I'm going to weigh in with what I follow, (and I believe it follows closer to Diego's reading).
First, thanks to our great copy/paste job, only rogues have a chance of noticing the symbol as a trap.
Second, if you are within 60' of the symbol, and say you are looking around the room, and the symbol is set to go off when seen, you will set it off.
Third, if the rogue fails their perception check to notice that the symbol is a trap, and they are within 60' of the symbol, they will set it off when they say they are checking the room for traps.
Lastly, Since taking 20 assumes you take any penalty for failing the roll before you get the 20, and the penalty for failing to notice the symbol as a trap is setting it off, unless the rogue will succeed on a 1, if he takes 20, he will set the trap off.
P.S. If the rogue takes 10, and that is high enough to detect the symbol, he is golden, as taking 10 does not have any consequences associated with it.
Anyway, that's how I'd run it. Diego, is this more what you were trying to say?
secondly symbol of death explicitly says that rogues ONLY can detect it as a trap AND that the DC is 33. It doesn't say the DC is 33+distance. But, shouldn't the DC for a symbol trap be 39 since you need +6 to have a safe distance to detect it? I can understand WHY it would be 39 as it lists +1 dc per 10' under perception, but why doesn't symbol of death, or ANY ranged magical trap take this into account?!
The spell description doesn't have to take this into account since it's already written under the Perception and the Wilderness rules. Note that the -1/10ft distance is different in some terrains. Also, the rules under Symbol do not know how far away the rogue will be when he starts to see if the glowing rune is a trap. He could do it at 100 feet if his Perception check is high enough. If he is using a spyglass, he could do it even further away.
Third not allowing rogues to disarm a symbol of death unless they trigger it is just completely retarded and against the rules of the game.
PRD- under disable device
"The spells fire trap, glyph of warding, SYMBOL, and teleportation circle also create traps that a rogue can disarm with a successful Disable Device check. Spike growth and spike stones, however, create magic hazards against which Disable Device checks do not succeed. See the individual spell descriptions for details."
The PRD explicitly states that a rogue can disarm a symbol of death trap as the spell does not explicitly state other wise. This implies that the rogue can also do this at a distance or else he wouldn't be able to disarm it safely.Which is the WHOLE point of disarming a trap- so it doesn't hurt you!
Though this hurts my brain trying to figure out how this is possible it really doesn't matter. the rules simply state the rogue can- so he can!
This is where, I as GM, would say that the rogue makes his Disable Device check at the 60 foot range. Since it takes 2d4 rounds to disable the symbol (the DC is 25+), then make part of that time the rogue moving to the symbol in such a way as to not trigger it. I know that it is strange if a halfling rogue needs 3 rounds to get to the symbol and disables it in 2 rounds. This is where the GM can make an adjustment to the result or have the rogue roll a second time. Personally, I would just have the minimum result on the 2d4 rounds roll be the time it takes for the rogue to travel 60 feet.
If the rogue failed to disarm the check, in this case, it would probably be triggered due to the nature of the trap.
|
This, on the other hand, I'm having a hard time with. Making a PC search every 5' square is very time consuming and a major slowdown on the game
This is the whole balancing act, do you slow down and search every space, do you slow down even more and take 20 on certain areas?
All these things slow you down, I'm not sure about your party but most of the groups I'm in have at least a couple minutes or 10 minutes/ level effects going on that are getting burned up when you do these things.
As for taking a lot of time in-game, you might consider having your characters pre-roll their perception checks, and writing the checks down then just crossing the check off when they've used it. I've done that before and it works fairly well.
Lastly, Since taking 20 assumes you take any penalty for failing the roll before you get the 20, and the penalty for failing to notice the symbol as a trap is setting it off, unless the rogue will succeed on a 1, if he takes 20, he will set the trap off.
Which is exactly the problem. There is no failure condition for not detecting a trap other than possibly setting the trap off later. If the trap can be set off by the act of searching for it, it doesn't matter whether you succeed or fail to 'perceive' the trap.
As for taking a lot of time in-game, you might consider having your characters pre-roll their perception checks, and writing the checks down then just crossing the check off when they've used it. I've done that before and it works fairly well.
On this note, my GM has recently just done a big sheet of paper of d20 rolls. Printed out. When we have "hidden" rolls, he just marks off the next roll off. I think we're about 1/3rd through a sheet in 3-5 sessions. Works good, as you can't accidentally metagame "oh that was a terrible roll". Having the players roll their own could lead to one going "well, I got only 12 and higher, so I know everything will be pretty good" and one going "I got 3 1's, I'm screwed!"
