Can't anyone notice that (magical) trap?

[hisnamehere]

I've been playing with a few builds lately, mostly centered around filling the rogue job in the party (i.e. trapfinding, maybe a few skills).
I got to thinking, "Why can only a Rogue use their Search skill to find magical traps?" (and traps with DC greater than 20)
I do believe that Rogue's should (typically) be the best at this, as it fits their profession, but it seems odd that no other class can do this. Especially the Wizard, who has the related stat (Int) as his main class stat, and studies magic extensively, arguably having a greater understanding of magical traps than the typical Rogue.

Has this been discussed before? What's the two coppers (ask for two, get a mountain-full) of the Playground?

[Crazysaneman]

Detect magical traps with *Detect Magic?*

[Fenryr]

The Scout and Factotum can detect those traps. Ranger and Barbarian have Alternate Class Feature that allows them to get Trapfinding (but the later can only stop Mechanical traps). Also, some Prestige Classes get Trapfinding.

[Flickerdart]

The wizard doesn't study magical traps, he studies magic. Just like a software engineer wouldn't necessarily know the first thing about circuit boards, the spellcaster might know everything there is to know about the spells inside the trap, but he couldn't begin looking for one. The Rogue, on the other hand, doesn't know anything about the magic, but he knows what good places for traps are, how to spot glitches in the crazy camouflage the traps use, and what wire to cut.

[Crazysaneman]

The wizard doesn't study magical traps, he studies magic. Just like a software engineer wouldn't necessarily know the first thing about circuit boards, the spellcaster might know everything there is to know about the spells inside the trap, but he couldn't begin looking for one. The Rogue, on the other hand, doesn't know anything about the magic, but he knows what good places for traps are, how to spot glitches in the crazy camouflage the traps use, and what wire to cut.

True but a magical trap would still glow with detect magic, would it not?

[Flickerdart]

It definitely would, but rummaging blindly within the cone to find the trap is quite likely to set the thing off.

[Psyren]

In Pathfinder, anyone can find traps if their Perception is high enough. Trapfinding only applies to disabling them via Disable Device. (Other methods still work, such as dispelling or disjoining the trap.)

[deuxhero]

Chock it up to "core is really badly designed".

[tyckspoon]

True but a magical trap would still glow with detect magic, would it not?

It does, assuming a couple of significant factors. The source of the magic has to be close enough to the surface to be pinged by Detect Magic- remember that
1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks

Put a fairly thin layer of metal or just a coating of lead around your magic trap, and you can no longer Detect it. The metal is also useful in hampering people who find it anyway and decide to go Trapkiller on it. Also note that Detect Magic will not tell you what the trap does or how to disable it- it just tells you there's magic in the area (and the magic is not necessarily all that related to the trap- you could detect a magic source in one square as part of a trap that has a mechanical trigger in a different square and actually effects a third location.)

[Curmudgeon]

I do believe that Rogue's should (typically) be the best at this, as it fits their profession, but it seems odd that no other class can do this. Especially the Wizard, who has the related stat (Int) as his main class stat, and studies magic extensively, arguably having a greater understanding of magical traps than the typical Rogue.
Being methodical (high INT modifier) in doing a Search has nothing to do with having a sneaky mind-set. That's the characteristic which is necessary to discern something which is purposely intended to be overlooked (i.e., every trap that isn't purely a spell). If anything, the Wizard's disciplined approach to learning would impose a penalty to perceiving as dangerous something which is carefully created to look innocuous.

Maybe if most spells were designed to inflict harm to everything in the immediate vicinity of their activation (casting), the Wizard would have a more wary approach. But that's just not how they think about things.

[Elboxo]

spells:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/findTraps.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/summonMonsterI.htm
are the best ones, as well as alterself/polymorph to get you senses and skills bonuses and things

[NichG]

The real question is, what is the fundamental character of a 'magic' trap versus a 'non-magic' trap that makes it rogue-only. If not for the Wizard, I could say that through experience with handling magic items and picking the best out, experience with how people set traps, and a good dose of instinctual danger sense, a rogue picks up on things in the area that are literally impossible to see. They don't see the magical trap, they realize that it must be there because they feel like if they took one more step they'd die, and this is the likely place for a trap.

