Why is practically everyone against traps?

[Talore]

I love traps! So sexy... Wait, we're not talking about those traps...


I like traps when they aren't just random hidden things. I like them when the party can see them and reason out a course of action that involves multiple people. Those fall into 'puzzles' but it still counts.


The other place where I like traps is in active combat, either visible or hidden. Makes bull rush more fun and gives attentive players creative solutions to challenges.

[RedWarlock]

I enjoy traps that act more like monsters. Encounter traps.

Tonight, I threw a large open room of tiles in the middle of a cavern. On the far end of the room was a runic circle with a large fire that sprung up as soon as you entered the chamber. The trap was a modified lightning bolt trap, in that the first person to cross triggered a lightning bolt stretched horizontally. Then, each subsequent round, on initiative order, the trap would attack as many people as possible on a horizontal row (random is the same number in different rows), or if no targets were present, effectively ready an action to lightning bolt the first person to cross the tiles.

Then I put a deep dragon into the shadowy stalactites overhead, who waited until they'd circled the trap, and was gathered around the (heatless, illusory) flaming circle, to unleash his breath weapon cone from above.

[Kasz]

I utilize traps in my dungeons but they have to be done pretty well or not at all.

1. You must realize they're a HP tax. They make fights a bit more tense... going into the zombie ambush with half hp is more tense than going in with three quarter hp. Your resources have to last for multiple encounters over the day... otherwise you might as well remove /day abilities and vancian spellcasting and just make them at will.

1a. "HP taxes are lame and not tense at all you're a bad DM" - pfft, if you holdperson the fighter and kill him without taking damage - awesome. If you go toe to toe in melee and take half your health whilst killing him - awesome. both use up resources... smart play uses less. Traps are the same.

2. Don't punish the trapfinder. he's a TRAPFINDER if he's moving at a walking pace he'll get a search check automatically. If he's moving slow and being careful, give him a bonus! If he's running give him an equal minus! either way he gets an automatic check... he's not a mindreader... "Well you didn't ask to search!" He didn't realise he had to ask every 5ft square... that's poor DMing.

3. Give non trapfinders spot checks for obvious traps... only a trapfinder would notice a pressure plate without stepping on it... but anyone can see the wall has lots of little arrow sized holes. Give them a spot check to notice this odd feature. If they ignore the holes... fine, if they decide to tread careful.... awesome.

4. Have some traps already sprung... nothing tells the party to beware more than the bandit's corpse crushed under a weight or cut in two next to a large groove in the floor. If the trap resets then it's a warning, if the trap does not reset then awesome, the party scoots around it and keeps an eye out for similar... maybe give the trapfinder a +2 on search and the nontrapfinders a +2 on spot for traps like the one they've just seen... not all traps but the one they've seen. Maybe a +4 if the trapfinder thoroughly investigates it to learn how the dungeon designers were thinking.

5. HE CHOSE POORLY. Maybe the door has 5 combinations... a wrong combo hurts... simple as. Think about the skyrim traps, you put in the wrong combo you get a faceful of arrows and try again. The trapfinder tries the lever, arrows shoot, he reflexes and evades... great , give him a +2 if he tries another combo... This is like a riddle that takes a maximum of 5 attempts but might cost a chunk of HP. Or the players could slow down and do some mental arithmetic and take no damage.

6. Grimtooth's Traps. - Awesome book... some nice inventive traps in these books... a lot that can be overcome with clever play rather than "one skill check". although you can give hints if people ask the right questions or perform the right checks.

[veekie]

^^
Hp taxes don't work at all on groups with any level of optimization. Unless you are dropping a monster on them immediately as part of the trap activation,  any party past level 5 can easily heal off the damage with a negligible expenditure of resources...or just camp out and get the spell slots they used to fix it back.

As for choosing poorly, it depends on how that is presented. What is obvious to one is not obvious to all. Especially if the one is the guy who put it all there.

[ImperatorK]

I'm not really against traps, but I don't know how to feel about them, they just leave me confused.

[InnaBinder]

I utilize traps in my dungeons but they have to be done pretty well or not at all.

