Post/Author/DateTime	Post
LordArcheron 07-07-07, 04:42 PM	Hi, I have a quick question: If a PC triggers a trap which makes melee attack (like a scythe-blade in a doorframe) is the PC considered flat-footed or do i has do call for a initiative-roll? Thanks, Dirk
Marcus Majarra 07-07-07, 05:26 PM	The FAQ covers this. The short answer is that the PC is caught flat-footed, since he's yet to act by the time the trap is sprung.
LordArcheron 07-07-07, 05:33 PM	Thank you. Dirk
unusualsuspect 07-07-07, 07:54 PM	Hi, I have a quick question: If a PC triggers a trap which makes melee attack (like a scythe-blade in a doorframe) is the PC considered flat-footed or do i has do call for a initiative-roll? Thanks, Dirk Also keep in mind that a PC who is aware of the existence of the trap should get the initiative roll: it's no longer so clearly a surprise attack, nor one a character's dexterity would ALWAYS be IMPOSSIBLE to use against.
Marcus Majarra 07-07-07, 10:37 PM	Also keep in mind that a PC who is aware of the existence of the trap should get the initiative roll: it's no longer so clearly a surprise attack, nor one a character's dexterity would ALWAYS be IMPOSSIBLE to use against. This applies only against Encounter Traps (from Secrets of Xen'drik). Regular traps have no initiative and always surprise a character.
Nom 07-09-07, 05:05 AM	This applies only against Encounter Traps (from Secrets of Xen'drik). Regular traps have no initiative and always surprise a character.Not really. "A scythe will swing out from that box when you open the lid". "OK, I'll open the lid and be ready for the scythe". You know where the attack is coming from and you voluntarily enter combat rounds before opening the box, so not flat-footed.
Marcus Majarra 07-09-07, 12:59 PM	Not really. "A scythe will swing out from that box when you open the lid". "OK, I'll open the lid and be ready for the scythe". You know where the attack is coming from and you voluntarily enter combat rounds before opening the box, so not flat-footed. I don't believe this is a good example (or, rather, it's a good example of why traps SHOULD have initiative). Let's look at a similar situation, but with different participants. Say you have a door. On the other side of the door is an armed orc and he's going to attack you when you open the door. The orc is aware of you and you're aware of the orc. Even if you're ready for the orc's attack, can he still catch you flat-footed? The answer is yes, because the orc might beat your initiative. Furthermore if "you voluntarily enter combat rounds before opening the box," you're not considered to have acted before the trap's attack occurs, which makes your flat-footed by default.
weasel0 07-09-07, 01:56 PM	I think common sense should apply to the trap and rogue here. The rogue knows it's trapped. okay. The trap is armed and is always set with a readied action to attack(say scyths swinging out). The rogue opens the chest which sets off the traps readied action. The rogue is not flatfooted, but is stuck taking the attack(whether is misses or not) because the readied action interrupts his. If the trap has say a reflex save instead, then the matter is moot.
calvinNhobbes 07-09-07, 02:31 PM	Let's look at a similar situation, but with different participants. Say you have a door. On the other side of the door is an armed orc and he's going to attack you when you open the door. The orc is aware of you and you're aware of the orc. Even if you're ready for the orc's attack, can he still catch you flat-footed? The answer is yes, because the orc might beat your initiative. Usually I agree with your interpretations of the rules Marcus, but not with this example. If both creatures are aware of each other, then combat has started. Just because they do not have line of effect does not mean they remain flat-footed until they can see each other. If you move up to the door and open it then you have performed an action and are no longer flat-footed in regards to the waiting orc.
Neutronium_Dragon 07-09-07, 06:50 PM	> Furthermore if "you voluntarily enter combat rounds before opening the box," > you're not considered to have acted before the trap's attack occurs, which > makes your flat-footed by default. If you've entered combat rounds then you've just spent a move action (or more, depending on how heavy it is) to open the box. Ergo, you've acted and are not flat-footed.