So what I'd fall back to is how trapfinding was handled in 1ed D&D, where it was even more stark. Only thieves (and assassins) could actually make a check to find a trap. Everyone else got to find it by stepping in it. Except that you could actually play out looking for things, and the DM would tell you if you saw something. So the thief gets to roll (usually a bad idea because failing to spot = triggering in 1ed), but everyone gets to poke around with sticks.

Back to 3.5ed, what would this mean? The wizard basically has a 10ft pole (Detect Magic, Spellcraft, etc) but no innate skill at finding traps. If there is a trap that is magical, the wizard can find it 'explicitly' by using the tools he carries with him, but the use of those tools is not automatically part of their search check (especially since Detect Magic can be an expendable resource in principle). But the rogue gets to wrap those things into his skill check.

That picture doesn't work too well if you're in/running the type of 3.5 campaign where 'I prod the flagstones ahead of me with a pole and send forward a summoned rat. What happens?' is answered with 'make a Search check' though.

[Psyren]

Being methodical (high INT modifier) in doing a Search has nothing to do with having a sneaky mind-set. That's the characteristic which is necessary to discern something which is purposely intended to be overlooked (i.e., every trap that isn't purely a spell). If anything, the Wizard's disciplined approach to learning would impose a penalty to perceiving as dangerous something which is carefully created to look innocuous.

It's even worse than that; magic traps are often designed to trigger upon any attempt to analyze or understand them. Wizards are thus prone to self-nerd-sniping (http://xkcd.com/356/) even if they use magical means to detect them.



That picture doesn't work too well if you're in/running the type of 3.5 campaign where 'I prod the flagstones ahead of me with a pole and send forward a summoned rat. What happens?' is answered with 'make a Search check' though.

The trouble with magic traps - they can be set up so that they will never trigger no matter how many summoned rats you send in front of you or even how many times you poke them with your stick. (And given the radius of many of these, even if they do trigger on a poke, it may already be too late.)

[Curmudgeon]

It's even worse than that; magic traps are often designed to trigger upon any attempt to analyze or understand them. Wizards are thus prone to self-nerd-sniping (http://xkcd.com/356/) even if they use magical means to detect them.
Rogues really are special when it comes to detecting magical traps.
Check: You generally must be within 10 feet of the object or surface to be searched.
Until it is triggered, the symbol of death is inactive (though visible and legible at a distance of 60 feet). ...
As a default, a symbol of death is triggered whenever a creature does one or more of the following, as you select: looks at the rune; reads the rune; touches the rune; passes over the rune; or passes through a portal bearing the rune. ...
Note: Magic traps such as symbol of death are hard to detect and disable. A rogue (only) can use the Search skill to find a symbol of death and Disable Device to thwart it. Everybody else can only use Search on a Symbol of Death within 10' ─ which is generally going to be a post-mortem check. :smallwink:

[Coidzor]

Has this been discussed before? What's the two coppers (ask for two, get a mountain-full) of the Playground?

Trapfinding, like track as a feat, especially as a class feature for rangers, is a bad joke. Pathfinder almost made the right decision when they nixed trapfinding as a pre-requisite for finding mundane traps, but they kept in the special snowflake trapfinding for the Rogue because they couldn't think of a way to keep them on the archetype level without making it into a tax.

This is why trapfinding as a special ability no longer exists in my material.


Being methodical (high INT modifier) in doing a Search has nothing to do with having a sneaky mind-set.

So now all Rogues have the same mindset? :smallyuk: I can't see how you'd agree with that kind of type-casting to justify something WOTC didn't feel needed justification.


The wizard doesn't study magical traps, he studies magic.

Well, unless he makes and places the damned things.

[Legendairy]

I am AFB right now but I will check when I have the chance but Artificers can detect magic traps correct? I think they can ONLY detect magical traps and bypass them etc. Again I could be wrong.

[Dimers]

So now all Rogues have the same mindset? :smallyuk:

Or to look at it another way -- since mindset is a roleplaying quality, what prevents a spellcaster or axe-wielder from having that mindset? One could argue that having a trapfinding class level is the in-game way to express "I'm suspicious and have a highly-trained sense for danger" ... but that gets messy quickly. The trait should at least be available as a feat or as an ACF for all base classes.

