How to punish excessive trap checking

[Siege Tower]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

[Innis Cabal]

Don't throw any traps at them for a while. They'll revert back to a less paranoid mindset. Or do something meaner to them then traps. Or throw traps at them that don't require rolls

[dextercorvia]

Timed challenges.

Traps that are only triggered when searched for.

[Siege Tower]

Timed challenges.

Traps that are only triggered when searched for.

I've tried the search traps before but I could never think of a reason why traps would be triggered by being looked at. If I did something like that they would just throw more books at me unless I had a good in-game reason.

[gbprime]

Programmed Illusion of a trap. It's a cruel variant on the "just don't throw any traps at them for a while" school of thought, which I approve of. :smallwink:

[dextercorvia]

Try this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/phantomtrap.htm) instead.

[Lord_Gareth]

Explosive Runes blow up upon being looked at :p

[Drynwyn]

Use an out-of-game solution. Explain to the players that traps will not be a frequent feature I. Your game, and will only appear in a few cases( which you should outline.). If they would like to play a trap-heavy game.... I advise you to locate a copy of Tomb Of Horrors.:smallamused:

[HunterOfJello]

Invent a new kobold tribe that has been scouring the countryside stealing everyone's traps. They steal bear traps, trapped locks on people's doors, magical traps and even the traps from the dungeons of powerful dragons and liches.

[Tvtyrant]

Make timed dungeons; have a rival group of good adventurers taking an alternate path and make your group race them if they want to magical items. If they spend excessive time in 5-minute days or trap checking they will lose. Set up an ingame time like 48 hours which grants some leeway but makes every moment feel like it counts.

[Siege Tower]

Illusionary traps seem good but, is there any way that I could make them checking for traps cause them harm rather than just wasting their time?

[HalfTangible]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

Have traps that spring when someone makes a trap check and place it every third or fourth door.

Or hell, you're the dm. Simply say 'that's it, if you continue searching every single bloody object like an idiot, no more trap searching. They'll just go off in your face. I'm sick of your constant trap checks slowing down the game and everyone getting ticked at me when you don't have a high enough score to succeed.'

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Change the Trapfinding ability to work like an Elf's ability to find secret doors: If anyone with that class feature would come within ten feet of a trap's trigger, they get an automatic check to notice it. No more having to actively check every door and candle and stair step for traps, if there's a trap you roll for them before they even get there and it doesn't slow down your game.

[Flickerdart]

Whenever they ask to search for traps, say "yes" before they roll. Do not have traps appear at any other time.

[Hawriel]

...they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.


This right here is what every GM should hope for.

There is no reason to punish the players for searching for traps. They are not doing any thing wrong.

However there can be ingame consiqences. It takes time. Depending on what object they are searching it can take one or two rounds, or several minuts.

Roming monsters blunder into them, whether it's just a random animal or a patroling guard. The NPC they would have encountered half way through an activity may have finished their task. Now the party has to deal with the consequences of not interupting that task. Maybe the villan gets away. Maybe the demon that was being summoned is now ready to fight the party gets to help the evil wizard.

The 'punishment' should never be some ingame fait because you as the GM are anoyed. It should be in the form of natural consiquences of the players actions, or inaction.

You did say your players get pissy. This should not be tollerated. If they continue to be disruptive and accusational offer to let one of them GM. You dont have to put up with **** like that. It's your game just as much as theirs if they have a problem with you they can find a new GM. That will give you a chance to be a player and not have to worry about being the GM for awile.

Edit.

OR piss on all of it and run them through the Tomb of Horrors. Make sure you mod a 3rd ed version so its just as leathal as the origional.

[gbprime]

Invent a new kobold tribe that has been scouring the countryside stealing everyone's traps. They steal bear traps, trapped locks on people's doors, magical traps and even the traps from the dungeons of powerful dragons and liches.

I'm gonna have to steal this. :smallcool:

[Yahzi]

The obvious solution: stop using traps.

Nothing will punish your players more than checking for traps and never, ever finding them. Don't wuss out: don't toss in a trap just because they haven't checked for one in the last few (real) hours. Just stop, cold turkey, and never use another trap again. If you run a module and it has traps, ignore or disable them all.

Not only will it freak out your players, it will make you a better DM. :smallsmile:

[Worira]

Your players are looking for traps in a game in which traps appear. Why exactly is this a surprise to you? If you don't want time being spent looking for traps, don't put them in the game.

[ThirdEmperor]

I don't use Trapfinding at all. My traps are all puzzle based, or just meant to be avoided by common sense. Some give you an automatic Spot check to detect them when you get close, which Rogues and others who used to have Trapfinding get a bonus to. Much more fun, especially as Save bs. Damage traps that are just a bunch of rolls are boring.

[Waker]

Alternatively you could rule that by spending an excessive amount of effort searching for traps, they might take a penalty to Spot checks to notice other things. "You were staring at the floor looking for a pit trap, so you didn't notice the monster on the ceiling."

[Jack_Simth]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?
As many people have noted, one of the simplest ways to do this is to simply stop using traps. Another is to essentially sign a treaty with them - "I'm tired of the incessant searching; I'll stop using traps (and remove all traps from modules we use) if you'll stop looking for them everywhere. Agreed?" or "Ah... the repetitive 'I check for traps' is getting out of hand. Just to speed up gameplay, how about we just assume this happens in the background, and I call for Search/Disable Device when a trap would actually come up?"

You can also, of course, use timed missions, but that'll just convince them to find a faster method of looking for traps, if you still include them.

[Kobold Esq]

Your players are looking for traps in a game in which traps appear. Why exactly is this a surprise to you? If you don't want time being spent looking for traps, don't put them in the game.

This.


Why do you want to punish your players for taking a sane approach to the world? Dungeons have traps. They have someone in their party who can find traps. It just makes sense that they would check everything they can for traps, rather than blundering into them.

On the same note, sometimes they won't find them, and they need to suck it up when they don't.

[MeeposFire]

The obvious solution: stop using traps.

Nothing will punish your players more than checking for traps and never, ever finding them. Don't wuss out: don't toss in a trap just because they haven't checked for one in the last few (real) hours. Just stop, cold turkey, and never use another trap again. If you run a module and it has traps, ignore or disable them all.

Not only will it freak out your players, it will make you a better DM. :smallsmile:

This actually is the only way to get them to stop. Most of the suggestions made actually get them to start searching again. Negative reinforcement of this sort tends to make them check more not less since if you stop and bring it back traps randomly it will cause them to start checking again.

Best idea is doing what 4e does and stop putting random traps in random places. Use traps as ways to influence encounters rather than random. Also start making "passive" search checks for the players (10+search mod) vs the trap DC that way they do not constantly tell you they are searching.

[Vangor]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

Is the rest of the group annoyed by this slow pace, or is this merely to your annoyance? If the group is comfortable with this, I recommend you shrug this off as a hazard of DMing; sometimes the group fumbles with puzzles, wanders in bad plot directions, or focuses on the irrelevant minutia. If the group is also frustrated, this needs to be resolved directly by either eliminating the current concept of traps or by hastening the searching process.

Now, the issue of eliminating traps is players often choose a class with search and disable device specifically to be trapsmiths. A rogue can feel pointless without a real use of those skills. Make sure if you eliminate hidden, basic traps you provide alternate means to search and disable device. Desks should have hidden drawers, trapdoors and similar need to exist, and perhaps find little inscriptions and levers around. Overt traps and devices need to exist to be disabled or otherwise tampered with to assist the party, perhaps mechanical winches to lower gates and similar.

Otherwise, merely hasten the process by providing full room searching including pieces of furniture. This way, the group enters a room and they can roll once to try and find everything. Effectively functions the same, but rather than search the door, the chest, the shelf, multiple pieces of the floor and walls, and more, all of this is done simultaneously.

As well, as others have said provide a feature similar to Stonecunning where if they come nearby a trap they receive the automatic ability to roll. The significant issue I see, though, is if they get mad about not detecting traps despite searching (which if the party trapsmith always found and disabled every trap, may as well eliminate the whole process since this would be irrelevant) I see them metagaming and hesitating on low rolls without detection. Usually is an issue I have had with the way many people use hide, move silently, search, spot, etc., since players can see they rolled poorly and decide not to act.

What you do not do is punish for trap checking. Traps which trigger by searching don't realistically exist because the only way for this to work is a magical trap similar to belief in illusions, except they would be able to search for the magical trap, too.