MarkB 07-09-07, 07:12 PM	> Furthermore if "you voluntarily enter combat rounds before opening the box," > you're not considered to have acted before the trap's attack occurs, which > makes your flat-footed by default. If you've entered combat rounds then you've just spent a move action (or more, depending on how heavy it is) to open the box. Ergo, you've acted and are not flat-footed. I think the point was that there is no such action as "I voluntarily enter combat rounds". If combat is happening, you are in combat. If it isn't, you aren't.
PenderGrass 07-09-07, 09:01 PM	I think the point was that there is no such action as "I voluntarily enter combat rounds". If combat is happening, you are in combat. If it isn't, you aren't. Not only that... You may decide that you are going to attack that group of goblins on the other side of the wall as soon as there is an opening (and they feel the same way about you), but until you roll that first initiative die, you will likely be considered flat-footed until your first initiative count comes up. I have never had a trap that needs an initiative roll. Most have reflex saves and the attacking ones such as the one above given by the OP are simple enough to work out: If the person setting off the trap knows that the trap is there, what the trap does and how it does it - well, give them their full AC. If the person is unsure how the trap operates or is completely unaware of it - the trap attacks their flat-footed AC. There are many ways to adjudicate a trap that is approached in a new way by a PC - that is why they gave you the ability to adjudicate as a DM. Use it. I know many of you out there are afraid to adjudicate with all these rules-lawyering players that slam their DMs on the optimization boards, or keep 30 volumes of splat books on hand to disprove your every say - but stop being afraid and use your powers of DMing to make a fair, accurate and perfectly legitimate call. :dragon: ****
Marcus Majarra 07-09-07, 10:32 PM	Usually I agree with your interpretations of the rules Marcus, but not with this example. Really? Maybe I'm confused, but didn't we argue long and hard about polymorph? Or was that with PenderGrass? Or both? Still, it's good to know my interpretations aren't that far off, most of the time. If both creatures are aware of each other, then combat has started. Just because they do not have line of effect does not mean they remain flat-footed until they can see each other. If you move up to the door and open it then you have performed an action and are no longer flat-footed in regards to the waiting orc. This was all under the assumption that combat had not yet begun. Keep in mind that awareness in combat is used to determine the presence of a surprise round. That's the only reason I specified this for the example. In it, combat actually begins after the door is opened, with no surprise round. If the person setting off the trap knows that the trap is there, what the trap does and how it does it - well, give them their full AC. Well, the same kind of logic should also apply against armed opponents in combat. The reason characters are flat-footed at the start of combat is because they're not yet ready to act (or react), and even if you know that a trap is going to attack you, it's no more of a guarantee that you can be truly ready for it. Of course, I do allow for the possibility of being completely ready against a trap. I call it succeeding in disarming the trap.
PenderGrass 07-10-07, 01:19 AM	Well, the same kind of logic should also apply against armed opponents in combat. The reason characters are flat-footed at the start of combat is because they're not yet ready to act (or react), and even if you know that a trap is going to attack you, it's no more of a guarantee that you can be truly ready for it. Of course, I do allow for the possibility of being completely ready against a trap. I call it succeeding in disarming the trap. Well, the trap that was in the OP is a typical "attack" trap, just because someone isn't flat-footed, doesn't mean they aren't gonna get hit. So, allowing a non-flat-footed approach isn't granting them immunity to the possibility of getting clobbered. Not in the least. Also, traps are not the same as an armed opponent. Opening a chest when you know it is going to shoot an arrow out of the front is far different than looking down the bolt of a loaded crossbow in the hands of a trained killer. This doesn't mean you should allow people to not be flat-footed because they are prepared - it is all dependent upon how they are prepared. Hence, the whole thing about using your ability to adjudicate the situation. Sometimes setting hard and fast rules is really where the game starts to break - sometimes. :dragon: ****
PenderGrass 07-10-07, 01:22 AM	Really? Maybe I'm confused, but didn't we argue long and hard about polymorph? Or was that with PenderGrass? Don't expect to be swapping spit in the shower. Really. "long and hard"? You couldn't think of something better to write? If that argument chapped your hide that badly, you should look it up and determine who has offended you so deeply before you start typing "long and hard" and attaching names. :P :dragon: ****
calvinNhobbes 07-10-07, 10:20 AM	Really? Maybe I'm confused, but didn't we argue long and hard about polymorph? Or was that with PenderGrass? Or both? Wasn't me! Arguing about the mess that is polymorph seems futile to me! :D This was all under the assumption that combat had not yet begun. Keep in mind that awareness in combat is used to determine the presence of a surprise round. I don't quite agree with this statement. I think in your example combat has begun. Awareness is used to determine the beginning of combat in general not just a surprise round. Obviously, if all parties involved are not equally aware then that justifies a surprise round, but a surprise round is still part of combat. In it, combat actually begins after the door is opened, with no surprise round. I would say combat begins once they are aware, even if that means the door is closed. Each side may spend several rounds waiting for the other to move first and open the door, but both sides are in combat and no longer flat-footed.
