So long story short I have an immigrant 2E player playing his first Pathfinder game.
He likes to try and find ways to simply avoid traps rather than disarming them ("I duck behind the chest and open it, the trap should spring straight forward and I'm fine." type stuff). I understand why he does it, but it just bothers me for a simple reason: Traps are already a joke in this game for the most part.
They become almost auto-detects/disables later on, especially with Taking 10, and it just doesn't sit right with me to make them even more trivial to avoid by just saying "Well I do this and that and the other and then I'm immune to this trap".
I've started going out of my way to have the trap pop up in unexpected places when he does so (especially since he thinks he can forgo a Perception check a lot of the time by assuming there's a trap and taking steps to avoid it). Things like the crossbow trap being sprung by a tripwire, that fires a crossbow from across the room or up on the ceiling or whatever, but I think that'll become tedious or unrealistic later.
I've had a talk with him, and he says he'll stop (or he's trying to stop, he does it LESS anyway, I think it's a force of habit with him), so I'm just wondering if I'm being a little harsh here by not allowing nonstandard approaches to trap disabling (something I think is way to easy as it is).
Should I have allowed it (with a corresponding beefing up of traps)?
Personally, I think you made the right call for Pathfinder. I prefer playing the way he does, but I prefer playing systems where skills are either non-existent or much less codified than in PF. I'd guess it's just a holdover from the older gaming style and that as he gets more used to Pathfinder, he'll appreciate the difference in approaches. (Does he also tend to roleplay out interactions rather than asking to make a diplomacy check too?)
(Does he also tend to roleplay out interactions rather than asking to make a diplomacy check too?)
Yeah. Though I tend to encourage that anyway. I generally allow favors to substitute (somewhat) for Diplomacy checks (more like granting a large bonus...if the guy hates you he's not automatically going to become best friends just because you did him a favor, unlike what a high Diplomacy can do for you).
Especially since their party has no Diplomancer (not everybody dumped Cha, but nobody has over a 12).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always run traps a lot harder I have played 1e 2e 3.0 3.5 and pathfinder.
I like to run a string of traps if one go's off it sets up more.
a rune in a hall set to a rod of lighting bolt go's down once then is eaten by the rod again then in same hall a trap armed by the lighting.
In my mind if I was a bad guy I would make sure any coming throw my door die with out me lifting a finger.
in a lvl one all trap dc's should be 15 in a lvl 2-3 dc 18-20 lvl 4-5 20-23 and so on
(Does he also tend to roleplay out interactions rather than asking to make a diplomacy check too?)Yeah. Though I tend to encourage that anyway. I generally allow favors to substitute (somewhat) for Diplomacy checks (more like granting a large bonus...if the guy hates you he's not automatically going to become best friends just because you did him a favor, unlike what a high Diplomacy can do for you).
Especially since their party has no Diplomancer (not everybody dumped Cha, but nobody has over a 12).
Sounds sensible.
My experience has been that moving from older style games to the more modern games takes a bit of an adjustment to recognise that much more is codified in the skills/talents/whatever mechanics. That means a lot of the "I hide behind the chest as I open it" action is subsumed in the disarm traps roll.
roleplay is fine if and he wants to roleplay traps fine its the dm job to out think the thief come up with something he wont see coming. I've done light beams from a window that if broken causes the floor to open in a 15' spot down 30' to a gelatinous cube.
Some traps are just that easy to block, however that's what the character's actually doing with disable device checks. They're identifying where the trap is coming from and taking steps to mitigate, dodge, or jam it's operation. There's no magic on/off switch the rogue's finding when they're disabling a device they're either breaking what the trap needs to function or jamming it up so it can't function, how that plays up is entirely up to them but they still need to successfully disable the device in order to avoid the trap's deployment.
That's a a pretty good way to look at it, actually. I may use this next time I need to explain it.
On a side note, what got me thinking about all this was playing Fallout 3 again last night. Disabling traps in that can be done two different ways: Clicking on the trap (and if your Repair is high enough you disable it) or in many cases, triggering the trap and then scrambling back out of the way.
Kinda silly but I felt pretty hypocritical doing the latter, despite the very different type of game.
Then again, I suppose all that scrambling represents your AC or Reflex save (all the races in the Fallout universe have Evasion, I suppose).