[Forum Explorer]

Have them do a passive roll before hand. Than say that you'll assume that they search every room for traps using this roll as the result. After the first real trap hit, get a real roll. If they feel paticually paranoid about a paticular section allow them to take 20. Do not let them take 20 for their passive roll.

[Pink]

Suggestions

1) Random Encounter. Thoroughly searching a room and door for traps takes a while. If the party doesn't have some people standing guard, consider giving the enemies a surprise round as well. Toss these in often enough and it will give a sense of urgency.

2) Gaze attacks. While it's unfair to have traps that only go off when they're searched for (except exploding runes, those are always fun :smalltongue:), enemies with gaze attacks nearby can make things interesting. Something like, setting up a dungeon where traps are disarmed through secret control panels, saying: "You don't find a trap, however you do find a small door on the wall beside the door, very carefully hidden." To sort've indicate that while they've missed the trap, they've found the control panel, will give them a false sense of security. When they go to open it up, Medusa staring right at them from the other room.

3) Traps that go off when disarmed, or traps that trigger other traps when disarmed. Obviously, a truly high perception check might still notice these, but they can be fun. These can be sadistic, so use with care.
Example 1: A trip wire in a room. Easily spotted. Little do they know, that the room beyond is only disarmed if the tripwire is disturbed. Otherwise the pressure sensitive tiles beyond it release a highly toxic gas into the air.
Example 2: A door that appears to have a closed padlock. The door is actually specially designed so that it appears locked, when it actually isn't, a decent search check reveals an unorthadox way of opening (IE, it actually lifts up like a portcullis.). Any attempt to unlock the lock, the door behind them snaps shut and the five feet of floor behind them disappears. Further attempts continue to remove five feet of floor until nothing is left by a long drop into a spiked pit.

[NichG]

Personally I don't feel that traps make any sense as a game mechanic once rolls to detect and disarm them are involved. Its basically a random pass-fail switch with very little player interaction if you let it boil down to rolls - you might as well say 'make two skill checks, one for search, one for disable; this dungeon has 400 damage worth of traps in it, so take the product of the skill checks and subtract that from 400. Thats how much damage you guys take while exploring the dungeon. Yes, you can heal it, just keep track of those lesser vigor charges'.

So either drop the traps or drop the rolls.

[dextercorvia]

Rolls for traps are like Diplomacy checks. Not everybody is as smart as their characters at figuring puzzles out, so they put dice rolling in to "help". But it does remove some of the excitement.

[Arutema]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

Get everybody's search scores. Announce that you will be rolling them behind the DM screen from now on if there is a trap to spot. Only interrupt gameplay to say "you find a trap."

[Arbitrarity]

Is it worse than this (http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=41)? Because if you read the next 9 or so of those, you will know paranoia.

[NichG]

Rolls for traps are like Diplomacy checks. Not everybody is as smart as their characters at figuring puzzles out, so they put dice rolling in to "help". But it does remove some of the excitement.

My problem with it is that its such a binary mechanic. Even though I don't really condone RAW Diplomacy, at least there are interesting gameplay choices in terms of what to ask for, and what to offer. With a trap, its either 'we find/neutralize it and move on' or 'we suffer whatever the effects are and heal up'.

I think 4e does it right when it combines roll-based traps with combat, where at least they become interesting tactical elements. I also like the old style traps where its all about what you choose to look at and try, and if it comes down to a roll you've already screwed up (especially back when the party thief had no more than a 20% chance of successfully handling any given trap by rolling, and most traps would instakill). I'd say a compromise solution for game mechanically interesting traps would be to if Search and Disarm gave staged clues and viable manipulations of a greater puzzle, for example:

You sneak through the tunnels of the enemy fort, which is abuzz with activity. Strange glass tubes follow the hallways near ceiling level, flowing with some sort of faintly glowing liquid (Search check DC X shows that one pipe has liquid flowing the opposite direction, trivial Disable checks can break a pipe). You come upon a place where the room is filled with workers and overseers wielding nasty weapons. It looks like it'd be hard to sneak through here. You find another place where there's a great pipe organ-like machine into which all the dozens of tubes are flowing, and a lone goblin is manning the device (dispatch goblin, proceed to...): high Search checks reveal that most of the keys have been worn from frequent use, while three keys remain nearly untouched; Disable Device checks allow the PCs to relate which of the tubes is controlled by which of the keys. Elsewhere in the fort, the PCs can observe one of the pipes going into a great engine, which is powering some sort of machinery and is under heavy guard(Disable Device let the party know what the machinery might be doing). An odd device seems to be attached to one of the cogs (Disable Device check to show that the device is an alarm in case the cog malfunctions). And so on...

[Totally Guy]

Why not ask for one "look for traps" roll and explain that that one roll will be used for every trap in the entire dungeon?

You could allow the player a chance to improve this roll by re-rolling the die and taking the better value if they are hit with any traps. (You now know to look out for something new.)


So if the are 3 traps in the dungeon at DC 25, 27 and 30 and the player rolls a 28 then the player is informed of both the other traps but not the best hidden one.

If the player rolls a 17 then when a trap inevitably gets him he gets a chance to re-roll to see if he can improve his roll significantly enough to be told about the other two.


That cuts the rolls down considerably and keeps the player satisfied that his rolls were important.

This is a modified form of the "Let it Ride" concept from Burning Wheel.

[Hida Reju]

We cheated in our game

As long as the trapchecker went first and was stated as looking for traps he got a passive roll to see it when he encountered a trap.

Basically when a trap was encountered we rolled to see if it was spotted and if it was it was disarmed, if not seen then we hit it and went about our business.

[DeltaEmil]

Don't bring in "Haha-gotcha"-traps. If you use them, it's your own fault for the players wasting time with searching for traps.

If you want to incorporate traps without players having be annoyingly paranoid, use them as part of a combat encounter, where the traps are obvious in what they do, and you actually search for the mechanism to disable it while fighting monsters, as detailed in Dungeonscape.

[jguy]

Couple things.

1.) Make sure the traps make sense. No one traps their bedroom door since they go in and out of it constantly. Same with bathroom. Not every dresser is trapped no every door to every single room. People live there! Or at least did in the first place. Traps should be at the very beginning of an area to deter people from coming in in the first place but once you get into the inner sanctum there should be no traps. I should clarify in that I mean mechanical traps. Magical traps are a different thing for my next point.

2.) Magical traps are a tricky area. They are just so darn convenient. Glyph of Warding is a 3rd level spell that last indefinite amount of time (if I remember correctly) and can be attuned to just about anyone. Like "Don't zap me or anyone with the password." In a week every portal and door nob does 5d8 damage if the person is really paranoid.

3.) Give them some time saving actions that they always take. Like if they come to the door it should be assumed that they checked it for traps right away and made a standard roll of a 10 since you cannot take a 20. If they so choose they can roll for it but only once and are forced to take the roll, even if its worse.

4.) If there is a wizard of even marginal smarts, they should be having no problem with mechanical traps. Unseen servant (level 1 spell) and Servant Horde (level 3 spell) give you an Unseen servant for you. He will open all doors for you from a safe distance and is immune to all non-AoE damage. He can push/drag 100 pounds so if they are really paranoid, get a 95 pound rock with a 5 pound chain to it and have the servant drag it in front of them on every long hall way. That should trip every major trap involving walking

5.) Have an item of Continuous Detect Magic. 900g I believe. Spend 18 second every hallway and door and give it a quick scan to make sure there is nothing magic. That should save a lot of time.

[BobVosh]

At the beginning of each session ask for 10 trap searching results from whomever has trapfinding. Always ask for 10 so they don't know how many they will encounter (or if sandboxy you don't know how many they will encounter) and use those numbers whenever it comes to the traps. If you have more than 10 traps per session you are really, really doing it wrong imo.

I would say if you enjoy it more power to you, except you can see the natural reaction to this. 10 rolls quickly done before people even start to get ready really speeds this up quite a bit. Takes less than 2 minutes and you don't have to fuss with it again for the whole night.

[ffone]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

Don't use traps.

Seriously. I virtually never use traps, and this paragraph is an excellent summary of why. I've never seen a campaign which used traps w/o this happening.