[Addi]

I am AFB right now but I will check when I have the chance but Artificers can detect magic traps correct? I think they can ONLY detect magical traps and bypass them etc. Again I could be wrong.

The Artificer can disable traps. I think it was mentioned in the errata.

[Curmudgeon]

So now all Rogues have the same mindset?
Not all the time, of course, but all Rogues do possess sufficiently similar training (which most other classes lack) so that they can adopt that necessary mind-set when doing a Search. A D&D class merely represents some training, with a structured framework that imposes some minimum similarities.

Or to look at it another way -- since mindset is a roleplaying quality, what prevents a spellcaster or axe-wielder from having that mindset?
It's not just a roleplaying quality; you've got to learn to be suspicious of the right things (including subtle differences between dust disturbed by the breeze and passage of creatures, and dust disturbed by a buried trigger mechanism). Spellcasters can certainly be suspicious of everything (and be paralyzed by that omnipresent dread); they just don't know how to adopt the trained mind-set which is suspicious mostly of the things which indicate traps.

The trait should at least be available as a feat or as an ACF for all base classes.
Oh, goodie! I want the feat that gives my Rogue Wizard spellcasting, then. :smallbiggrin: After all, that's just one class feature, too, and fair's fair.

[Psyren]

I am AFB right now but I will check when I have the chance but Artificers can detect magic traps correct? I think they can ONLY detect magical traps and bypass them etc. Again I could be wrong.

Artificers get the exact same Trapfinding Rogues get - it just has a different name.

[Flickerdart]

Well, unless he makes and places the damned things.
Then he would have no difficulty finding the traps he placed, and disabling the traps he made. Assuming standardization of any kind from a pre-industrial society is a mistake, though, and other master trapmakers (those skilled enough to make traps with a Search DC better than 20) are likely to have a much different approach to things.

[ericgrau]

There are ways. Analyze dweomer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/analyzeDweomer.htm) or greater arcane sight (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/arcaneSightGreater.htm) should find most spell-based magical traps. Visible effects can be identified with a spellcraft. Detect magic notices the presence of the magic trap but doesn't even tell you it's a trap. You can even disarm many of them with dispel magic.

[Coidzor]

Then he would have no difficulty finding the traps he placed, and disabling the traps he made. Assuming standardization of any kind from a pre-industrial society is a mistake, though, and other master trapmakers (those skilled enough to make traps with a Search DC better than 20) are likely to have a much different approach to things.

Indeed, assuming any kind of commonality of experience or applicability thereof is just silly.


Oh, goodie! I want the feat that gives my Rogue Wizard spellcasting, then. :smallbiggrin: After all, that's just one class feature, too, and fair's fair.

Except one is a tax that was there to make the Rogue a must-have character despite being useless before the splats and the other is actually useful and scales with character level to break the game in two.

[Dimers]

Oh, goodie! I want the feat that gives my Rogue Wizard spellcasting, then. :smallbiggrin: After all, that's just one class feature, too, and fair's fair.

Sure, no problem! On pages 76, 80, 81 and 83 of Complete Arcane, you'll find feats that grant spellcasting to anyone who takes them! Fair warning, though -- since they don't require two fully-developed skills to make decent use of them, they may seem a bit overpowered for your campaign. :smallbiggrin:

[Flickerdart]

Indeed, assuming any kind of commonality of experience or applicability thereof is just silly.
If you were a trapmaker, would you make traps that other trapmakers could figure out, or would you purposely put in obfuscating tricks and twists of your own devising to trip them up if they got their hands on your traps? Because if you have a Wizard's intelligence, you'd most likely do the latter.

[Coidzor]

If you were a trapmaker, would you make traps that other trapmakers could figure out, or would you purposely put in obfuscating tricks and twists of your own devising to trip them up if they got their hands on your traps? Because if you have a Wizard's intelligence, you'd most likely do the latter.

You mean other than the quite patently obvious bit where putting in obfuscating bits and tricks and twists of your own devising would mean that you'd recreate some of the obfuscating bits and tricks and twists that others would come up with?

Especially if one is intelligent and clever, they may even come upon alternate ways of doing the things they did or alternate approaches that they don't generally use due to seeing the flaws with them and seeing them as less desirable than the flaws with their own techniques of choice.

After all, the dumb as bricks rogue can pick up on all of these and is incapable of making 'em at all or truly studying them in the same intimate way.