On a side note, what got me thinking about all this was playing Fallout 3 again last night. Disabling traps in that can be done two different ways: Clicking on the trap (and if your Repair is high enough you disable it) or in many cases, triggering the trap and then scrambling back out of the way.
Always thought traps were most fun when you tried to find alternate ways to disable them than just rolling. My favorite was tricking the super mutant horde into walking into the tripwire that dropped grenades.
Anyways, another option is to try and play using traps that set battlefields and create scenes.
I don't have a problem with players bypassing traps via mundane means. Back in the day we used to open trapped doors via grappling hooks and ropes from around the corner. Yeah, you might lose a grappling hook and rope, but you saved your party from harm. Good deal.
Part of the fun is letting players find the "obvious" traps but not rolling high enough to notice (or not roleplaying it out sufficiently that they look for the secondary trap in the right spot) the backup trap. So the PC who finds the obvious poison needle trap in the lock steps around to the back of the chest (unless said chest is cemented to the floor without sufficient room to maneuver behind it) but fails to notice the poisoned scythe blade hidden under the backside of the chest that slices his ankles as he avoids the obvious poison needle.
Stuff like that. I think traps can be fun, and I much prefer them to be rp'd out rather than "roll d20, spot trap, roll d20, disable trap, gain reward."
One thing to realize is a lot of the easy to avoid stuff is through the application of a lot of meta gaming.
Your average player with a high school education has the equivalent of multiple rans of several of the knowledge skills. These should not be applied when the character doesn't have them.
So in the ops example fiddling with the wires on a crossbow trap is.. disable device. If he doesn't have disable device he can't trip it. By "out smarring it".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Professionally I actually design traps to have mundane means of being avoided, I always remind myself that if you want to show off traps show them having killed someone who previously came along. I am constantly reminded that the cool part of Indiana Jones and the Lost Arc of the Covenant was him getting past the traps.
I have traps that spring and down't work right, or traps that miss, traps that collapse upon themselves because they are old and not well maintained.
Trap detection is usually about giving the PC time to find the traps so I don't do that i put immediate danger and distractions in the room, I make traps parts of ambushes, I make traps that are triggered by creatures pulling a lever or flipping a switch, there is no trigger for the PC to detect.
Oh and when I want really deadly traps I go use Grimtooth's Wurst Traps by Necromancer games for d20.
I'm actually thinking about letting him have his way on this one, at least for a little bit, but beefing up and layering the traps to compensate, with a few caveats. It could be fun, and I do like trying new stuff.
The big one being that if he can't find the trap (Fails the Perception DC), he can't avoid it/assume what it is. After all, if he doesn't know what it is, how is he going to try to get around it?
He can use regular DD rolls if he likes but I'm definitely taking out the ability to Take 10 (no matter what I decide, since that's like 70% of the problem with the DCs being too easy), and probably beefing up the DCs slightly since alternate methods are now available.
Traps shouldn't be too easily avoided, that defeats the purpose of setting the trap in the first place. Obviously, whoever set the trap will have some kind of way around it, but you have to consider that, if the person setting the trap is smart, he'll be thinking about how it could be circumvented and then try to circumvent that.
For example, that chest trap ... opening it from behind or the side is obvious. So, instead of something like a poison dart trap, use a poison gas trap that goes everywhere. Or perhaps the chest is actually on top of a pillar in a pit, with the floor around it rigged.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm actually thinking about letting him have his way on this one, at least for a little bit, but beefing up and layering the traps to compensate, with a few caveats. It could be fun, and I do like trying new stuff.
The big one being that if he can't find the trap (Fails the Perception DC), he can't avoid it/assume what it is. After all, if he doesn't know what it is, how is he going to try to get around it?
He can use regular DD rolls if he likes but I'm definitely taking out the ability to Take 10 (no matter what I decide, since that's like 70% of the problem with the DCs being too easy), and probably beefing up the DCs slightly since alternate methods are now available.
My suggestion: Find a middle ground.
Instead of allowing him to completely bypass those Perception and Disable Device checks, give him a sizable bonus when he has a creative idea of how to evade the trap (a +4 is usually enough to feel like he's being rewarded for creativity and role playing without giving him auto-success, but lower and higher bonuses could be more fitting sometimes).