One solution is 'obvious traps' - which is not as stupid as it sounds. Think the famous Indiana Jones scene where he knows the golden idol has the pressure plate trap. Just use traps in places where the PCs can tell from context - i.e. without Search checks - "that's too good to be true, it must be trapped" or "the wise old guy in town told us the traps in this place and where the hollow-eyed statues are."

[Weasel of Doom]

The way I'd deal with it would be to just have them role a series of search checks at the start of the session and whenever they tell you they're searching just tick off one of those checks each time they come across a trap.

(I'd also do the same for spot and listen check to avoid tipping them off to ambushes)

[Curmudgeon]

The "take 10" and "take 20" mechanics are what you want to use here. No player time should be used if your PCs are constantly checking for traps as they go. You'll have set numbers to compare and will know whether any traps are spotted, without any role-playing time expended.

The downside is the time involved. Each 5' square will take 1 full round (6 seconds) to Search if one person is doing the job, and that character will have to move in between each 10' of area checked. So total up all the squares in a room and divide by ~9 to get the number of minutes spent taking 10 with Search. If they're taking 20, instead multiply the number of squares by ~2.1 for the minutes spent checking that room.

100 squares (say a 20' x 125' passageway) will then take either ~11 minutes to Search ("take 10"), or ~3.5 hours ("take 20"). That latter time is enough time for a couple of wandering monster encounters. Also note that after 8 hours on their feet the PCs will be tired, and the Forced March rules come into effect (requiring a CON check each hour).

My guess is that if you follow the rules about the time spent checking for traps, the players will decide that they'll rarely "take 20". "Taking 10" is then pretty straightforward, and shouldn't slow the game down at all.

[Jack_Simth]

Is it worse than this (http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=41)? Because if you read the next 9 or so of those, you will know paranoia.

Of course, it's number 45 which is the reason they're doing so.

[Kiero]

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

Stop over-using traps as "challenges".

[WarKitty]

Stop over-using traps as "challenges".

Depends on the players. I've had some that will insist on checking every 5-foot square even if there's never been a single trap in the game.

[DeltaEmil]

Did the player know that there wouldn't be traps? If yes, then he was just being obnoxious on purpose. If not, it's the fault of the gm for not making things clear before the game begins.

[Tyndmyr]

I'm currently running a game where the the PC will NEVER open or touch or walk over or look at or do ANYTHING to any object with out trap checking it first. They do this so excessively that if they ever happen to miss anything (rolling to low against the DC) they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me. It's really slowing down the game and gets particularly annoying when they go through many trap-less rooms getting increasingly more paranoid.

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

Heres the thing. Just assume the characters are always looking. Roll the check before they encounter a trap, tell them if they notice it. If not, sucks to be them.

There is no value to requiring players to say "I check it for traps" before absolutely everything. It slows the game down immensely.

Also, use traps sparingly. The hp tax traps, like in the book? Those are the least interesting traps. When you use traps, go for traps that are complicated and interesting enough to be worthy of an encounter in their own right, or are part of another encounter, not just something sitting in a hall somewhere.

[Mr. Snuggles]

Nobody has said anything about how the players got this way in the first place.

My guess is they have been dealing with a steady diet of "gotcha" traps. When the DM loves to see his petty schemes realized, then paranoia is an entirely rational response.

[Deathslayer7]

If the rest of the group is annoyed because of this trap checking, tell your players that it is not your fault, and talk the the PC (Who does the trap-checking) that this is a problem.

I would try to find a solution together. Good solutions would be that you will roll automatically for him for a trap or ask him to roll a dice but not tell him the reason. OR have everyone roll a d20. Although everyone might get paranoid at this. :smalltongue:

The point is, tell him that if there is a trap, he will have a chance to spot it.

If it's not a problem, I would still advise the above, as it would increase gameplay and allow you to get more done.

[Tael]

Before the next session begins, state that all perception, trapfinding, diplomacy etc. rolls have been pre-rolled by you. Use a dice roller before the game and print out a big long sheet of rolls, and whenever a roll is needed, cross it off the list and just tell them how they did. Be sure to show them the list as evidence though.

[DwarfFighter]

So my question is. How do I discourage so much trap checking?

Search: It takes a full-round action to search a 5 ft. by 5 ft. area or a volume of goods 5 ft. on a side. Take 20 means it takes 2 minutes per check.

Assuming that the character does nothing except check for traps, the entire party will move at about 1/12th of their normal movement. Or 1/120th for characters insisting on taking 20.

If time becomes a factor when searching for traps, I simply figure out the total area the PC will search and work out the time he'd need to spend searching. I usually limit this to the ground area: I allow that walls and ceilings are "free". :)

Then I make the rolls for hidden objects/traps in the area and inform the player what his character has found, if anything. Of course, if the character fails to spot a trap, it's a judgement call if he triggers it.

-DF

[WinWin]

If a player is giving you attitude because their character failed a skill check, tell them to desist. One thing I hate is working on an adventure and then getting attitude from demanding players.

One alternative to your problem may be to allow open rolls for mundane traps. The no-reroll policy is still in effect, I would not allow it for magical traps either, but this guy sounds like he needs to be coddled.

If excessive trapfinding is still a problem, then I suggest stepping down and alowing someone else to take over DMing for a while. Oberving other peoples styles for a while can give you some insight into the type of games they like playing.

[DeltaEmil]

How often do traps actually come up, Siege Tower?

[Vance_Nevada]

Heres the thing. Just assume the characters are always looking. Roll the check before they encounter a trap, tell them if they notice it. If not, sucks to be them.

This is basically how I run it. The characters are always assumed to be trap-checking a suspicious environment (the doors in a dungeon? Yes. The doors in an inn? No.), and the Rogue makes a Search check only if there's actually a trap to find.

You need the right players, though. Otherwise you end up with a situation where the GM has to roll the Search check, or the Rogue says "Hold on, for no particular reason I feel the need to search this door again", after seeing that he's rolled a 2.

Good players will just shrug, say "I guess Kathrax didn't find that trap", and open the door anyway. Bad players will find reasons to check the door again until they find the trap, which is what I would see happening with the OPs group.

[erikun]

Your players are looking for traps in a game in which traps appear. Why exactly is this a surprise to you? If you don't want time being spent looking for traps, don't put them in the game.
This. Players react as the game demands. If there are never any traps in any of your games, players won't waste time searching for them. If there are tons of traps, players will spend tons of time searching. It sounds like you have placed a number of traps in your games, probably highly damaging one in random locations. As such, it isn't a surprise that your players are taking the time to avoid them.

Don't ask your players to stop searching from traps and then spring traps on them. That's just being a jerk.

I would also highly recommend against the "spring a trap whenever they announce searching for traps" idea. That would be like having the party Bard spontaneously killed and eaten for suggesting diplomancy against a group of orcs - it would be perfectly reasonable for a diplomancy-based character to be interested in diplomancy with a group that might be interested in talking.

[Kuma Kode]

Any DMing question that begins with "How do I punish" is wrong. You are not a schoolmarm, you are a friend running a game for other friends. If there's a problem, you should talk to them.

In this case, paranoia is almost never unwarranted. I'm guessing you've put some nasty traps in their way before, and so this is a natural reaction to that. If you drop random encounters on them all the time, would you be surprised if they walk around with weapons out and buffs on? They take their cues from you. If you portray the world as something they can't trust, they won't trust it.

If you want to use traps, I second doing the rolls ahead of time like has been suggested. If you don't want to use traps anymore, simply tell them that you find adding traps isn't adding anything to the game and so they won't need to deal with them. My group knows very well that I don't feel random traps in hallways add anything to the game, and so they don't lag things down with needless checks.

Again, punishing unwanted behavior only serves to make it worse. If you got books thrown at you before, prepare for the entire bookshelf after a bit of vindictive behavior.

[Coidzor]

Ahh... Table running issues. It seems that at the core is that they've lost their trust in you. Or they're confused about how DCs work... Or both.

Regaining lost trust is a tricky thing, but it might be necessary to adjust how you run for awhile after addressing the out of character issues that are at the core of all of this.

[ericgrau]

First, don't punish rogues. They really don't need it. Second, write down every relevant character's search modifier. Let them say they want to search an entire section and then you make a single secret roll for that section. Or multiple if there's more than 1 trap, or only for the first trap and stop there. But make at least 1 so that they don't know if there's really something there. Or let them take 10, or let them take 20. Done, now you can move on to the next room after about 15 seconds. If they're super paranoid then they'll take a 20 and it'll still take 15 seconds. They won't take more time to redo bad rolls b/c they don't know what they got.