1. You must realize they're a HP tax. They make fights a bit more tense... going into the zombie ambush with half hp is more tense than going in with three quarter hp. Your resources have to last for multiple encounters over the day... otherwise you might as well remove /day abilities and vancian spellcasting and just make them at will.

1a. "HP taxes are lame and not tense at all you're a bad DM" - pfft, if you holdperson the fighter and kill him without taking damage - awesome. If you go toe to toe in melee and take half your health whilst killing him - awesome. both use up resources... smart play uses less. Traps are the same.

2. Don't punish the trapfinder. he's a TRAPFINDER if he's moving at a walking pace he'll get a search check automatically. If he's moving slow and being careful, give him a bonus! If he's running give him an equal minus! either way he gets an automatic check... he's not a mindreader... "Well you didn't ask to search!" He didn't realise he had to ask every 5ft square... that's poor DMing.

3. Give non trapfinders spot checks for obvious traps... only a trapfinder would notice a pressure plate without stepping on it... but anyone can see the wall has lots of little arrow sized holes. Give them a spot check to notice this odd feature. If they ignore the holes... fine, if they decide to tread careful.... awesome.

4. Have some traps already sprung... nothing tells the party to beware more than the bandit's corpse crushed under a weight or cut in two next to a large groove in the floor. If the trap resets then it's a warning, if the trap does not reset then awesome, the party scoots around it and keeps an eye out for similar... maybe give the trapfinder a +2 on search and the nontrapfinders a +2 on spot for traps like the one they've just seen... not all traps but the one they've seen. Maybe a +4 if the trapfinder thoroughly investigates it to learn how the dungeon designers were thinking.

5. HE CHOSE POORLY. Maybe the door has 5 combinations... a wrong combo hurts... simple as. Think about the skyrim traps, you put in the wrong combo you get a faceful of arrows and try again. The trapfinder tries the lever, arrows shoot, he reflexes and evades... great , give him a +2 if he tries another combo... This is like a riddle that takes a maximum of 5 attempts but might cost a chunk of HP. Or the players could slow down and do some mental arithmetic and take no damage.

6. Grimtooth's Traps. - Awesome book... some nice inventive traps in these books... a lot that can be overcome with clever play rather than "one skill check". although you can give hints if people ask the right questions or perform the right checks.

I'm sorry, but I pretty much disagree with this wholesale: 
1.  As veekie said, HP taxes are a non-factor if your group optimizes or even just plans ahead.

2.  All too often, automatic Search checks like this will quickly turn into a pointless roll-fest for the trapfinder who is just as likely to wind up getting good rolls on untrapped sections of dungeon floor and failing to roll well to avoid the actual trap as he is to get an actual benefit from this largesse.  Not to mention, you'll give the trapfinder Carpal Tunnel from repetitive motion.

3.  Allowing non-trapfinders to use an alternate means to find traps FURTHER DEVALUES the resources the trapfinder spent to, yanno, find traps, in addition to obviating specific ACFs for this purpose, such as the Barbarian's.

4.  Having traps already sprung means the party is most likely to either a) become MORE paranoid and slow their exploration down further while the trapfinder grindingly pores over every millimeter of the dungeon, or b) thinks that they're in some sort of race with another adventuring party (which isn't necessarily bad on its own) and rushes, increasing their pace and their likelihood of setting off more traps.  Do you consider either of those outcomes positive?  I don't.

5 + 6. See "Guess what the DM was thinking," above.

[Libertad]

As someone who's used the D20 version of Grimtooth's Traps in my games, I can tell you that quite a bit of them are not meant to be used in conventional play.  They're highly lethal and have redundant security measures in order to confound the typical "Detect Magic/Search for Traps" scheme.  And most also have the effect of effectively "trapping" hapless PCs in areas once the damage is dealt.

[Shinkuro]

I'm okay with traps if they're good traps.

(click to show/hide)

awesome trap. you get a cookie.

[Kasz]

I'm sorry, but I pretty much disagree with this wholesale: 
1.  As veekie said, HP taxes are a non-factor if your group optimizes or even just plans ahead.

