|
I may have been adjudicating traps incorrectly...
Let's use an example of PC's in a basic hallway that has a pit trap in it.
The PCs enter the hall and are allowed a perception check to notice this trap. If they don't it goes off with the PC rolling the appropriate saving throw. If they see it, they can take actions from there.
However, looking at feats, I see what is called Heightened Trap Sense: Source Osirion, Land of the Pharaohs pg. 29
"You are acutely attentive to the subtleties of traps and how they are hidden.
Prerequisites: Search 6 ranks, trap sense +1.
Benefit: When you pass within 5 feet of a trap, you are entitled to an automatic Search check to notice the trap. This check is made at a –10 penalty, or –5 if you are moving at half speed and taking no actions other than moving.
Normal: You must take an action to actively search."
This seems like a waste if you take this as a Rogue...I must be missing something here...
The Perception DC is for actively searching for traps. If you'er not searching for them then you just get hit by them.
I may have been adjudicating traps incorrectly...
Let's use an example of PC's in a basic hallway that has a pit trap in it.
The PCs enter the hall and are allowed a perception check to notice this trap. If they don't it goes off with the PC rolling the appropriate saving throw. If they see it, they can take actions from there.
However, looking at feats, I see what is called Heightened Trap Sense: Source Osirion, Land of the Pharaohs pg. 29
"You are acutely attentive to the subtleties of traps and how they are hidden.Prerequisites: Search 6 ranks, trap sense +1.
Benefit: When you pass within 5 feet of a trap, you are entitled to an automatic Search check to notice the trap. This check is made at a –10 penalty, or –5 if you are moving at half speed and taking no actions other than moving.
Normal: You must take an action to actively search."
This seems like a waste if you take this as a Rogue...I must be missing something here...
Just for clarification, that feat was from a very old Pathfinder book, back before the Core Rulebook came out. Heightened Trap Sense is basically the predecessor to the Trap Spotter rogue talent.
Normally PCs are not searching for traps unless they're a rogue with the above-mentioned rogue talent or unless they specifically say "Hey GM, when we enter this room, I'm actively looking for traps" and then they take the time to search and make a Perception check. I wanna say even out of combat it takes a good while to search an entire room, especially if they take 10 or 20.
and the realization hits me: I did traps a bit wrong. *scribbles note*
Hmm so if a Fighter says he searches for traps and fails his perception roll, will he automatically set of the trap at that point?
That is correct. Fighter in the hole. This is why you want a rogue or at least a summoned pony to find the traps.
Hmm so if a Fighter says he searches for traps and fails his perception roll, will he automatically set of the trap at that point?That is correct. Fighter in the hole. This is why you want a rogue or at least a summoned pony to find the traps.
Well wouldn't it depends on HOW he is searching for traps AND what kind of trap it is?
|
By default, searching for traps does not set off traps, as you do not have to be in the square where the trap is to search for it. In the OP's example, actually stepping into the square with the pit trap sets it off, but you could search for the trap as soon as the area where it was, came into view.
|
One note is that it's implicit that it be a Hidden or Concealed Trap.
For example, an open pit trap in the middle of a hallway does not normally require an active perception check to detect and any GM who requires you to actively look for unconcealed open pit traps is simply being a wienie. And yes, if you're doing something stupid like walking through a dangerous unknown dungeon while playing vegetables versus zombies on your magic cellular communication device, you may fall into one, but anyone moving in a normally cautious manner shouldn't have a problem.
Many if not most traps are hidden or concealed, but not all. A Good aligned wizard might put an obvious death trap in front of a door to both protect the door AND warn any interlopers to stay away from the door. Being good aligned, he doesn't necessarily want to kill anyone, though he's willing if they try to breach the trap, but he wants them to see the trap as his real goal is to simply keep people away.
If you need to fit this into RAW because you can't wrap your head around the idea of traps that don't require active perception checks, then think of them not as traps, but as obstacles or terrain. Since they're obvious, they're not there to "trap" you, they're simply part of the terrain you need to negotiate.
The Osirion feat was for 3.5. The feat makes little sense in Pathfinder.
You get a passive check. If you fail it, you don't notice the trap. If you actively search, you can continue to make checks as long as you have the time and inclination, including a take 20. If you have the Trap Spotter rogue talent, you get another automatic check with no penalty when you get within 10 feet.
This is incorrect. You do not get passive checks unless something is actively opposing you - like a creature making a stealth check. Only a rogue with Trap Spotter (or someone with a similar ability) gets 'passive' Perception checks versus traps.
Can you provide a citation for this? The rules for Perception allow you to notice fine details with a successful check, and Perception typically requires no action at all unless all you're doing is intentionally searching for stimuli:
Action
Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action.