The only drawback should be in-game time, but not out of game time. 1 round per square or 2 minutes if taking a 20.

[erikun]

Well, my recommendations for future games. Some have been suggested by others, so I hope I'm not repeating myself too much.

Only place traps where they would logically be located. The treasure chest locked and bolted in the big boss's room? Probably trapped. The large iron door covered with arcane writings and magical seals? Probably trapped. The long hallway full of discarded bolts and cut in half bodies? Probably trapped.

The kitchen? Probably not trapped. It simply isn't worth it to trap a location that is in heavy use by half a dozen people several times a day, especially when you're only protecting a cup of flour from being stolen by outsiders. It would be far more practical to trap outside any base or dungeon, to prevent people from getting in, than to trap inside where you frequently move about.

And there is resources to consider. The orc army is not going to set up lethal traps throughout the forest a quarter-mile away from their camp. It simply isn't resource intensive. With the amount of effort needed to do so, they might as well just build earthworks and be better prepared for anyone attacking them. At best, they'll run string and bells/seashells just outside the campfire light to alert any sentries on duty.

Use wandering encounters when the PCs are taking too long. Consider what frequently stalks around the given area, then make up 3-4 different encounters. If the players decide to take a long time looking for traps, roll some dice to simulate perhaps 20-40 minutes passing and choose a group to attack. They'll likely be hitting from ambush from outside the party's torchlight, either attacking the searchers or one of the PCs on guard.

Of course, you should probably make the encounters one or two CR below the party level. And definitely give the party a chance to notice them. The point isn't to kill the party, or even to rough them up - it is to point out that sitting around in one place, examining the floor, can be rather dangerous in wild territory. If the party decides to do something even more stupid - such as spending hours searching the main hall of an inhabited fort - then feel free to throw the full force of whatever would logically get together to force the party out. Patrolling orcs don't simply pace around 20x20 rooms all day.

Speed things up if nothing will happen. That is, if you know the abandoned castle is empty of enemies and there is nothing interesting beyond the jail cell and treasure room, then just ask the players how long they will continue searching for traps. Calculate how much time it takes to search everything, then report back: "After three days of throughly searching the castle, you discover the only points of interest being the jail cell and the poorly hidden treasure room beind the dilapidated throne. Neither has been searched yet by the party. Take three rations off everyone's character sheet, and let's pick things up from here."

[Jay R]

The problem you've run into is this. Taking the time to search for traps has no penalty; failing to do so can have a massive penalty. So of course they are going to keep searching.

You are now trying to invent a penalty for excessive trap-searching. But don't invent one; use its real-world consequences.

The solution is to track the characters' time. Ask them to describe the trap-finding procedure. If it takes an hour, then after four rooms they have to stop and eat. After eight rooms they're too tired to continue. Don't forget to ask them how much food they brought with them before the adventure starts.

Combined with night-time wandering monsters, this will convince them to be reasonable.

(If it still doesn't work, eventually you need a rival party who move in faster than they do and get all the good loot.)

[Shatteredtower]

Since you already got a lot of good advice, here's something else to consider: rather than punish them for searching, reward them for not searching.

Let them catch villains out of armour or hiding something important (such as a lich's phylactery) or in the middle of preparing something unpleasant for the party. If they lost time searching, note what opportunities were missed and be sure to provide one to the team they don't waste time searching everything, and regularly enough after that to encourage them.

Provide clues about traps that give players alternatives to searching. Detours, spells that protect against the indicated trap effect, and effects one or more characters could easily ignore or shrug off can make them happy. Similarly, offer situations in which the AC/Reflex bonuses provided by trap sense let a rogue shine.

Most of all, use traps that involve the players, rather than just hurting them if they fail two skill checks. Adversity should lead to more options.

[prufock]

While it isn't necessary to punish players for being cautious, if they're making the game less fun for others, the behaviour needs to be corrected.

I'm not convinced that putting them through long stretches with no traps will change their behaviour, as others have suggested. I'd expect the player to suspect you of just lulling him into a false sense of security. That's why they get more paranoid.


Whenever they ask to search for traps, say "yes" before they roll. Do not have traps appear at any other time.

This is hilarious, but I would still have them search. You could even form some sort of in-game justification for it. A creative use of Bestow Curse? A roving trap-setting monster? I'm not sure it would change their behaviour, though.

Time-sensitive tasks are probably the best way to shape the behaviour, since they'll want to be successful in the task. As others have said, making it important to finish a task quickly means if they stop and search every 5-foot square (a full-round action) they'll fail the challenge.

If you're just looking to speed the game up, have one search check include an area - a room, a hallway, etc - not just one square. Still make sure it takes 1 round per 5-foot square, but just use one roll.


they call me a cheating bastard and throw books at me
If they accuse you of cheating when they roll poorly, you bring the DM-hammer down. Literally throwing books is grounds for either expulsion from the table or a punch in the face (preferably the former).

[MickJay]

If you really want to punish them, use the "malicious compliance" tactics: number all squares in the dungeon, and ask them whether they want to search square 1? Let them roll, check result, say they found nothing. Do you want to search square 2? Let them roll, check result... Chest A? Chest B? Bookstand A? Footlocker G? Statue B-2? Let them roll for everything, while, of course, the only traps in the whole dungeon are painfully obvious (big blade tied by a string to a chest filled with loot and hanging above it), or nonexistent. Use your friendliest voice, too.

That said, best solution would be to talk with them OOC and simply use one of the earlier mentioned methods that would speed things up a lot, or just drop the idea of using traps completely.

[VirOath]

Well, everyone has stated, stop using traps if they are constantly checking for them and slowing down the game.

Honestly though, it's your fault as the DM for putting in traps in the first place. Why? Because traps were designed as a **** move, they are written right in as a resource tax to punish players that are doing too well in a dungeon. It's how you punish players for not being paranoid.

Flat out say that there will be no more random traps. You can even still use traps in places that make sense. Either already triggered if they aren't repeating, or if they are repeating there is a lot of old blood stained into the walls, or bones and corpses laying about all killed by the same means.

Stop putting in those traps that have no reason that the players could know about, or no triggers that they are there. Putting a Symbol of Death on a door to kill any living thing that tries to open it randomly in a dungeon is just a **** move.

[Callista]

I ran into this with a new Rogue player. After a while she complained to me that she was tired of the same old routine of check for traps, listen for enemies, pick the lock.

My solution was pretty simple--The party set up a standard procedure for locked objects and dangerous areas, and I assumed they followed this procedure at all times. Then, if I had a trapped object and their standard procedure said they would have searched for traps, I rolled the search check and informed the rogue if she'd found any traps. They were 4th level at this time, so I figured they had enough experience to know their roles and stick to them--nobody was playing a truly stupid or inattentive character.

It was just so much interesting that way. The Rogue in question much preferred running cons and charming people anyway, so I was just getting rid of some of the more tedious parts of adventuring.

[MeeposFire]

Of course that eliminates most of the reason to have stupid random traps in the first place, but if you are going to keep them might as well do it that way.

[TheDMofDMs]

I would suggest the following:

Put traps in logical places. On doors and chests. At intersections. Etc. Don't put a trap 35ft. down the hallway, with no in-game tactical purpose. Who built it? Why?
A lot of this can be solved by simply thinking about what kind of a place this is. If it's a sealed tomb, there's probably a lot of traps, but only at important places. Low traffic=more traps
If it's a cavernous orc-den, there will be fewer traps; the orcs have to get out, after all. Or a tomb that has been sacked once already, with most of its traps sprung or disabled. High traffic=less traps.

That's what you can do for your self.

Also, it takes one full minute to Search every 5ft. square. Who, in life, is really that meticulous? That anal-retentive? Not adventurers. If the PC's are that twitchy, they should stick to potato farming. Who's that boring? That dull and tiresome? No one. No real person would be content to shuffle down a dank, mildewy corridor as their shifty friend checks the floor, walls, and ceiling for trip wires and pressure plates. Talk to your players, and ask them to take it down a notch.

That's what you can do for your players.

[Jack_Simth]

Putting a Symbol of Death on a door to kill any living thing that tries to open it randomly in a dungeon is just a **** move.
Actually, if you're guarding the dungeon yourself, it makes perfect sense to do things like that - primarily because a Symbol of Death is rather flexible on targeting. "You can also set special triggering limitations of your own. These can be as simple or elaborate as you desire. Special conditions for triggering a symbol of death can be based on a creature’s name, identity, or alignment, but otherwise must be based on observable actions or qualities."