So if your group has a wand of cure light wounds it's not worth damaging their hit points because they'll just use their wand of cure light wounds?

2.  All too often, automatic Search checks like this will quickly turn into a pointless roll-fest for the trapfinder who is just as likely to wind up getting good rolls on untrapped sections of dungeon floor and failing to roll well to avoid the actual trap as he is to get an actual benefit from this largesse.  Not to mention, you'll give the trapfinder Carpal Tunnel from repetitive motion.

I always assume unless the trapfinder says "I make a search check" all search checks are automatic take tens. If he says he's being slow careful and considerate I assume taking ten with a +5. if he's running, take ten -5. I don't ask for rolls every few minutes, it breaks up play... I only ever slow down play with search checks when I know theres a trap coming and the "secret search check" ensures the party is still "surprised" by the trap.

3.  Allowing non-trapfinders to use an alternate means to find traps FURTHER DEVALUES the resources the trapfinder spent to, yanno, find traps, in addition to obviating specific ACFs for this purpose, such as the Barbarian's.

The giant spikes on the ceiling descend and crush you all.
"What giant spikes?"
You couldn't see them because you don't have trapfinding.

spot checks to spot killholes, arrow holes, giant spikes... y'know, stuff you'd see... not find the traps trigger, not disarm it... just to see it... if you see a trap coming you get a bonus to the save to avoid... it doesn't devalue the trapfinder's ability to actually find and disarm the trap's trigger.

4.  Having traps already sprung means the party is most likely to either a) become MORE paranoid and slow their exploration down further while the trapfinder grindingly pores over every millimeter of the dungeon, or b) thinks that they're in some sort of race with another adventuring party (which isn't necessarily bad on its own) and rushes, increasing their pace and their likelihood of setting off more traps.  Do you consider either of those outcomes positive?  I don't.

Like I said, we don't roll search, if the trapfinder says "I go slow" he gets a bonus but the party might take 12 hours to clear a 4 hour dungeon (in game time) OOC the same amount of time passes. The modifiers here being that random patrols and whatnot get more likely.

Or the party might rush... making a 4 hour crawl take 2 hours but using up more resources as they stumble into fights without prebuffing or set off traps.

both of the above might take 1 or 2 sessions... but they take considerately different amounts of in-game time. Which might have ramifications on other quests or it just might mean it's dark when they get out of the crypt or whatever.

5 + 6. See "Guess what the DM was thinking," above.

Yeah, fair point. This is always difficult, but it can be done well. What a lot of DM's forget is "make it obvious...smack yourself in the forehead obvious...and make sure the "other" option always works"

The other option is brute strength... the barbarian CAN bend the metal with his bare hands but it might take him 3 rounds and during those 3 rounds a malfunctioning (as it's being abused) trap will hurt him.

Making it obvious either means the group will find it very easy but just assume they are smart... or they'll get it pretty quickly... if they don't get it after a minute or two of setting the scene then start to point out the structural weaknesses for the third option or the "long way round"

The reason "guess what the DM is thinking" is usually so terrible is because the DM prefaces it with
"The indestructable door to the chamber with the plot device stands before you... a riddle etched into it's dwarvencraft  engravings... There is no other way in"

There's nothing wrong with the above... it means the players can fail and might have to seek help... but it should only be used to protect something that's [i[supposed[/i] to be difficult to obtain. Putting one in every dungeon just makes your game frustrating.

Also DMs forget that a bardic knowledge check, knowledge history, knowledge local, Intelligence check or other skill could be used to completely bypass their trap... DMs fall into pride and want to show off but just saying... Skill check... pass... you remember the history of this town and the werewolves and make an educated guess "Wolfsbane"... the door creeps open.

An Analogy
Sex in DnD is usually done worse than terribly we all know this... however having a queen who openly flaunts her many bed-partners as half dressed muscular slaves who carry her throne places and openly suggests the party barbarian might be useful to her... once or twice at least. - might make the players awkward but it's a memorable leader and one I used myself in my 7 deadly sins campaign, for Lust.

TL;DR
I like traps, they can be done well... lots of people do them badly. I might not change your mind and you might not use them but you shouldn't say "No group should use them ever".