To me it seems pretty straight forward, after James Jacob's comments. So, here's how I would interpret it.
Symbol Trap :
Beyond Trap's Range : No issues with seeing it, detecting it as a trap, etc. If you take 20 looking down a hallway from beyond the traps range, and it's visible, you see the trap and presumeably recognize it as a trap (if your 20+Perception-Range mods) is greater than the DC of detecting it as a trap (assuming you're a rogue, if the symbol specifically calls out that rogues only can detect it, and that there has been no errata on the issue).
Within the Trap's Range : Assuming the trigger is 'Sees/reads the symbol', then it get's tricky.
If the searcher is not taking 20, and is just making a straight check (or taking 10), then if the perception check is greater than the symbol DC, it's noticed as a trap without setting it off. If the perception check is less than the DC to recognize it as a trap, but it's higher than the DC to notice symbol (usually a pretty low number, modified by lighting and distance), then the person saw the symbol, didn't recognize it as a trap in time to avoid setting it off, and sets it off. If their check was lower than the DC to notice the symbol, they missed it completely and don't set it off.
If the searcher is taking 20, it's get's very very bad. If their skill +1 is enough to beat the DC of the symbol, after taking into account all modifiers for distance, lighting, etc, then they recognize it as a trap and don't set it off. If a 1 is not enough to detect it, then they set it off, since the DC to see the symbol will always be less than the DC to recognize it as a trap, and take 20 assumes you roll 1, 2, 3, 4, etc up to 20.
Of course, the GM has to assign a DC to notice the symbol, which should be much easier than one to recognize it as a trap. This could be very very low, or just a few points under the symbol's DC, depending on how big the symbol is. If it's 4 foot high and glowing blue, that's a very low DC to notice/see it. If it's 4 centimeters high and is black on a charcoal gray background, it might be almost as the DC to detect it as a trap. Theoretically, you could make them do two perception checks, one to see the symbol, and one to recognize it for a trap, but that's a game slower. I'd rather use the same perception check for both.
To throw more grease on the fire, if you allow any rogue to disable at a distance, you're basically giving away Ranged Legerdemain for free, weakening Arcane Trickster further.
I don't care if a random poster on the thread said it or Jacobs said it, things that don't make sense are things that don't make sense and if the nonsense isn't in the rules, I am going to go with what makes sense.
If taking 20 sets off a symbol trap, then any attempt to detect it will set it off. There is no failure condition in Perception therefore you can take 20. Moreover, there is no failure condition in Perception that says failing to perceive a trap upon a search sets it off. Therefore any trap that will be set off by failing to perceive it will equally be set off by succeeding at perceiving it.
ALTERNATELY, if there is a failure condition for ANY Perception check to find a trap, then you can NEVER take 20 to find ANY trap using Perception.
To throw more grease on the fire, if you allow any rogue to disable at a distance, you're basically giving away Ranged Legerdemain for free, weakening Arcane Trickster further.
I don't see why he'd get to disarm at a distance. He'd still need to close on the symbol to disable it. But, once you know it's a trap, you can avoid looking at it by fixing your sight on something close to it without actually looking at it. If nothing else, you can look at your own feet while you move up to it to disable it.
To throw more grease on the fire, if you allow any rogue to disable at a distance, you're basically giving away Ranged Legerdemain for free, weakening Arcane Trickster further.I don't see why he'd get to disarm at a distance. He'd still need to close on the symbol to disable it. But, once you know it's a trap, you can avoid looking at it by fixing your sight on something close to it without actually looking at it. If nothing else, you can look at your own feet while you move up to it to disable it.
See? This is why this is stupid.
Either symbols work like all other traps and go with the rules as written for detecting and disabling traps using the DCs given or they are not detectable with Perception nor disablable with Disable Device.
Cartigan. There is a failure for perception. You don't see the whatever. If you are taking 20, and someone has setup an ambush. They can interrupt you at any time before the 2 minutes is up, and surprise you (assuming you haven't found them yet). Why? Because you hadn't noticed them until that point.
"BUT I WAS TAKING 20!" you cry out. Yes, and that involves taking a long time, during which you can make mistakes and are able to be interrupted. Same thing with the symbol trap. Taking 10, you're fine, as either you succeeded, or failed, the end. Taking 20, you're screwed, because in your detailed search, you go "oh, look at that rune, I should check and see if its a trap!" *boom* instead of "oh, that might be a rune, and runes can be traps sometimes, let me check it out without looking at it directly..."
Brotato, I agree with you. I would say once the rogue has identified it as a trap, they could move up to the symbol and use disable device without causing it to go off without any further checks. If it was a proximity symbol instead of an on sight symbol... well, I'd probably let them know the trigger mechanism with a sufficiently high knowledge arcana check. This lets them know if they can approach and disable, or have to avoid/dispel it.