If I am putting up a Permanent Symbol of Death in my Goblin stronghold, I might very well set it to trigger when anything other than an Evil Goblin goes through a particular point. Why? Well, "Goblin" is fairly easily observable, and "Evil" is explicitly something the Symbol can check for. Which means all my goblin minions can go through it, no problems at all. I'll also probably put in a "key" of some type - a 'guest pass' item to be worn visibly; if worn properly, they symbol ignores that particular person/group. Even better, as there's no real limits to how complex you can make the trigger, you can have rank and department badges for your minions. If they're worn visibly, the minion (and those within a certain radius of the minion) can pass through the area without danger. If most/all my minions are of a particular kind, I can align based on that, too, so the badges only work if worn by an LE goblin, for instance. All guests must be escorted, but otherwise everyone essentially wears security cards that are scanned by the defenses.

Sure, it's expensive to do, but quite handy from a defensive standpoint.

[DeltaEmil]

Who, in life, is really that meticulous? That anal-retentive? Not adventurers. If the PC's are that twitchy, they should stick to potato farming. Who's that boring? That dull and tiresome? No one. No real person would be content to shuffle down a dank, mildewy corridor as their shifty friend checks the floor, walls, and ceiling for trip wires and pressure plates. Bomb-Disarming specialists are the same to fantasy-trap disarming experts. Nobody would disturb the bomb-disarming guy, just as nobody would disrupt the guy who has to disarm deadly traps that can kill you in ways that shouldn't even be possible.

Talk to your players, and ask them to take it down a notch.The problem is, we have no clue if it's actually Siege Tower's own fault for having caused the players to be that paranoid in the first place, and why they're behaving like that. Normally, players only do that if the gm smacks them with a bunch of stupid traps that kill or disable their characters. If the gm still throws stupid amounts of deadly traps around, then the players won't (and shouldn't) tone it down.

There is always a cause for that.

[WarKitty]

The problem is, we have no clue if it's actually Siege Tower's own fault for having caused the players to be that paranoid in the first place, and why they're behaving like that. Normally, players only do that if the gm smacks them with a bunch of stupid traps that kill or disable their characters. If the gm still throws stupid amounts of deadly traps around, then the players won't (and shouldn't) tone it down.

There is always a cause for that.

It also depends on if he's their first DM. I'm not a major traps person, but if I get players in that have played with another DM that puts traps in liberally, the paranoia doesn't always fade.

[Jack_Simth]

It also depends on if he's their first DM. I'm not a major traps person, but if I get players in that have played with another DM that puts traps in liberally, the paranoia doesn't always fade.
Speaking of, how much *do* you use traps? My default assumption is that 'yes, they're in the game, be ready for them' and I've been running with that.

[Endarire]

If you think you live in a minefield, you effectively do.

Why is this trap checking a problem?

[WarKitty]

Speaking of, how much *do* you use traps? My default assumption is that 'yes, they're in the game, be ready for them' and I've been running with that.

Not a lot, really, unless it's a place that's obviously built to keep people out. I generally find the things annoying. So, general ruins aren't trapped, but the labyrinth protecting the evil artifact probably is trapped. For most other things, I prefer the kobold with a flipswitch method.

Battlefield traps, now, those can be fun - but there the challenge isn't so much finding them as figuring out how to use them.

[VirOath]

Actually, if you're guarding the dungeon yourself, it makes perfect sense to do things like that - primarily because a Symbol of Death is rather flexible on targeting. "You can also set special triggering limitations of your own. These can be as simple or elaborate as you desire. Special conditions for triggering a symbol of death can be based on a creature’s name, identity, or alignment, but otherwise must be based on observable actions or qualities."

If I am putting up a Permanent Symbol of Death in my Goblin stronghold, I might very well set it to trigger when anything other than an Evil Goblin goes through a particular point. Why? Well, "Goblin" is fairly easily observable, and "Evil" is explicitly something the Symbol can check for. Which means all my goblin minions can go through it, no problems at all. I'll also probably put in a "key" of some type - a 'guest pass' item to be worn visibly; if worn properly, they symbol ignores that particular person/group. Even better, as there's no real limits to how complex you can make the trigger, you can have rank and department badges for your minions. If they're worn visibly, the minion (and those within a certain radius of the minion) can pass through the area without danger. If most/all my minions are of a particular kind, I can align based on that, too, so the badges only work if worn by an LE goblin, for instance. All guests must be escorted, but otherwise everyone essentially wears security cards that are scanned by the defenses.

Sure, it's expensive to do, but quite handy from a defensive standpoint.

I wasn't saying that it's not something to ever do, or that there is no reason, and the latter half of your comment shows exactly what you should be looking at when placing a trap. Your example is a perfect instance of how to do it, why?

Because it is clear, it is something that shows with the level of organization, the way the goblins would act would give some indication as to just what is in store and the intelligent placement of traps from it.

But no, I wasn't talking about the outer layers of a goblin stronghold. I was talking about a poor goblin den that doesn't have the means to set up a mechanical trap in a high traffic area that has a Symbol Of Death on the door to the kitchen. Reason it was there? Because the captive the party was sent to rescue was about the be boiled alive. That kind of trappery.

Harsh traps are just fine, can even be built into the place as part of the challenge. But these traps come with a design in mind and a purpose. Don't just have them placed to be a "Richard" or "Because the guy was paranoid" and if you do, then you have only yourself to blame when the party starts checking every 5 feet for traps, over and over.

[MeeposFire]

Yea checking for traps like this is a learned behavior. Either they learned it from a current game learned it from a previous game, or learned it from somebody else that played in a game with bad trap design.

If you tell them not to do it you must not put traps in places that punishes them for not checking for traps. Once you start putting traps in random places they will stat checking all over again. Best thing to do is to tell the party what sort of situations would have a chance for traps and only do traps in those situations that way they do not check outside those situations.

Random traps make for paranoid behavior. If you are not willing to give up such random traps you will have to accept that behavior. it only makes sense.

[Kiero]

Speaking of, how much *do* you use traps? My default assumption is that 'yes, they're in the game, be ready for them' and I've been running with that.

Personally, I don't use them at all. But then I don't have any time for dungeon crawls, so their value and appropriateness pretty much vanishes.

[Sipex]

This thread got pretty long so I'm just going to add advice for the OP.

Don't use HP-tax traps anymore. If your PCs trigger a trap it should be a trap which they can still actively work around and might actually be fun to do so too.

IE: If the PCs hit the trip-wire then a series of pendulum blades start swinging. The PCs can still get around them and it's not an automatic "Oh, you tripped it, take 20 damage."

[Jack_Simth]

Not a lot, really, unless it's a place that's obviously built to keep people out. I generally find the things annoying. So, general ruins aren't trapped, but the labyrinth protecting the evil artifact probably is trapped. For most other things, I prefer the kobold with a flipswitch method.

Battlefield traps, now, those can be fun - but there the challenge isn't so much finding them as figuring out how to use them.

So, of course, we don't know which we're on now. OK.

[Callista]

Of course that eliminates most of the reason to have stupid random traps in the first place, but if you are going to keep them might as well do it that way.Yeah, I'm not at all fond of random traps myself; but there are locations where it really would make less sense if there weren't any traps. The nobleman's vault of gold? Probably trapped. The ancient tomb of the long-dead king? Probably trapped. The kobolds' lair? Definitely trapped. And it's not the traps themselves that really create the problem; it's just that the PCs are logically paranoid enough that the players spend time searching for them--time that could be spent having fun. So I just assume they are searching, roll for them, and leave it at that. It gets rid of the boring part--searching for traps--without getting rid of the exciting part--disarming, disabling, or circumventing them. (Or even using them to your benefit. That long-dead king? Yeah, mummies don't do so well in Fireball traps... Darn clever players, though I did have to give them extra XP for that one.)

[Curmudgeon]

Speaking of, how much *do* you use traps? My default assumption is that 'yes, they're in the game, be ready for them' and I've been running with that.
I use traps in strategic places, where it makes sense for them to be. But I also pay attention to dungeon construction. There's usually a reason for a very strong (adamantine or whatever) door and door frame. Remove the structural wall next to that door, and you've got a Reflex save or die situation as the roof collapses. Punch through another wall or ceiling and you may breach an underground cistern or aquifer, and demonstrate the importance of water breathing. :smallsmile: Real traps will be detectable through the usual means. Only a Knowledge (Architecture and Engineering) check will avoid the foolishness associated with bashing down or magically obliterating a piece of untrapped (but vitally important) wall.