Phrennzy 07-10-07, 01:22 PM	I've never even considered a trap catching someone flat-footed. (And Uncanny Dodge for the rogue negates the argument anyway). I can see if you don't know the trap is there, you are flat-footed. If you know there is a trap, but don't know where it will fire from (you found a pressure plate), I can see flat-footed. If you know there is a trap, and where it will fire from, you aren't flat-footed. There is no suprise factor - you are ready for the attack. You know it's coming and are prepared to dodge. In terms of the door with the orc on oneside and the party on the other: If neither side knows about the other, and someone opens the door, there is no suprise round (or rather, both sides are suprised). Flat-footedness as normal until your initiative. If one side knows about the other, and either side opens the door, there is a suprise round. If both sides know there is someone on the other side, that's combat. No one is suprised or flat-footed - with the exception of something oddball happening, like the mage casting passwall to let the party attack from where the wall was, or some other sort of 'surprising' attack.
qwerty1 07-10-07, 01:28 PM	Question: How would you deal with a trap with an "Onset Delay"?
MarkB 07-11-07, 02:57 AM	I think a lot of the disagreement in this thread comes from the assumption that flat-footedness is a condition a character gains by being surprised or unprepared. Despite the name, it's not. Flat-footed is the condition your character is in all the time, no matter how well prepared he is, until after combat has started and he has begun his first action during combat.
PenderGrass 07-11-07, 03:37 AM	I think a lot of the disagreement in this thread comes from the assumption that flat-footedness is a condition a character gains by being surprised or unprepared. Despite the name, it's not. That is somewhat debatable: Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, not yet reacting normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity. Stumbling into a trap with no clue could obviously equal a flat-footed condition. Attempting to disarm a trap with full knowledge and awareness of the trap, its mechanism and location, is not nearly as clear - is the aware PC able to react normally to the situation? The overall question has become - at what point is a character able to react normally to the trap (or situation)? One just as obvious answer would be that a character with enough awareness of the situation would be able to react normally to the situation (and thus not be caught flat-footed). The next obvious answer would be that a character without enough awareness to react to the situation normally would be considered flat-footed. The job of the DM is to fairly assess the situations on an individual basis and make the call. I would only add that not being flat-footed doesn't mean you escape the trap without an attack roll, it merely gives you more of a chance to not be hit by it. In game terms, flat-footed means nothing more than you either loose your dexterity to AC or you don't, and, you cannot make AoOs. Beyond that it is up to the DM to decide what situations he feels call for it or not. I could easily see a DM that decides that no trap really catches people flat-footed, unless some other circumstance prevents them from reacting normally (i.e., they are climbing a rope, etc.). I could just as easily see that reacting normally means that they have to be aware of the trap's existence prior to it springing. Another factor to consider would be that I don't recall seeing a standard trap in the DMG that makes the characters roll less than their normal reflex save - thus, indicating that they are more than able to react normally to a trap without even knowing it is there. :dragon: ****
Leilond 07-11-07, 03:54 AM	Another factor to consider would be that I don't recall seeing a standard trap in the DMG that makes the characters roll less than their normal reflex save - thus, indicating that they are more than able to react normally to a trap without even knowing it is there. :dragon: **** Reflex save aren't related with the flat-footed situation at all. Flat-footed character roll their reflex save like all other characters, so the issue doesn't matter at all The issue here is: do you consider the character flat-footed or not? I will rule that knowing of the possible existence of a trap isn't enought to not be flat-footed. You've to know where it is a and its effects. This means that you must know from which general direction the arrow fired by the traps will come, - There's a trap on that door isn't enought, you'll be flat-footed - There's a trap on that door that make an arrow fire from the cealing when you try put your foot on that square is enought, and you won't be flat-footed. Remembering that this issue come is important only if the trap use a "to hit roll", because all other traps do not change their effects against flat-footed characters