And be sure to add traps that can be bypassed through creativity (e.g.: he can either roll Perception/Disable Device to disarm the trap on the floor, or he can swing on a rope to avoid stepping on the trigger altogether), so that the player can enjoy his 2ed trap finding abilities without unintentionally "cheating" the Pathfinder rules.
That's how I usually handle most skill checks in my games. Players seem to like the situational bonuses without feeling like it's enough to automatically succeed.
|
Don't be afraid to get a little more realistic with the traps. If "roll a d20 for perception, roll a d20 for disable device" isn't doing it for you, don't use it. Instead, you could describe the room very carefully, and ask him specifically what he looks at and/or touches; instead of a perception roll simply meaning he finds the trap, give him little tidbits or out-of-place things that he can then use to deduce the location of the trap. Don't show the crusher trap; show the flattened bones.
PS: Know what's fun? Delayed traps. "I disabled it guys, come on in!" (make sure you roll the disable device roll instead of him)
I would simply have the character spend some point on disable device. Unless it is a magical trap anyone can disable traps. After that I would give him a circumstance bonus to disable device when he come up with clever ideas. Also he should get XP for disabling the traps. To me this is an example of good roleplaying and should be encouraged. I might even give him a bonus skill point to only be spent on disable device.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its funny: the skill check for Perception on detecting traps says something like you note some detail of the triggering mechanism and unless you roll better you don't know what the trap actually does. So that would be the equivalent of coming around a corner and seeing a tripwire. You suspect it could be a trap, but that's it.
How does the guy then know where to step, look or anything to avoid the falling rocks in the ceiling? I could see if he just stepped over the tripwire, but the OP made it seem as though he'd trip the trap while protecting himself and the party from the expected outcome. How does he know the expected outcome?
"You enter a room. It is octagonal with a chest on a pedestal in the center" This guy makes a DC 20 Perception check. "You note that the panel of the pedestal that the chest rests on appears to be some kind of pressure plate."
If he just says he knocks the chest over from a safe distance, inform him that the wall beside him was made of pressurized glass filled with acid and it just exploded. He needs to make a DC 18 Ref save or take 6d6 acid and 2d6 slashing.
Of course, if he says he DISARMS it by shoving it over from a safe distance, have him roll and see if his Disable Device check succeeds.
I would simply have the character spend some point on disable device. Unless it is a magical trap anyone can disable traps. After that I would give him a circumstance bonus to disable device when he come up with clever ideas. Also he should get XP for disabling the traps. To me this is an example of good roleplaying and should be encouraged. I might even give him a bonus skill point to only be spent on disable device.
Oh, he HAS points in Disable Device, that's why he's been fiddling with traps in the first place (though he mostly uses it on locks). This is probably what I'll end up doing to accommodate both of us, give him a circumstance bonus on disarms
He's a Goblin Vivisectionist, for a little bit of context.
Its funny: the skill check for Perception on detecting traps says something like you note some detail of the triggering mechanism and unless you roll better you don't know what the trap actually does. So that would be the equivalent of coming around a corner and seeing a tripwire. You suspect it could be a trap, but that's it.
How does the guy then know where to step, look or anything to avoid the falling rocks in the ceiling? I could see if he just stepped over the tripwire, but the OP made it seem as though he'd trip the trap while protecting himself and the party from the expected outcome. How does he know the expected outcome?
"You enter a room. It is octagonal with a chest on a pedestal in the center" This guy makes a DC 20 Perception check. "You note that the panel of the pedestal that the chest rests on appears to be some kind of pressure plate."
If he just says he knocks the chest over from a safe distance, inform him that the wall beside him was made of pressurized glass filled with acid and it just exploded. He needs to make a DC 18 Ref save or take 6d6 acid and 2d6 slashing.
Of course, if he says he DISARMS it by shoving it over from a safe distance, have him roll and see if his Disable Device check succeeds.
And this is kinda what I have been doing, but more like using the same trap from an unexpected direction.
For example, he's in a room and has opened 3 or 4 chests. Two have been trapped.
So after the second trap goes off he's real cautious...but he never actually goes "I look for traps, I want to Disable it if I find it". He just goes "He ducks down beneath the edge of the chest and shoves it open from the left corner."
So I just had the crossbow shoot him from across the room for his trouble.
But I figure that gets tedious for me after a while, and seems adversarial to change up the trap after he's tried to do something for the specific purpose of foiling him.