So, yeah, still not convinced there's any rational basis here, just arbitrary game mechanics that were created to try to force people to play the archetypal party from 2E even though they demolished most of the rest of the reasons to do so.

[Legendairy]

After quickly reading the artificer stuff, they can only deal with traps with a dc higher then 20 IE only magical in nature, dunno if that was changed in errata.

[Addi]

After quickly reading the artificer stuff, they can only deal with traps with a dc higher then 20 IE only magical in nature, dunno if that was changed in errata.

Everybody can deal with traps with a DC under 20. That's why the wrote this stuff under the "Disable Trap" class feature. An artificer can disable all traps (only) in the magical or mundane version.
I don't like it that the artificer can't disable siege engines.

[Sandman]

Sure, no problem! On pages 76, 80, 81 and 83 of Complete Arcane, you'll find feats that grant spellcasting to anyone who takes them! Fair warning, though -- since they don't require two fully-developed skills to make decent use of them, they may seem a bit overpowered for your campaign. :smallbiggrin:

Yes, even rogues can learn 0 or 1st level spells with feats, and even wizards can find traps (without needing a feat).:smallwink:

[tyckspoon]

I don't like it that the artificer can't disable siege engines.

I'm not sure I'd ever bother throwing Disable Device against a siege engine, unless you run into somebody who actually developed a magical self-propelled and operated one made out of adamantine.. and then you basically are looking at a magical trap anyway. Otherwise, your standard siege engine is effectively disabled by either killing the operators or wrecking some fairly obvious and not-especially-tough pieces of the mechanics, which shouldn't require a skill check to do.

[Cerlis]

i think its simular to my theory about illusions. That even if you walk through an illusionary wall, you still have to make a will save to disbelieve it. THis is because of Sentient Confusion, doupt, and imagination. If in real life i saw someone fly across the sky my first thoughts would be that i misread something, that i was going crazy, that i didnt get enough sleep. Not automatically "OMG people can fly now!". Same with an illusionary wall. I could have missed something, maybe it was a magic wall only handsome people can walk through.
All these complicated possibilities are best represented by a will save, for simplicity sake. I could doupt i went through anything, i could doupt its an illusion. I Could suspect its an illusion but deep down not believe that anyone who could do such a thing would be down here and so dont truly believe it (but that doesnt keep me from testing it out to find out for sure). this last thing represents someone who knows about illusions, sees "proof" it is an illusion, but fails his save.


-----------------

Likewise a someone with trapfinding is the only one who can detect traps over DC 20 is NOT like the order of the stick take(unless for some reason you want to exploit that clause for humors sake), where others magically cant see it.

You may see a strange device, you may see magic runes. you may realize its likely this place is trapped. you may know the magic runes use magic that often protective or destructive. Hell you may know they contain a fireball spell and DEDUCE that its PROBABLY a trap.

But only someone with special training can tell for sure.

Even a fighter can get lucky and spot check the creeses in the floor that hint to a drop away door that may lead to a pit of spikes. but as to identifying and finding the actual trap aspect of it, is different.

[Zaq]

Suggested houserule: Anyone can, if they roll well enough, find a trap with a Search DC of up to 20 (same as currently written.) Anyone trained in Search can, if they roll well enough, find a trap of whatever DC they hit. Classes with "Trapfinding" get a bonus of 3 + 1 per class level on Search and Disable Device checks made to disarm traps. Multiple classes that grant Trapfinding stack, but you only get 3 + combined level, not 3 per class + 1 per level.

With this houserule in place, Trapfinding still grants a significant benefit and definitely places classes that have it on the top of the heap, but anyone who wants to invest in Search/DD can at least try.

[Addi]

I'm not sure I'd ever bother throwing Disable Device against a siege engine, unless you run into somebody who actually developed a magical self-propelled and operated one made out of adamantine.. and then you basically are looking at a magical trap anyway. Otherwise, your standard siege engine is effectively disabled by either killing the operators or wrecking some fairly obvious and not-especially-tough pieces of the mechanics, which shouldn't require a skill check to do.

I wanted to make clear that the wording in the artificers entry excludes other complex magical devices from being disabled. But I realised that he can disable every other device apart from traps without such a feature - the disable device skill covers this.