PenderGrass 07-11-07, 04:27 AM	Reflex save aren't related with the flat-footed situation at all. True enough, but it is an indication that traps do not necessarily create negative situations in and of themselves. Again, the DM must make an evaluation whether the flat-footed prerequisite of being able to react to the situation normally is really met. Since no other factor of a standard DMG trap creates a situation where the PC cannot react normally (whether that be a saving throw, skill check or otherwise), it is just as logical to imagine there is no inherent penalty to a PCs AC vs a standard trap's attack roll. In fact, I would even go further and point out that many of the CR1 traps have attack rolls of +10. +10 vs 1st level PCs. Granted the attack roll really has nothing to do with flat-footed conditions, per se - but it does have everything to do with determining a fair and balanced DM decision. Is it really that horrifying to allow PCs a chance to not be in the default flat-footed vs an attack roll of +10? How about a fusillade of 1d4 darts at multiple targets - each at +10? For 1st level characters, they are surely sitting targets with that kind of attack roll without dumping a default "you're scr*wed" condition on top of it. The more I look at these traps the more I see it is less likely that a character's default stance towards them is "flat-footed." :dragon: ****
Leilond 07-11-07, 04:46 AM	True enough, but it is an indication that traps do not necessarily create negative situations in and of themselves. No, it isn't an indication, because a character catched flat-footed during battle is like a character catched flat-footed by a trap. Both loses their dexterity bonus to AC and both roll their reflex saves without problems So, a trap that let you roll a reflex save, can be consideret it catched you flat-footed. Again, the DM must make an evaluation whether the flat-footed prerequisite of being able to react to the situation normally is really met. Since no other factor of a standard DMG trap creates a situation where the PC cannot react normally (whether that be a saving throw, skill check or otherwise), it is just as logical to imagine there is no inherent penalty to a PCs AC vs a standard trap's attack roll. Except that it is perfectly logical that you're catch flat-footed. In fact, I would even go further and point out that many of the CR1 traps have attack rolls of +10. +10 vs 1st level PCs. Granted the attack roll really has nothing to do with flat-footed conditions, per se - but it does have everything to do with determining a fair and balanced DM decision. Is it really that horrifying to allow PCs a chance to not be in the default flat-footed vs an attack roll of +10? How about a fusillade of 1d4 darts at multiple targets - each at +10? For 1st level characters, they are surely sitting targets with that kind of attack roll without dumping a default "you're scr*wed" condition on top of it. The more I look at these traps the more I see it is less likely that a character's default stance towards them is "flat-footed." :dragon: **** The first trap deals only 1d6 damage so it isn't probably going to kill nothing at all, only to consume one of the cleric cure, if the DC 20 search check fail. And +10 to hit doesn't mean "auto-hit". The rogues usually use some armor (perfect chain shirt usually bought before leveling up to 2nd level) The second trap is surely more dangerouns, but the DC for the search is 14. If you've a rogue or a ranger you'll find it very easly (traps with search DC under 20 can be found by everyone). If you lack both rangers and rogues, your fighter with AC 16 (scale maile and heavy shield) and 12 pf, can resiste to the 1d4 darts that inflicts 1d4+1 damage, because only 2 or 3 will hit for an average damage of 7-9 HP. Even if the rogue is caought by this trap he isn't going to fall -10 and die, it will consume 2 cleric cure, and you've to be unlucky to not find a DC 14 trap I think these traps are perfectly balanced considering you "flat-footed"
PenderGrass 07-11-07, 01:24 PM	I think these traps are perfectly balanced considering you "flat-footed" Just as balanced if you don't, as well. And now we're back to square 1. :dragon: ****