Well, you COULD always do what an old GM of mine did when every 10' we were checking for traps and it got tedious:
GM: you see a chest
Players: (35 minutes of various checks for traps including actual rolls)
GM: there are no traps but it IS locked.
Rogue: I pick the lock (rolls). Does a 27 get it?
GM: the lock is open
Rogue: I open the chest
GM: (makes a roll) out jumps a full grown Bengal tiger
I hope you're able to find a happy medium w/your guy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am honestly not a huge fan of abundant trap use. I usually dont use them except in very specific circumstances, and if they are in an adventure I am using i remove them unless they are significant to the story. Traps to me slow down the game, hamper flow, and generally only involve one person in the party. Everyone else stands around while the trapfinder deals wit hteh trap. Either that or its just an hp/resource tax if they miss it and it goes off. I'd rather have actual encounters tax player resources so that 30 minutes includes everyone and not just one member of the party.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I see you have a highly creative player. Good, these are fantastic.
Your best bet is to design your treasure traps in such a way that removing something activates the trap rather than attempting to get to the treasure activating it.
Just to note something here:
Using perception to identify that an item is trapped is fine. It informs the character that it is trapped, what type of trap it might be, and what its effects are.
Using Disable Device is to find a way to safely discharge the device (E.G. standing behind it and lifting the lid of the chest to make it discharge so you can get at the nice goodies within), or to safely disable the device entirely.
The basic check is to disable the device entirely, but the PC could also just opt to discharge it safely, which would probably be with a -5 to the check with disable device being to find the safe way to do it.
Your PC is just using roleplay to get the same effect.
So, suggestions:
Nothing says that the trap has to come from the chest. Perhaps the opening of the chest activates a trap somewhere else in the dungeon. Perhaps opening the chest causes portcullises to fall in front of all of the exists of the dungeon, and decanters of endless water get activated by a magic mouth.
Now your dungeon is starting to fill up with water, albeit slowly, and the party must escape.
I remember seeing a thread about how traps in Pathfinder tend to suck. They are often just one-offs, and there isn't a struggle with the majority.
So, rethink your traps. What is worse for your PCs? The trap shooting someone with an arrow, or the trap activating the alarm trap that lets the master of the dungeon--see what I did there?--know that something is amiss? He uses message to inform his army of death to go check it out, and now the PCs are stuck in an area being attacked. If the enemies are undead and you go with the idea of decanters and portcullises then the PCs have a time limit before they all die.
Transition your traps from being direct effects to indirect effects.
The PCs open the chest, a CR1 arrow trap goes off. However, the real danger is the stinking cloud spell that just activated in the corridor, the fog cloud spells that are now filling the room, and the various non-breathing monsters that were just released.
One example is the treasure is in a room whose ceiling is concealed by fog. When the party opens the chest a portcullis falls over the entrance, a stinking cloud trap goes off, and the meat-hooks the four zombies hidden in the cloud disconnect from the ceiling and drop them into the party.
The trap itself is indirect, there isn't a single attack-roll and it is done. Instead it is a portcullis and a debuff cloud that the zombies are immune to. The PCs must now contend with the zombies while stuck in the effects of the stinking cloud. Even if the zombies are trash the debuff of being nauseated with no way to escape it is problematic.
Of course the party will just start opening all of your chests with mage hand and Open/close from afar.
Just remember that there is a safe way that doesn't discharge the trap. The person who made it knows what that is. Clever RP can enable the PCs to figure out and use this same method.
Eh, mundane traps are kinda like that. I'd let him have his fun while there's still a chance for it. Once it hits magical trap land there's not much he can do in that direction since they usually function on the proximity scale. So he might find the trap, but he can;t actually disarm it without setting it off without arcane trickster, or if the proximity is small enough, those long reach picks. And that's when the wizard saves the day again.
So yeah, give him his playtime before he's redundent again, traps are tedious as it is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Traps as encounters/hazards:
1. Roll Perception to detect as normal
2. If party attempts to disarm, have anyone suggest a way to disarm it using any skills they think might apply to grant Aid Another bonuses. Ex: Rogue detects a tripwire in the hallway; dwarf ranger uses Knowledge: Dungeoneering to see if this is a common kobold trick and if so if he might know any probably outcomes for such a tactic - success indicates +2 to the rogue's Disable Device roll
3. If the trap is detected but the disarm fails, have the party, minus the one disarming, roll initiatives and work it like a Haunt; anyone who beats a 10 initiative can act before the trap fully functions and those PCs can take either a Standard or Move action at that time.