If the trap is at all observable, you get a check, full stop. It may be a slight seam around the pressure tile, a simple glance upward to notice the blades hidden in the cobwebs of the ceiling, or the quiet tap-tap-tap of the claws of a horde of carnivorous beetles boxed and ensconced in the wall. If you want to be particularly careful, you can spend a move action (or several) listening and looking to receive additional checks.
I agree that you get an automatic perception check against basic traps such as false floor over a pit, or spikes in the wall. This is subject to the penalties such as if you enter the room, you are 20 feet away, and it is dark, and there is a troll in the room, I would apply +2 for disatnce, +2 for unfavorable conditions (unless you have darkvision or enough light to put the trap in normal lighting) and +5 for distracted due to the presence of a hostile creature in the room. For a pit trap the base DC is 20, so this would put it to 29 for all the modifiers, 27 with adequate light, and after you kill the troll, if anyone wants to make another check, they could do so at 20 + distance.
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.
Another question I've often wondered about is how do you get the Dodge bonus to AC from your Trap Sense ability if you didn't know the trap was there? Wouldn't you be considered flat-footed against the trap's attack roll, and thus lose all Dodge bonuses to AC against it?
Way I've usually handled this is the player has to say "I'm looking for traps and moving cautiously" or some such. At that point, I have them roll. I tell them that will be their perception for when there's a trap, and that they move at half-speed. Play resumes. As soon as they come within 5-10 feet (whatever I deem reasonable), I determine success or failure. Traps goes off (or not).
The only time this has bitten me has been when there's multiple traps and they somehow 'dodge' the first by accident (never set foot in the square) and run into a second. They should get a new roll. Ideally, you could do it secretly for them, but I find that more of a personal dislike. At the risk of letting them know out of character knowledge, I usually just tell them to roll again (and for simplicity, flat out tell them they passed a trap they didn't see; some players get really paranoid that they just unleashed some monster elsewhere in the dungeon, tee hee hee!!!)
A chair in the room does not require a perception check. It is obvious.
A hidden panel is not obvious, so there is an automatic perception check (distracted) to see it when you come in the room. If you choose to intentionally look for traps after coming in the room, you will get to remove the (distracted) modifier.
For trapspotter, I give them an immediate non-distracted check at 10 feet.
You can take 20 for the searching the room from the square you are in. Traps 10-15' away will have a +1 DC for the distance, and traps 20-25' away will have a +2 to their DC for distance. This takes 2 minutes.
There is a lot of debate about how to properly run traps and using perceptions.
Personally, I find it to be a jerk move as a GM to tell players that they can't just generally say they are looking for traps as the walk down a hallway or through any place they suspect could be trapped. Your characters are adventurers, at a certain point they are always on the look out for danger and they are used to it. The basic assumption is that in situations where traps are likely to be present everyone is looking for them and perception works just fine to find them. You don't need trapspotter to find them and I shouldn't have to constantly say I'm searching for traps because that is tedious from an actual player perspective.
Your characters aren't normally just rushing through areas headlong without looking around are they? I would guess not. They are going to look at the walls and every unfamiliar thing in a dangerous place.
Honestly I hate traps because it reinforces a need for a class which is otherwise worthless and because traps rarely are used well. Most traps are have exceptionally binary outcomes that depend on just one or two dice rolls and are largely irrelevant otherwise. Either someone detects the trap with perception or someone is injured/killed. If detected, then someone disables the trap/trap is avoided or someone is injured or killed. If someone is injured and you are outside of comabt (how most traps are applied) then it is usually irrelevant as a wand of CLW is common. If someone is killed...well you've probably just used too powerful and trap and killed a player because they had bad luck on two rolls. I would consider this a "dick move".
The basic assumption is that in situations where traps are likely to be present everyone is looking for them and perception works just fine to find them. You don't need trapspotter to find them and I shouldn't have to constantly say I'm searching for traps because that is tedious from an actual player perspective.
Your characters aren't normally just rushing through areas headlong without looking around are they? I would guess not. They are going to look at the walls and every unfamiliar thing in a dangerous place.
Sometimes the PCs are rushing - "We won the battle and still have active buffs, let's hurry to the next room and see if we can use them in a second encounter."
It's reasonable for a GM to say at any time, "Are you moving quickly or are you moving slowly and carefully?" And if they say they're going slowly, they may have to deal with enemies having time to prepare for them, or similar penalties.
The basic assumption is that in situations where traps are likely to be present everyone is looking for them and perception works just fine to find them. You don't need trapspotter to find them and I shouldn't have to constantly say I'm searching for traps because that is tedious from an actual player perspective.
Your characters aren't normally just rushing through areas headlong without looking around are they? I would guess not. They are going to look at the walls and every unfamiliar thing in a dangerous place.
Sometimes the PCs are rushing - "We won the battle and still have active buffs, let's hurry to the next room and see if we can use them in a second encounter."
It's reasonable for a GM to say at any time, "Are you moving quickly or are you moving slowly and carefully?" And if they say they're going slowly, they may have to deal with enemies having time to prepare for them, or similar penalties.