PenderGrass 07-11-07, 01:25 PM	Except that it is perfectly logical that you're catch flat-footed. Just as logical to say someone is perfectly capable of reacting normally to the situation as well. :dragon: ****
LordArcheron 07-11-07, 03:01 PM	First...thanks for your replies. But another thing came up my mind: How about sundering a melee-attack-trap? Considering you are aware of the trap and where the attack comes from. 1. I think the trap wouldn't get an AoO. 2. Opposed rolls. A scything-blade would get the bonus for a two handed weapon (i think so) 3. Damage to the trap. However it makes the most sense to me for traps which automatically resets. Can you also fight defensively using sunder? Dirk
Leilond 07-11-07, 06:36 PM	Just as balanced if you don't, as well. And now we're back to square 1. I never said they aren't But you were the one who look like to think it wasn't balanced if you're catch flat-footed. Pheraps I missreaded your post Just as logical to say someone is perfectly capable of reacting normally to the situation as well. Well... pheraps... but my mind find more logical thinking about a person that is surprised when an arrow fire unespected from a wall How about sundering a melee-attack-trap? Considering you are aware of the trap and where the attack comes from. 1. I think the trap wouldn't get an AoO. 2. Opposed rolls. A scything-blade would get the bonus for a two handed weapon (i think so) 3. Damage to the trap. However it makes the most sense to me for traps which automatically resets. Can you also fight defensively using sunder? You cannot "sunder" something until you don't see the weapon and once you see the weapon the attack started and you cannot sunder it You can fight defensively using sunder: you'll have -4 to the opposet hit roll in the sunder attempt
LordArcheron 07-12-07, 02:47 AM	You cannot "sunder" something until you don't see the weapon and once you see the weapon the attack started and you cannot sunder it But what about if someone, not the sunderer, triggers the trap, and the sunderer prepares a ready action "i will sunder it when the trap tries to attack my fellow". I would allow the player to try to sunder the trap, since it makes sense to me that one can break a scything-wall-blade when it's coming out the door from e.g. Dirk
Leilond 07-12-07, 02:56 AM	But what about if someone, not the sunderer, triggers the trap, and the sunderer prepares a ready action "i will sunder it when the trap tries to attack my fellow". I would allow the player to try to sunder the trap, since it makes sense to me that one can break a scything-wall-blade when it's coming out the door from e.g. Dirk I'm not sure if it can be done strictly by the RAW. Personally, as a DM, I will allow it if you know exactly how the trap will attack
PenderGrass 07-12-07, 02:57 AM	But what about if someone, not the sunderer, triggers the trap, and the sunderer prepares a ready action "i will sunder it when the trap tries to attack my fellow". I would allow the player to try to sunder the trap, since it makes sense to me that one can break a scything-wall-blade when it's coming out the door from e.g. Dirk I have used hallways filled with timed slicing blades and knew that my players would be attempting to sunder them as the rest of the trap chugged along to their doom. Since I knew beforehand of their likely tactic, it was a simple task of identifying the closest weapon type in the sunder table and then using that for their "sundering attack." :dragon: ****
zorgling25 07-12-07, 03:09 AM	But what about if someone, not the sunderer, triggers the trap, and the sunderer prepares a ready action "i will sunder it when the trap tries to attack my fellow". I would allow the player to try to sunder the trap, since it makes sense to me that one can break a scything-wall-blade when it's coming out the door from e.g. Dirk The blade is not a valid sundering target when it hasn't attacked (its in the door/wall/etc.) You cannot sunder a weapon mid-attack. Since the blade doesn't become a valid target until it's already making the attack, you can't sunder it until after the attack has finished (after which it's pointless, unless its a rearming trap)
Leilond 07-12-07, 03:42 AM	The blade is not a valid sundering target when it hasn't attacked (its in the door/wall/etc.) You cannot sunder a weapon mid-attack. Since the blade doesn't become a valid target until it's already making the attack, you can't sunder it until after the attack has finished (after which it's pointless, unless its a rearming trap) Sounds very RAW
zorgling25 07-12-07, 03:43 AM	Sounds very RAW Thats the point. There's no point in not following RAW unless there's clearly an inconsistency. The rules are clear on this one.