[veekie]

So if your group has a wand of cure light wounds it's not worth damaging their hit points because they'll just use their wand of cure light wounds?

Exactly, at least not if they have time to burn.

What happens with damaging traps used on their own:
1) Trap detected and disarmed.
2) Trap detected and NOT disarmable, results in spending some time trying to deplete it's reset/bypass the mechanism, before either doing it the hard way or going another way.
3) Trap not detected, damages some of party. Party uses wand of Lesser Vigor and lowest level spontaneous Cure spells to completely heal the damage, proceeds with maybe 10 minutes of in game time spent on various patching up. Remember, the cost of level 1 healing spells in wands are negligible by even early mid levels, Healing Belts buffer the initial bunch so it doesn't even hurt their wealth in the long run, and divine spellcasters have more than enough low level spells to burn that they're not going to be using in combat anyway(combats generally last 1-3 rounds, and divine spellcasters tend to only need to cast for half of those, presuming 4 encounters a day, that'd be 8 of their higher level slots, out of maybe two to three dozen spell slots). And if the casters DO run low, and there is no specific time pressure, why not take a break and reload?

[Kasz]

So if your group has a wand of cure light wounds it's not worth damaging their hit points because they'll just use their wand of cure light wounds?

Exactly, at least not if they have time to burn.

(click to show/hide)

Well everyone we've gathered here for DnD night, okay, Bob's a Cleric, Jon's a Wizard, Marie's a Bard and Steve's a Fighter/Ranger.

Right, well you all know you're going to the crypt to fight the lich king, when you get there there's a guard at the door who cannot let anyone enter as the town are afraid dead adventurers will only make the lich stronger. Fortunately Marie is a Bard so we can skip that. Right well you get into the dungeon and there's zombies.

**combat**

You're all full health again because you have a cleric and he has a wand so lets just skip the idea of damage.

Okay now as you go through the crypt a foul wind blows out the torches so your spellcasters obviously cast some light stuff and you keep going deeper... this deep however the light attracts some skeletons!

**combat**

You're all full health again because you have a cleric and he has a wand so lets just skip the idea of damage.

Right there seems to be a sealed door here but with a combination of Bob's Clerical trapfinding, thanks Olidamma, his knowledge religion and the Bardic knowledge from Marie you can skip that.

on the other side of the door theres a rope that needs to be tightrope walked but the casters can obviously buff all that need it so lets skip that.

you enter the last chamber and discover the lich!

**combat**

You're all full health again because you have a cleric and he has a wand so lets just skip the idea of damage.

You discover the phylactery and destroy it, Steve finally finds a use for his STR score to become a mule and carts the treasure out, obviously the wizard flies him over the tightrope and you all leave.

Excuse me if I actually make my party use their trivial resources and give them a challenging encounter that's not completely combat based. We have differing opinions on the usage of traps and I'm sure you're an excellent DM but I like traps and will continue to use them until my group says "wow traps are lame/boring" but considering how most of them like my traps I think I'll be fine.

[veekie]

Consider the process, your party encounters the trap, if they fail to detect the trap, they do nothing and can do nothing about it, it wings them for a fistful of damage. They heal the damage and move on. For an encounter, the party interacts with the encounter, they get relevant choices to make which changes the outcome.

That's the difference between a passive trap and a useful one. A useful trap engages the party, adding complications and allowing for more a more interesting encounter. Simple traps are useful as part of an encounter, whether as preface(party hits trap, trap dumps one guy into a pit, then an alarm goes off and a goblin warparty shows up while they are still coping with the damage and the pit) or active terrain(traps as active parts of the battlefield, which enemies and PCs alike can be moved or tricked into). All of these make the encounter more interesting, thus fulfilling their role in the game.
A passive trap hits for easily repaired damage, which is then repaired.

[Kasz]

I'd agree an active trap is better than a passive one... but I still use both. Passive less than active... but I still use both. It doesn't make sense to me why certain places wouldn't have them... Egyptians guarded their tombs with them... Kobolds are in the fluff dragon obsessed trapmasters... even creatures like orcs who lack the imagination to create a hallway of death could rig up bones on string to make move silently checks harder for intruders.

