using the 3.5 rules. If you're converting a 3.5 module, of course, you just don't adjust the traps.
The reason to not use magical traps is that the dispel check odds aren't pretty. Letting anyone with a caster level disable them normally would be another option.
Well, lets find out shall we?
Format will be PF first and 3.5 second. If they are the same then I will put them as PF/3.5. Trap elements will be Perception/Search and Disable Device (abbreviated PS and DD).
A note about poisons. PF poisons are generally less deadly than 3.5 equivalents. 3.5 equivalents hit hard and fast while PF poisons last longer and hurt more over the entire duration. This makes PF poisoned traps less deadly because of treatment possibilities IMO.
Arrow Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS20, DD20). Note: attack and damage increased in PF version.
(Camouflaged) Pit Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS24, DD24). Note: reflex did not change, PF damage/depth is doubled to 20feet.
Poisoned Dart Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS23, DD18). Note: PF Dart does 1d3 vs 3.5 1d4 damage. Poisons are different of course.
Swinging Axe Trap (Scything Blade Trap in 3.5): PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS21, DD20). Note: PF version is slightly more accurate, does slightly more damage, and attacks 2 squares vs 1.
Burning Hands Trap: PF/3.5 (PS26, DD26). Note: Reflex did not change. PF damage doubled.
Spiked Pit Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS18, DD15). Note: 3.5 Fall is double the height/damage otherwise same spike damage and Reflex saves.
Javelin Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS20, DD18). Note: PF damage slightly higher, 3.5 Attack slightly higher.
Acid Arrow Trap (Melf's Acid Arrow): PF/3.5 (PS27, DD27). Note: PF version lasts 2rounds longer.
Camouflaged Pit Trap: PF (PS25, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS24, DD18). Note: Reflex and damage identical.
Electricity Arc Trap: Not available in 3.5. No comparison to be had.
Wall Scythe Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS21, DD18). Note: 3.5 version does slightly more damage.
Falling Block Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS20, DD25). Note: attack and damage same.
Fireball Trap: PF/3.5 (PS28, DD28). Note: PF version does 2d6 less damage.
At this point Im going to stop listing common Magic Traps. It has been shown that (other than damage) they are basically the same at the same CRs.
Wyvern Arrow Trap: PF (PS20, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS20, DD16).
Frost Fangs Trap: No 3.5 Equivalent.
Camouflaged Spiked Pit Trap vs Well-Camouflaged Pit Trap: PF (PS25, DD20) vs 3.5 (PS27, DD18). Note: These are two different pit traps but this is the closest I could get in this CR. The damage for the PF pit is 5d6fall +1d4spikes@1d6+5each vs a 10d6fall. The reflex saves are the same.
Insanity Mist Trap: PF/3.5 (PS25, DD20). Note: Poison Trap
There are no common (physical) CR9 traps. However both physical traps in PF have a DCs of 25/25 or 26/26 (PS/DD) while the physical traps in 3.5 have DCs are 18/26, 20/16, 25/25, and 20/20 (avgs of 25.5/25.5 vs 20.75/21.75).
There are no common (physical) CR10 traps. However the one physical PF trap has DCs of 25/20 while the 3.5 physical traps are 22/20, 20/25, and 16/25 (avg of 19.33/23.33).
The 3.5DMG trap chart ceased at CR10. Perhaps there are more sources of 3.5 traps but I do not feel like hunting around for them. This should be a pretty decent sample.
CR Sample Summary: It is my opinion that PF traps are pretty stable on DCs while 3.5 traps were all over the place. With that said, the average DCs for PF vs 3.5 traps do not seem to be that different. The averages at CR9 and 10 do show a several point deviation but the samples are disimilar so there is no way to be sure. 3.5 Trap examples are haphazard.
It is also worth having a look at the two construction tables.
Perception/Search: In PF a trap with a PS of 30+ has a +3CR whereas a 3.5 trap only has a +2CR. This means that higher Perception/search DCs can be built into 3.5 traps than in PF traps at earlier levels.
Disable Device is identical to the Perception/Search table. Again, it appears that 3.5 traps can have higher DCs for lower levels.
Reflex Save has the same breakdown as Perception/Search and Disable Device. IE: 3.5 has higher requirements at a lower level.
Attack Bonus is the same story. 3.5 has a higher attack bonus at a lower level.
Damage is the first area where PF actually has a trap statistic per CR point. 3.5 is +1CR/7points vs PF +1CR/10points. More damage in PF results in less of a CR increase.
Poison bonuses: Identical (with the exception of one poison removed from 3.5).
Construction Table Summary: Except for damage 3.5 traps are have higher numbers at equal levels. (Put another way: PF traps have lower numbers at equal levels.) Perception/Search, Disable Device, Reflex, and Attack Bonus are all higher. Only Damage is higher in PF vs 3.5.
Complete Summary: 3.5 exchanged various things for lower DCs when they did have lower DCs. PF typically has consistent DCs and does not sacrifice Perception/DD DCs in favor of damage. It doesn't need to since PF increased the average damage.
It is worth noting that the one PF mechanical CR18 trap example (Deadly Spear Trap) only has a Perception DC of 30. A level 18 character with Perception as a class skill and max ranks (+0wisdom) will have a 60% chance of seeing this trap. If taking 10 (which I believe you can do) then it is a 100% chance. A rogue can do it faster, while on the move (trap spotter), and without taking 10 still have a 100% chance to find it. Thats just what rogues do. There is no arbitrary DC increase just because rogues exist.
- Gauss
P.S. I do not know why I sometimes make this massive posts. Perhaps I just love to do comparisons. *shrug*
There are a lot of classes that can get trapfinding and everyone can learn disable device.
If your pc decide they don't need someone so be it.
Would you have your enemies deal less damage if the party decided to go without anyone who can cast healing spells?
And your PCs can use the find traps spell.