Ex: At a corner in the hall the PCs notice an ominous wall sconce that looks like a gargoyle's face with an open mouth filled with fire. The party rolls Perception checks and the rogue notes a long pressure plate spanning the entirety of the corner; there is no obvious bypass.
The elf sorceress notes w/her perception scorch marks on the wall; a knowledge: arcana or spellcraft (I forget which applies here) is rolled for her to help the rogue "disarm" the trap by triggering it while staying out of the way of the fire. The human rogue rolls to disarm...but fails. Everyone now rolls initiative. The rogue doing the disarming doesn't get to roll.
The sorceress and the 1/2 orc barbarian both beat the initiative. In slow mo we see the fire begin erupting from the mouth of the sconce; the sorceress calls out a warning and casts Ray of Frost to reduce the damage of the trap's flames while the barbarian heroically bull rushes the rogue successfully knocking the human out of harm's way and taking the fire damage himself.
I am honestly not a huge fan of abundant trap use. I usually dont use them except in very specific circumstances, and if they are in an adventure I am using i remove them unless they are significant to the story. Traps to me slow down the game, hamper flow, and generally only involve one person in the party. Everyone else stands around while the trapfinder deals wit hteh trap. Either that or its just an hp/resource tax if they miss it and it goes off. I'd rather have actual encounters tax player resources so that 30 minutes includes everyone and not just one member of the party.
This is also good advice. The best traps, IMFAO, are ones that are part of a larger encounter; something that hinders the PCs but not the opponents. I once made a room that had swinging horizontal blades and such, but none of them below 4' ... because kobolds. The kobolds had free run of the room, while the PCs had to crouch or crawl to get around.
Also, for F's sake, put traps where they make sense.
|
Most of primitive or simple traps can be avoided and there is nothing wrong if players find a creative solution to avoid traps, but completely disarming them is done via Disable Device checks. If player has a unique idea how to do it, you might provide a +2 circumstance bonus on check to reward him for it.
At higher levels such traps tend to be harder to understand or avoid because they are resetable, DC's are higher, or have some other unknown effect (especially magical traps).
I am of same opinions however that specific nasty or clever traps shouldn't be disabled by simple roleplay. It might provide bonus, but traps are mostly underpowered if used alone anyway. In most AP's they are set as singular "encounter" to waste PC's resources rather then being part of something bigger.
Malag
Hrm. I dig the player, but I understand your frustration Rynjin.
When my buddies and I play, searching for stuff goes interestingly. We like to directly interact with the objects in the room and just waive the search check if we uncover it through our actions.
For instance, I have a tendency to turn chairs over and pull out the drawers in desks and other furniture, then turn those over too. Sometimes I find a key under the chair or drawer. Sometimes theres an inner section in the desk behind where the drawer was. One time I hilariously uncovered a secret passage when I just walked up to the coathanger and turned it to the side since it was the only thing in a room.
In a group where there just isn't a trap disabler, I would embrace his method wholeheartedly. And seeing as he *is* the disabler, I would simply have it his way. Especially since normally a trap encounter is one a sole character is dealing with anyways. Roll Perception, Roll Disable Device, failure? Take damage and continue. Success? Move on.
What is the most fun to your players and you?
Best of luck.
I do not allow Take 10 on Disable Device for traps. I consider disarming a trap to be a stressful situation. If the trap is so easy that they don't consider it stressful, then they probably can't fail anyway.
You could always make it a stressful situation. You can definitely take 10 while disarming a trap. You can't take 10 while in combat with a trap! Much easier than denying the players something that they really should get. Traps themselves aren't very amazing if you can take 10 on them anyway. Its just a method to speed up gameplay anyways.