It's true that sometimes the PCs are rushing. And thats when the Trapspotter talent shines. You don't have to take your time, you just automatically get a check.
But generally my group assumes you are not hustling (not double moving each round) and are actively looking around (but not at any specific thing) unless you state you are doing something else. But yes, there are times when this isn't the case and those are times when a trap could pose a threat to the party. As to penalizing the party for moving slowly...I hesitate to encourage that. I'm not completely against it, but the situation should merit it. Enemies don't magically prebuff to fight the PCs unless there is a logical reason for it. If your players slowly go through a dungeon but are careful to kill any enemies before they can leave the area or raise an alarm (and other enemies aren't within earshot) then it's hard to justify that course of aciton in my opinion.
Just another note:
Covered pits are much more dangerous. They can be detected with a DC 20 Perception check, but only if the character is taking the time to carefully examine the area before walking across it. A character who fails to detect a covered pit is still entitled to a DC 20 Reflex save to avoid falling into it. If she was running or moving recklessly at the time, however, she gets no saving throw and falls automatically.
You don't get a perception on a covered pit trap unless you are explicitly taking your time to examine the area before you step.
To follow what Tarantula said, what if you have a 25x25 room with a desk and a bed and 5 inches of junk all over the place. You can't see the ground.
There is a hidden magical longsword under the mattress and a bag of gems in the 2nd drawer of the desk. On top of that, there is some valluables mixed in the junk like a magical ring and a ioun stone. The desk is trapped with a poison needle and some nasty little gremlin installed a magical trap in front of the bed. Logically, a 3.5 adventure would require a search for every single 5x5 squares and comparing the results with the DC of each items hidden and the traps... you find or you don't.
But how is it deal with in Pathfinder ?
The same ? Or is it only one perception check comparing the results with each DCs and adding modifiers for distance and other modifiers ?
I'll answer this here since you PMed me to answer this.
Longsword under the mattress. Unless the character specifically searches the mattress, they won't find it, as it is unable to be perceived as it just lies there.
Valuables in the desk. Same thing, unless they search the desk specifically, they won't find it.
Stuff mixed in the junk? Sure, +1 DC per 10/feet and nothing hard for size of the item. Whatever sounds about right. I'd probably say 20DC for the ring and 15 for the ioun stone.
When they make their perception check for "searching the desk" that goes for noticing the trap on it too. The magical trap in front of the bed they could get an automatic check when they first enter the room (with a +5 for distracted) or if they say they are looking for traps I would do another roll without the distracted penalty. If they just say, "I search the bed" after they failed the initial check for the magical trap on entering the room, I'd ask which squares they move through, and the trap would trigger if they moved through the square that it is in.
Just another note:
Covered pits are much more dangerous. They can be detected with a DC 20 Perception check, but only if the character is taking the time to carefully examine the area before walking across it. A character who fails to detect a covered pit is still entitled to a DC 20 Reflex save to avoid falling into it. If she was running or moving recklessly at the time, however, she gets no saving throw and falls automatically.You don't get a perception on a covered pit trap unless you are explicitly taking your time to examine the area before you step.
This meshes because there is no fine detail to observe (regardless of your Perception) without attempting to look at things from different angles, tap the walls, or even look under the rug, etc. That said, most traps leave at least some noticeable trace for a sufficiently perceptive character--a hollow sound to the floor, a depressed area in the rug--so I rarely disallow passive checks. At the very least, a sufficient Perception check might point out that those tapestries are hanging awfully far away from the wall....
When you make a perception check you notice everything that falls under it. Many GM's make you say "I check for traps" as a separate check. I used to be guilty of it also but there is no rules support for it. You do have to make a perception check on your own though. The GM does not owe you a free check.
When you make a perception check you notice everything that falls under it. Many GM's make you say "I check for traps" as a separate check. I used to be guilty of it also but there is no rules support for it. You do have to make a perception check on your own though. The GM does not owe you a free check.What often happens is players will voluntarily narrow their search field for fluff reasons, but the GM will then penalize the player for it. For example, it seems awkward to walk in a room with a desk and and a chest and say, "I make a perception check." as a player, you feel compelled to say, "I check the desk for traps." rather than make a general check.
This is also true. I think the game has conditioned most of us to doing it so much that it is hard to not mention what you are looking for.
I search for treasure/traps/hidden door/etc. Instead of "I look for anything that is not obvious".
I often hear "I make a perception check," or something along those lines. I dislike the meta-game sound of that, and prefer to make statements like NN959 said, though it can lead to limitations.
I often hear "I make a perception check," or something along those lines. I dislike the meta-game sound of that, and prefer to make statements like NN959 said, though it can lead to limitations.
Well you are speaking to the GM as a player, not as your character. Now if your character starts talking about rolling dice, that is different.