PenderGrass 07-12-07, 03:50 AM	The blade is not a valid sundering target when it hasn't attacked (its in the door/wall/etc.) You cannot sunder a weapon mid-attack. Since the blade doesn't become a valid target until it's already making the attack, you can't sunder it until after the attack has finished (after which it's pointless, unless its a rearming trap) My trap that the players wanted to use the "I smash the blades" tactic, and I am purposefully getting away from the Sunder term, was rearming. They knew the blades were coming out all along the walls, floor and ceiling. We may have used the opposed rolls similar to sunder, as well as the consequences of damage and so on. But in no way was it really a true sunder attempt. I would like to go back to another question asked earlier that seems to have been skipped for the most part: Question: How would you deal with a trap with an "Onset Delay"? I used a timed trap a few months back and I had it complete 1 round of time at the end of each round from being tripped. This was mostly due to the trap being tripped outside of normal initiative. A timed trap I used even further back had been triggered during combat and I marked the initiative count that it was triggered. Each time that initiative count came up, one round had elapsed. :dragon: ****
PenderGrass 07-12-07, 04:01 AM	Thats the point. There's no point in not following RAW unless there's clearly an inconsistency. The rules are clear on this one. I don't think I have ever seen rules pertaining directly to PCs trying to "sunder" blades that come out of walls, floors and ceilings. True, you can try to get the Breaking And Entering rules out of the PHB (pages 165-166) to work, but although they mention moving objects, they never really give you a means to work out the details of an activated slicing wall trap blade. :dragon: ****
Nom 07-12-07, 04:47 AM	True, you can try to get the Breaking And Entering rules out of the PHB (pages 165-166) to work, but although they mention moving objects, they never really give you a means to work out the details of an activated slicing wall trap blade.I don't see the problem. It's a non-immobile unattended non-magic object. Given the size and material of the blade, you can calculate its hit points and AC. The only trick is that it's moving, which probably makes it non-inanimate. Easiest just to say Dex 10 = 0 AC mod. If it's a metal sword roughly equivalent to a longsword, it has hardness 10, 5 hp, and size class Small. Thus, AC 11, 5 hp, hardness 10. Resolve your readied action.
nickcan 07-12-07, 04:58 AM	If initiative must be rolled with a trap (and sometimes it happens) I treat the trap as having a dex of 0 and is taking ten on initiative. So more often than not the character should win, but sometimes he doesn't. Funny story. I was once trying to get off a featherfall as I was falling from a great height. (obviously it was my character not me) I was scheduled to hit the ground on my initiative and there was a point of contention if I would hit the ground first or not. The DM just smiled and said "Roll initiative with Greyhawk" Good times.
Phrennzy 07-12-07, 10:37 AM	The only trick is that it's moving, which probably makes it non-inanimate. My head just exploded.
PenderGrass 07-12-07, 12:50 PM	The only trick is that it's moving, which probably makes it non-inanimate. :rofl: That is probably the funniest use of the word "probably" I have seen in quite some time. Seriously though, AC 11 for something that is moving that fast and being that small? To each his own, I guess. :dragon: ****