[randomhero00]

Tell them, have fun rolling. I'll be eating dinner. Write down your results and I'll tell you if there were any traps. So in other words, tell em to get a piece of paper out and roll 20d20s. Tell them they must describe each search attempt, as in how they're searching. Give them a quick run down of whats up ahead. Then come back and tell them there were no traps. Do that a couple times and they'll be annoyed enough not to do it :)

[DeltaEmil]

Tell them, have fun rolling. I'll be eating dinner. Write down your results and I'll tell you if there were any traps. So in other words, tell em to get a piece of paper out and roll 20d20s. Tell them they must describe each search attempt, as in how they're searching. Give them a quick run down of whats up ahead. Then come back and tell them there were no traps. Do that a couple times and they'll be annoyed enough not to do it :)I would just take 20. And if the gm uses any kind of traps, I will make him listen to whatever sort of stupid 1st edition D&D way of prodding around with 10 foot-poles, legions of expendable henchmen, goats and chickens, summoned elementals, camp-making in painfully detailled descriptions until he stops bringing the problem in the first place.

Jerking around with the players will only lead to them being jerks with the gm.

[randomhero00]

I would just take 20. And if the gm uses any kind of traps, I will make him listen to whatever sort of stupid 1st edition D&D way of prodding around with 10 foot-poles, legions of expendable henchmen, goats and chickens, summoned elementals, camp-making in painfully detailled descriptions until he stops bringing the problem in the first place.

Jerking around with the players will only lead to them being jerks with the gm.

For every time they took 20 I'd roll for a random encounter (taking 20 is like an hour or something isn't it?). And where are they going to get chickens and henchmen in the middle of a dungeon? I meant do it once, like as a warning, not repeatedly. Plus henchmen cost gold. If all else fails put a time clock on. It usually makes sense to have one.

edit: also chickens aren't usually heavy enough to spring traps and henchmen aren't usually willing to go out in front. If they use a 10 foot pole, then ask them how they carry it first off (10 ft is pretty unwieldy), secondly pressure once again. Most traps don't go off at the slightest bit of pressure. You can't put a full human sized weight on the tip of a pole. 3rd, even if they did spring it they can still be within range of the trap, and the pole might get destroyed in the process so it *might* work once.

edit2: Personally I rarely use traps except in clever, more puzzle like ways. The other option is just not to use any traps that are detectable for several sessions until they get the idea. OR make really really weak traps, like DC 5, you almost tripped and got a booboo, make fun of them for being so careful.

edit3: heh and then there's always the nasty (if you really want to punish them) the invisible trap that requires see invisibility to set it off. Tell them they feel something odd and reptillian roughly the shape of a head that's invisible....they cast see invisible...wooops its a medusa's head. I forget for sure if you turn to stone once there head is cut off but you get the idea. Make is so that looking for traps is worse than not looking.

[Callista]

My wizards usually use a Hand of the Mage to push a ball of metal ahead of them. The metal doesn't cost much; the Hand of the Mage is generally useful; and 25 feet is usually out of the range of any traps. It gets rid of most traps or at least warns us of them. But I only bother with it when the DM is known to use traps and doesn't yield to my suggestions to just assume we're searching and roll for us.

[Curmudgeon]

But I only bother with it when the DM is known to use traps and doesn't yield to my suggestions to just assume we're searching and roll for us.
Just tell the DM you're "taking 10", and there's no rolling. (Or a Rogue with Savvy Rogue would be "taking 12", but it's the same principle.) There should never be any effort involved on any player's part until you discover, or set off after failing to discover, a trap.

[DeltaEmil]

For every time they took 20 I'd roll for a random encounter (taking 20 is like an hour or something isn't it?). And where are they going to get chickens and henchmen in the middle of a dungeon? I meant do it once, like as a warning, not repeatedly. Plus henchmen cost gold. If all else fails put a time clock on. It usually makes sense to have one. I'd rather roll for initiative than roll for trap-searching, but if the gm is being a jerk with lots of hp-draining traps, then at least you know that this room is secure when a "random encounter" starts. Unless the gm of course is being a jerk again by having the monster be somehow completely immune to the traps (which aren't part of a cool combat encounter). And then it's back to extremely slow and painfully boring 1 hour per 5 foot-movements to make sure that there isn't any jerk-traps around.


edit: also chickens aren't usually heavy enough to spring traps and henchmen aren't usually willing to go out in front. If they use a 10 foot pole, then ask them how they carry it first off (10 ft is pretty unwieldy), secondly pressure once again. Most traps don't go off at the slightest bit of pressure. You can't put a full human sized weight on the tip of a pole. 3rd, even if they did spring it they can still be within range of the trap, and the pole might get destroyed in the process so it *might* work once.Once stupid and deadly traps are laying around in a stupid ressource-taxing way because the gm feels that he needs to put them around for whatever inane reason, then players will use any way possible, and henchmen will be thrown around if necessary, with chickens, goats, summoned elementals, and they will be replaced along with all withnesses who were throw into the idiotic meat grinder for which the gm is responsible in the first place.

edit2: Personally I rarely use traps except in clever, more puzzle like ways. The other option is just not to use any traps that are detectable for several sessions until they get the idea. OR make really really weak traps, like DC 5, you almost tripped and got a booboo, make fun of them for being so careful.Encounter traps or as part of a few selected combat is okay. Your other example of booboo-traps are not okay, and are the problems that lead to players having to behave that assinine in the first place. No good gm should ever use them.

edit3: heh and then there's always the nasty (if you really want to punish them) the invisible trap that requires see invisibility to set it off. Tell them they feel something odd and reptillian roughly the shape of a head that's invisible....they cast see invisible...wooops its a medusa's head. I forget for sure if you turn to stone once there head is cut off but you get the idea. Make is so that looking for traps is worse than not looking.And without see invisible, they would have been turned to stone anyway, and the players wouldn't even know why. See, that's the kind of crap that creates those kinds of problems on the gaming table, when a gm tries to screw over the players who have to play like a they're surrounded by mines every inch of space. Players have to play in an unfun way, and the game moderators have to accomodate to a gaming pace that could have been averted hadn't they started it in the first place.

[cfalcon]

Trap rolls take very little table time, and decent amounts of in game time. Much of the time, the explorers of old caves, ruins, and dungeons have plenty of in game time, and exercising caution is simply good play. Other times, time is of the essence.

I really don't even understand why this is a problem. Is it because the group isn't walking into your traps? That's why they have a trap guy. They could make a party without one.

[cfalcon]

Full disclosure: in my games, in any populated-but-guarded dungeon, there are usually copious traps. Checking for traps is often done, and almost always successful. Failed detections are often area elemental damage, or poison saving throws, which has led to amusing interactions with monks (I take no damage, and also I'm immune to that). The "hit point tax" traps are common.

In an abandoned dungeon, or one populated largely by monsters, traps are infrequent to nonexistent. Treasure hidden behind a secret door is more likely to be trapped, because no one has been through there, etc.

I don't think this is bad play on their part, or bad design on my part. I do have issues with the players going through very slowly (and rope tricking between encounters, or just going back to town), depending on the dungeon and the time scale- I've never had issues with trap rolls.

[Tyndmyr]

For every time they took 20 I'd roll for a random encounter (taking 20 is like an hour or something isn't it?). And where are they going to get chickens and henchmen in the middle of a dungeon? I meant do it once, like as a warning, not repeatedly. Plus henchmen cost gold. If all else fails put a time clock on. It usually makes sense to have one.

Henchmen cost a trivial amount of gold. And more importantly, they only cost gold when they find a trap. If the trap instead hits me, it costs me a potion or so. Potions are more expensive than henchmen.

That's assuming you aren't summoning them for free.


edit: also chickens aren't usually heavy enough to spring traps and henchmen aren't usually willing to go out in front. If they use a 10 foot pole, then ask them how they carry it first off (10 ft is pretty unwieldy), secondly pressure once again. Most traps don't go off at the slightest bit of pressure. You can't put a full human sized weight on the tip of a pole. 3rd, even if they did spring it they can still be within range of the trap, and the pole might get destroyed in the process so it *might* work once.