I had passive traps all over my Blood Magus's lair, to gather samples of the party's blood... that didn't end well.

[veekie]

In those cases the traps' role is to build tension, that the party is going where they aren't supposed to(note that lethal traps in any regularly trafficked area is pretty silly). In the cases of creatures setting traps in their living spaces, they ARE meant to be rapidly followed by a creature based reaction. They aren't universally, sweepingly bad, there are just few circumstances where they'd improve the gaming experience or advance the plot rather than just slow down the group into a paranoiagasm.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Of course it's like statting an encounter!

That's the point!

I think we need a guide on the proper use of traps in dungeon design...

I might try my hand at it when I have more time.

I recall Lycanthromancer had some great ideas for traps (see his ginormous post here).  You might tap him for help.  Unfortunately I haven't seen him online for quite some time

He sent me a link shortly before he disappeared
to a cartoon about a Goat.  Yes a goat.

I had a feeling it was a "trap" for the weenie filter I post through.

Or it was a trap that I fell for ... hmm ...  goat.

[Zionpopsickle]

So if your group has a wand of cure light wounds it's not worth damaging their hit points because they'll just use their wand of cure light wounds?

Exactly, at least not if they have time to burn.

What happens with damaging traps used on their own:
1) Trap detected and disarmed.
2) Trap detected and NOT disarmable, results in spending some time trying to deplete it's reset/bypass the mechanism, before either doing it the hard way or going another way.
3) Trap not detected, damages some of party. Party uses wand of Lesser Vigor and lowest level spontaneous Cure spells to completely heal the damage, proceeds with maybe 10 minutes of in game time spent on various patching up. Remember, the cost of level 1 healing spells in wands are negligible by even early mid levels, Healing Belts buffer the initial bunch so it doesn't even hurt their wealth in the long run, and divine spellcasters have more than enough low level spells to burn that they're not going to be using in combat anyway(combats generally last 1-3 rounds, and divine spellcasters tend to only need to cast for half of those, presuming 4 encounters a day, that'd be 8 of their higher level slots, out of maybe two to three dozen spell slots). And if the casters DO run low, and there is no specific time pressure, why not take a break and reload?

While this is all mechanically true it does hit on a common assumption that I think is made too often on this board: that what is theoretically possible is always practical within the context of the game.  Even if the trap is encountered alone it is highly possible that the party is still under a time crunch for campaign reasons or does not want to use the resources for a wide variety of reasons (chance of UMD failure at low levels, lack of immediate access to wand stores, RPed stinginess, etc.).

Also, there are mechanical reasons to force the party to use these types of resources in the first place.  Wands are supposed to have a particular shelf life and if the party managed to handle some previous encounters while taking lower than average damage then a simple plinking damage trap can help keep things on track.

Finally, a thing that is rarely discussed is that incremental damage helps to break the generality that HP is a binary defense.  It can make for interesting RP for the characters to have to decide if it is worth just sitting around for 2min to let the BSF heal up that last 10% of his health or to move on and risk it again.

I think the big question to ask about traps or most any encounter design is whether they will inspire more RP from the characters or whether they are simply something that the party will roll dice to overcome.  This can be just as true for combats as it is for any other encounter and is probably one of the skills that should be emphasized more in DM advice.

[Unbeliever]

Also note that the best arguments for traps in this thread talk about pairing traps with encounters or use them as part of a description of the environment. It's not traps alone and it requires a bit of setup - eg a time crunch.

[FireInTheSky]

Seriously?!?  How has no one posted this yet???

(click to show/hide)

[Halinn]

Seriously?!?  How has no one posted this yet???

(click to show/hide)

Because it's an old, tired meme. Also, if I were going to do it, I'd find a picture that wasn't grainy.

[FireInTheSky]

Because it's an old, tired meme. Also, if I were going to do it, I'd find a picture that wasn't grainy.

Well, since I wasn't being very original, I didn't feel like I needed to spend much time on it.  So I just grabbed the first picture I saw on google...