Played some 2E with a group of experienced players and one very experienced gm. I did try the open the chest from behind trick and the chests top popped off entirely spreading poison gas in a cloud. So I had to learn how the older generation played a bit. It's a lot of fluff, and not nearly as many dice rolls as compared to nowadays. I think you did the right thing by talking with the player. One more thing you can do is change the traps as they pop up and he tries to avoid them. If he fails the checks or does not disable them "properly" (lets face it there's more than one way to skin a cat) traps should just go off. Just re-skin the trap to affect the person who triggers it. Wands backfire, chests top pops off, the hinges are poisoned, magical doors have magical hinges, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the action is appropriate to disarming that specific trap, then allow a +1 or +2 circumstance bonus to the Disable Device check; similar to how you can allow a bonus to a Diplomacy check for good role-playing of a negotiation. If the action is not appropriate (i.e., opening a chest trapped with poison gas instead of a poisoned dart in the OP's example), then impose a -1 or -2 penalty.
If they are not using Disable Device to disarm the trap, then the trap activates; adjudicate the effect appropriately. Note that, per the description of the Disable Device skill, "a rogue who beats a trap's DC by 10 or more can study the trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it without disarming it." (emphasis mine) This implies that just because you detect a trap with a Perception check, you don't know exactly how it works before you attempt to disarm it; taking narrative actions to bypass the skill check devalues the skill system.
Alternately, you can make make the actual trap mechanics much more central and have the player describe exactly where and how their character stands/crouches, how they manipulate the chest/door, etc. Props can be used, as well (a cardboard box, crate, footlocker, etc. for a chest, etc.). Note that this requires additional preparation by the GM to detail the mechanics of each trap, critical danger zones, etc.
I don't see anything wrong with how he's playing, he's being smart. Traps are only really dangerous if they go unnoticed. Unless they're complex a lot of them are easy to overcome with a little thought put into it. I'd rather have a player tell me how he/she is going about their buisness than simply saying "I disable traps" *roll* or "I want to use diplomacy on this guy" *roll*. You roll anyways in most circumstances, otherwise why have the skill at all?
Traps in PF have also been nerfed to the point of being a joke. 2E traps were considerably more dangerous as was the poison. They were designed to be deadly and an actual threat and as a consequence for not using your head, as they should be. There should be more ways to overcome obsticles than just the "head on", "one dimentional" approach.
I give a bonus for creative problem solving. Or if the player actually gives a good oration to an NPC they're trying to persuade. If my players fail the roll it just means they jacked something up. Magic traps are also a bit trickier to out-think.
I'm also not sure how a lot of you look at the taking 10 rule. You can't take 10 if you are in immediate danger or distracted. I'd consider disabling a trap that can cause serious harm or death as putting yourself in immediate danger and thus cannot take 10.
You also might want to consider putting contact poison on the loot. Most people don't think to wear gloves or check the loot its self. "Hey, why is this gem greasy"?
You can also put highly venomous critters in chests.
Player "I open the chest, what's inside"?
GM "It's hard to see the loot behind a dozen poisonous jumping spiders, time for the suprise round".
I hear you. I miss the more deadly traps myself. I've noticed in the past few years that unless the party is paranoid, the guy with the most HPs walks forward, triggers the trap, gets healed, party precedes onward. Unless the trap automatically resets, it makes the rogues job less useful.
He isn't exactly wrong. The 10 foot pole exists very specifically to test for traps from a safe distance. Ingenious ways to avoid traps are something of a tradition.
The trick is when designing traps that are intended to be major challenges is to make them difficult to avoid. You poison needle does just come out when the chest is opened. The chest has a complicated latch that must be opened and the needle comes out in an area your hand needs to be to operate the latch.
The best way to do this would be to provide some traps your player can easily avoid, and others that are specifically designed to be hard or impossible to avoid. Then tell your players this is how it will be done, that they could try something clever and not roll a Disable Device, and it might work, or they might end up dead.
Thinking about how your traps work helps too.
There's nothing worse than having the GM change the rules on you in game. If a trap was originally going to "electrocute on opening" and it turned into a "poison cloud" trap, then that's dodgy as hell. Essentially it punishes the player who's trying to be creative and role play well, worse still this sort of thing is specifically targeting one player. Next thing we will see is your player beginning a thread on the forums titled "GM keeps changing traps on me"
If you want to take the easy route, let him tell you how he's planning to disable the trap and make him roll disable device. If he's successful trap disarmed, if not then the trap hits him (or activates on the next person into the area).
If you want to go a bit more indepth let him have a +2 bonus or something.
Something I'm now taking to doing in my own games is I tell my players "you *believe* you've disabled the trap" regardless of roll. The aim is to make things more uncertain, unless you have intimate knowledge of the trap, you can never be sure it's 100% deactivated.