That's why you use one of the following: Weight attached to a stick, many small weights moved by mage hand, earth elementals summoned via a reserve feat, or henchmen.

If the GM makes a trap trigger that isn't found by your normal routine, add a test for that kind of trap to your routine. If the GM won't just take this for granted, write it down. Read it every time you find something suspicious.

[Edhelras]

Well, my recommendations for future games. Some have been suggested by others, so I hope I'm not repeating myself too much.

Only place traps where they would logically be located. The treasure chest locked and bolted in the big boss's room? Probably trapped. The large iron door covered with arcane writings and magical seals? Probably trapped. The long hallway full of discarded bolts and cut in half bodies? Probably trapped.

The kitchen? Probably not trapped. It simply isn't worth it to trap a location that is in heavy use by half a dozen people several times a day, especially when you're only protecting a cup of flour from being stolen by outsiders. It would be far more practical to trap outside any base or dungeon, to prevent people from getting in, than to trap inside where you frequently move about.

And there is resources to consider. The orc army is not going to set up lethal traps throughout the forest a quarter-mile away from their camp. It simply isn't resource intensive. With the amount of effort needed to do so, they might as well just build earthworks and be better prepared for anyone attacking them. At best, they'll run string and bells/seashells just outside the campfire light to alert any sentries on duty.

Use wandering encounters when the PCs are taking too long. Consider what frequently stalks around the given area, then make up 3-4 different encounters. If the players decide to take a long time looking for traps, roll some dice to simulate perhaps 20-40 minutes passing and choose a group to attack. They'll likely be hitting from ambush from outside the party's torchlight, either attacking the searchers or one of the PCs on guard.

Of course, you should probably make the encounters one or two CR below the party level. And definitely give the party a chance to notice them. The point isn't to kill the party, or even to rough them up - it is to point out that sitting around in one place, examining the floor, can be rather dangerous in wild territory. If the party decides to do something even more stupid - such as spending hours searching the main hall of an inhabited fort - then feel free to throw the full force of whatever would logically get together to force the party out. Patrolling orcs don't simply pace around 20x20 rooms all day.

Speed things up if nothing will happen. That is, if you know the abandoned castle is empty of enemies and there is nothing interesting beyond the jail cell and treasure room, then just ask the players how long they will continue searching for traps. Calculate how much time it takes to search everything, then report back: "After three days of throughly searching the castle, you discover the only points of interest being the jail cell and the poorly hidden treasure room beind the dilapidated throne. Neither has been searched yet by the party. Take three rations off everyone's character sheet, and let's pick things up from here."

Many people have said more or less the same wise things; I liked this one. I would only add:
Take 10. If the players insist on doing trap-searching as a routine task everywhere they're going, they cannot reasonably claim to spend the time needed to Take 20 on each and every search. Rather, they've obviously taken to do it as an off-hand task. Just like NPC guards who''re just standing at the city gates all day long Take 10 to see through your disguise, the continually-searching Rogue can Take 10 to notice traps. If he insists on Taking 20 or similar behavior, that's his choice. But if he overdoes it, you're right to throw random encounters at the party.
For instance, some overpowering encounter that simply forces the party to run, in only one direction, be there traps or not. A rolling stone in a narrow corridor would do.

[randomhero00]

Henchmen cost a trivial amount of gold. And more importantly, they only cost gold when they find a trap. If the trap instead hits me, it costs me a potion or so. Potions are more expensive than henchmen.

That's assuming you aren't summoning them for free.



That's why you use one of the following: Weight attached to a stick, many small weights moved by mage hand, earth elementals summoned via a reserve feat, or henchmen.

If the GM makes a trap trigger that isn't found by your normal routine, add a test for that kind of trap to your routine. If the GM won't just take this for granted, write it down. Read it every time you find something suspicious.
shrug, we play a little more realistic. Where are you getting a 130+ pounds of weight? How is the pole not breaking? Why would henchmen agree to go along with you when they heard the last 5 didn't make it?

Yes, reserve feats are a bit of an achille's heel. That's why we don't use standard traps. We use puzzle traps. Traps that can go off multiple times until you figure out a clever way to disable them.

To be realistic we also throw in traps that are unarmed. After all, someone may have already come this way (usually its the boss waiting for us). But of course, we always have a stupid barbarian that goes "I push the button!" Axe blades swing down. collective party sigh as we become trapped in the room.

[Tyndmyr]

shrug, we play a little more realistic. Where are you getting a 130+ pounds of weight?

Frequently, bodies have been used for this purpose. Alternatively, a rock. Finding a heavy object is not hard.


How is the pole not breaking?

If it breaks merely from shoving the weight of a body around, it's a terrible pole. If this happens, we will buy a ladder, which is pretty much guaranteed to hold a persons weight up in the air. Then, we cut off the rungs. Two perfectly good poles.


Why would henchmen agree to go along with you when they heard the last 5 didn't make it?

Diplomacy is a wonderful, wonderful thing. Besides, henchmen are pretty much always in danger. They tend to have a terribly high mortality rate. Its a rough job.


Yes, reserve feats are a bit of an achille's heel. That's why we don't use standard traps. We use puzzle traps. Traps that can go off multiple times until you figure out a clever way to disable them.

Puzzle traps can be interesting. Auto-resetting traps are fairly easy to bypass once you know where they are. See also, a tower shield.

[randomhero00]

Frequently, bodies have been used for this purpose. Alternatively, a rock. Finding a heavy object is not hard.

.

Ok, so 130 or so is usually the average low for adventurers (besides small). Then assume a pack and armor. At least 160-170. I'd like to see you push a pole with a min of a 170 lbs on the end of it to check for IEDs in iraq. Whilst at every corner (or street in iraq) you turn there could be enemies waiting. I don't buy that crap as a DM but to each his own.

edit: for rocks we're talking 100lb + rocks. Those aren't easy to find. Much less throw 10 ft.

[Tyndmyr]

Ok, so 130 or so is usually the average low for adventurers (besides small). Then assume a pack and armor. At least 160-170. I'd like to see you push a pole with a min of a 170 lbs on the end of it to check for IEDs in iraq. Whilst at every corner (or street in iraq) you turn there could be enemies waiting. I don't buy that crap as a DM but to each his own.

edit: for rocks we're talking 100lb + rocks. Those aren't easy to find. Much less throw 10 ft.

That may be, but my strength score isn't great. My character, on the other hand, has a 15. My character can lift that over his head with ease, and can push or drag five times that much along the ground.


A character can generally push or drag along the ground as much as five times his or her maximum load.

[randomhero00]

That may be, but my strength score isn't great. My character, on the other hand, has a 15. My character can lift that over his head with ease, and can push or drag five times that much along the ground.

physics 101 its different with a smaller surface area (i.e. pole). The part you quoted was assuming you were putting your whole weight around it.

I'd say if they were super paranoid just made an iron ball or something with a few slits to see out of and have someone run around it in to set off traps.

[Tyndmyr]

physics 101 its different with a smaller surface area (i.e. pole). The part you quoted was assuming you were putting your whole weight around it.

While this is not actually true, and it takes the same amount of energy to move something by pushing on a small surface as a large one, and thus you are wrong both in reality and in D&D rules...I highly doubt that it would be difficult for a character to affix a board to the end of a pole.

Y'see, the more terrible objections that are brought up to prevent checking for traps, the more detail is required to explain it. Which results in a very long description of the most boring details of accomplishing a trivial task.

[Edhelras]

Some thoughts on trap placement: I find this difficult myself. Actually, traps require some kind of voluntary sacrifice on the players' side: Traps aren't funny if they're not dangerous, and to feel dangerous, they have to prove it once in a while. So, in order to have fun with traps in the game - which is a major way for the Rogue to feel like he's contributing and necessary to the group - some times the characters have to fail a trap search and suffer the damage. If the players aren't willing to accept this, if they're too cautious and paranoid, they'll never get to feel the thrill of a possibly trapped dungeon: either they will catch all the traps, or it will be trap-free (as suggested by many here), or it will feel like DM cheating if they are caught by a trap after all their searching.

This dilemma goes for the DM/dungeon constructor as well: If traps are overused, or gotcha, or ludicrously placed, it will foster player behavior that is contrary to the fun of the game, and will make traps a nuisance. Still, it the traps are at all times too "nice" they will pose no danger at all, cause no thrill, just be annoying and tedious. A fine balance indeed.

When trapping a dungeon, there are some major points:

- in an uninhabited dungeon, many or most traps will have been triggered before the PCs arrive, usually by some animal or monster, or by some previous adventurers. Unless the traps are self-resetting and need no maintainance, they will have expired long ago. So travelling through the main thoroughfares of such a dungeon should be reasonably safe (but just imagine the horror of encountering, in such a dungeon, a left-over, resetting trap or some lingering magical effect - a surprise that perhaps only the animal skeletons covering the floor will give a clue about).

- if traps remain in such dungeons, they should primarily be found in places that have been left untouched (hidden caches etc.) and where they would serve some logical function; guarding a treasure chest etc.

- in an inhabited dungeon, traps in much-trafficked areas have to be circumventable or easily disarmable for the inhabitants. I remember reading one of Salvatore's novels, about Morik the Rogue and the multitude of traps he had to disarm and reset just to enter his own house (and even they were eventually breached by Jarlaxle's drow...). Few people will bother with all that, unless it's absolutely necessary. In our own house, we have two locks and an alarm, but often we don't bother with more than the one lock. But anyway - traps are a hassle for those living in the dungeon, and should be rare in those parts.

- in less-trafficked areas, traps that deal direct damage should be pretty lethal, to serve any function. Actually, alarm effect traps would serve a better purpose in outlying corridors. Posionous traps could weaken an intruder, but even then would often just harm one or a few of the intruders - to little use if an entire company is attacking the compound.
Damage-dealing traps might just as well be pretty obvious in these parts of the dungeoun - and unavoidable - so as to function as a deterrent without actually ever have to be triggered.
This trap could still be major fun for the adventurers; it would still have to be actually detected and disabled, but then allow much easier access to the compound than a frontal assault.

With judicious use of traps, the players should through logics and experience learn to know where and when to look for them; they should pose a credible but usually overcome-able challenge, and sometimes, very rarely, they should come as a lethal surprise just to remind the players that they're playing a dangerous game...

[DeltaEmil]

Every gm trying to make trap-disabling that difficult are punishing themselves... which they deserve in the first place.

[Worira]

First off, taking 20 to check for traps takes 2 minutes, not an hour. Second, how big exactly do you think a hundred pound rock is?

EDIT: Personally, I'd roll a log if I wanted to check for pressure plates.

[randomhero00]

While this is not actually true, and it takes the same amount of energy to move something by pushing on a small surface as a large one, and thus you are wrong both in reality and in D&D rules...I highly doubt that it would be difficult for a character to affix a board to the end of a pole.


It is true. There are a lot of examples. For instance, imagine try to push a 150 lb bag of fertilizer with a needle...wouldn't worth so great. What about with a 4x4?

Another example, diggin through clay and hit a rock. Current min shovel can't get it out but a full size one can.

Its true that using a small object can transfer the same amount of energy if its going faster, but if its small enough its more likely to go through the object rather than pushing it. Like a gun for example. No one in real life is actually blown backwards from a gunshot.

[/QUOTE]


First off, taking 20 to check for traps takes 2 minutes, not an hour. Second, how big exactly do you think a hundred pound rock is?

EDIT: Personally, I'd roll a log if I wanted to check for pressure plates.

U sure? We've always done taking a 10 is a 5 minute check and a 20 is an hour. Otherwise we'd take 20 every time.

[randomhero00]

While this is not actually true, and it takes the same amount of energy to move something by pushing on a small surface as a large one, and thus you are wrong both in reality and in D&D rules...I highly doubt that it would be difficult for a character to affix a board to the end of a pole.


It is true. There are a lot of examples. For instance, imagine try to push a 150 lb bag of fertilizer with a needle...wouldn't worth so great. What about with a 4x4?

Another example, diggin through clay and hit a rock. Current min shovel can't get it out but a full size one can.

Its true that using a small object can transfer the same amount of energy if its going faster, but if its small enough its more likely to go through the object rather than pushing it. Like a gun for example. No one in real life is actually blown backwards from a gunshot.



First off, taking 20 to check for traps takes 2 minutes, not an hour. Second, how big exactly do you think a hundred pound rock is?

EDIT: Personally, I'd roll a log if I wanted to check for pressure plates.

U sure? We've always done taking a 10 is a 5 minute check and a 20 is an hour. Otherwise we'd take 20 every time.

[Sipex]

...I thought 20 meant 20 minutes.

edit:

Also, Random is right. It takes more energy to exert the same amount of force on an object through a smaller focused medium...like a pole.

Either way, it's the same amount of FORCE in the end, but one requires much more energy from you. (I'm pretty sure I misused lever so I'll just use you)

[Tyndmyr]

U sure? We've always done taking a 10 is a 5 minute check and a 20 is an hour. Otherwise we'd take 20 every time.


Taking 20 takes twenty times as long as making a single check would take.

Also, the needle example is irrelevant, as it penetrates you instead of you pushing it. This is not relevant with poles, unless you are using very odd, pointy poles called spears in a very bad fashion.

If you assume that I do such things unless I specify otherwise, gameplay will become very tedious as I explain in great detail how my character is not mentally deficient and can accomplish ordinary tasks such as poking a rock with a stick without personal injury. This makes the game suck more for everyone.

[Starbuck_II]

U sure? We've always done taking a 10 is a 5 minute check and a 20 is an hour. Otherwise we'd take 20 every time.

Taking ten takes no more time than rolling...

[randomhero00]

Woa sorry, dont know whats wrong with my posts. Anyways done here. go try pushing a 100lb bag with like que stick and then with a much thicker baseball bat.

Its been 5 years since college physics so I'm a little rusty.

[cfalcon]

Even if you rule that something really beefy like a Str 15 character can't, for whatever, reason, push weight in front of them with a pole, certainly 4 dedicated adventurers could.

[Tyndmyr]

If I can't, that still doesn't address the alternative tactics, such as moving many smaller rocks one at a time with mage hand or it's greater cousin. Or pushing multiple smaller rocks with a stick.

One method I've actually used. Toss a ladder on the floor. Walk on it, knowing your weight is distributed. Of course, tossing the ladder also clears tripwires. Carry second ladder with you. Toss ahead of you, repeat.

[NichG]

The problem with triggering the tile 10ft away with a pole isn't that the pole has a small surface of contact, its that you're exerting force on the tile with torque, and the tile has a 10ft advantage on you where torque is concerned.

Basically, your lever arm is the length of your palm at worst, or at best the spacing between your hands when you hold the pole two-handed, so lets give it 1.5ft. The tip of the pole is then 8.5ft away from the center of rotation. So for every 1lbs of force you want to exert on the tile, you personally need to exert about 6lbs of force (5 and 2/3 lbs actually). That means if you want to exert pressure equivalent to a 150lbs person, you need to exert 850lbs of force on the 1.5ft section of pole you're holding.

By the book that means you'd need a strength score of 26 (if you assume your heavy load is the amount of force you can exert) or 21 (if you assume that the amount you can lift over your head is the amount of force you can exert). Physically, it probably lies between the two since when you lift you're doing a surge of motion and then bracing with your bone structure rather than just using muscle strength, and you also get to use your hip muscles as part of the lifting which you could not do leveraging a pole.

Now, there's the problem that the 10ft wood pole would probably snap under that much force. We could run the stresses experienced by such a 10ft pole under such a torque, but we could also look at the break DC of a 10ft pole and compare to 'taking 10' on the strength check to leverage it (corresponding to a DC 15-18 range). Since a 'simple wooden door' has a break DC of 13, it suggests that a wooden pole should have an even lower break DC, so the thing will just snap.

[erikun]

Another thing that potential trap-planning DMs need to consider: if a 200+ lb adventurer, leaning foward with his weight onto a pole/ladder trying to trigger a pressure plate 10 feet ahead, just how much resistance would this plate have? If that isn't sufficient, then every single 40 lb gnome or halfling, and possibly even the lighter elves, should be able to wander throughout an entire dungeon of pressure plates and never trigger a single one. If you want a pressure plate triggered by the first step of a small creature, though, the adventuring party doesn't need to worry about anything as heavy as 100 lbs.


First off, taking 20 to check for traps takes 2 minutes, not an hour. Second, how big exactly do you think a hundred pound rock is?
2 minutes to search a single 5x5 square, not an entire room.