If it was a proximity symbol instead of an on sight symbol... well, I'd probably let them know the trigger mechanism with a sufficiently high knowledge arcana check. This lets them know if they can approach and disable, or have to avoid/dispel it.
See, this is the only part I disagree on. If they beat the DC of the symbol trap, and it's based on range, then they'd know it was range based, and what it's range was (part of how the symbol is written, for example). Then they can either avoid the area, set it off another way (summon monster in the range with a wand), blast the symbol from afar, or any other way they can come up with to reasonably disable it from a distance.
I think ranged traps are the only ones I'd allow to be disabled from range without a feat.
Honestly, the more I read the description of the Symbol spells, the more it seems to me that they cover just about every possible method of disabling. By default they will go off if you: see, read, touch, or pass by. They can be keyed to name, identity, alignment, specific individuals, and passwords. Destruction of the surface triggers the symbol. It almost feels like the last line discussing disabling them was just thrown in as an afterthought with no real process going into exactly how a rogue would go about accomplishing such a feat. Which is a shame, because it makes rogues weaker than they already are.
Cartigan. There is a failure for perception. You don't see the whatever. If you are taking 20, and someone has setup an ambush. They can interrupt you at any time before the 2 minutes is up, and surprise you (assuming you haven't found them yet). Why? Because you hadn't noticed them until that point.
But that has jack all to do with traps. Perception to detect traps is explicitly listed as something you can take 20 on. If you roll a 1 to detect a symbol trap and set it off by doing so, then Perception to detect traps has a significant failure condition and therefore you can NEVER take 20 to use Perception to detect ANY traps.
Cartigan. There is a failure for perception. You don't see the whatever. If you are taking 20, and someone has setup an ambush. They can interrupt you at any time before the 2 minutes is up, and surprise you (assuming you haven't found them yet). Why? Because you hadn't noticed them until that point.But that has jack all to do with traps. Perception to detect traps is explicitly listed as something you can take 20 on. If you roll a 1 to detect a symbol trap and set it off by doing so, then Perception to detect traps has a significant failure condition and therefore you can NEVER take 20 to use Perception to detect ANY traps.
Or, you could determine that the logical conclusion is: You can take 20 to detect traps, but symbol spells are an exception and will go off if you take 20.
Aha! I just found the key to a rogue disabling a symbol.
To be effective, a symbol of death must always be placed in plain sight and in a prominent location. Covering or hiding the rune renders the symbol of death ineffective, unless a creature removes the covering, in which case the symbol of death works normally.
Rogue walks up, keeping eyes averted, making sure not to pass by the symbol as well. Rogue rolls DD check, passes. Rogue successfully pins a scrap of cloth over symbol. Symbol now ineffective.
Cartigan. There is a failure for perception. You don't see the whatever. If you are taking 20, and someone has setup an ambush. They can interrupt you at any time before the 2 minutes is up, and surprise you (assuming you haven't found them yet). Why? Because you hadn't noticed them until that point.But that has jack all to do with traps. Perception to detect traps is explicitly listed as something you can take 20 on. If you roll a 1 to detect a symbol trap and set it off by doing so, then Perception to detect traps has a significant failure condition and therefore you can NEVER take 20 to use Perception to detect ANY traps.Or, you could determine that the logical conclusion is: You can take 20 to detect traps, but symbol spells are an exception and will go off if you take 20.
How, exactly, would they be made an exception? Are we going to declare them "Not traps?" Then what about all the bonuses to detecting them Rogues get or the "You need trap finding" to detect them?
How, exactly, would they be made an exception?
The same way other exceptions are made. By simply stating "other traps work like "x", but symbol traps work like "y" instead".
There is no need to make a convoluted "they are not really traps" reason. Just a "they work slightly different from other traps", which is the general purpose of exceptions.
But that has jack all to do with traps. Perception to detect traps is explicitly listed as something you can take 20 on. If you roll a 1 to detect a symbol trap and set it off by doing so, then Perception to detect traps has a significant failure condition and therefore you can NEVER take 20 to use Perception to detect ANY traps.
Or, they were talking about normal, mundane traps. You know, the ones they call "Traps". Magical traps are pretty explicitly called "magical traps" throughout the book. Taking 20 to spot a trap on a trapped door is fine. Normal traps can't go off because you looked at them.
Yes, magic makes being a rogue harder. Guess what, magic is the counter for magic. Always has been, always will be.
Actually, having just read the symbol spell again. I'd say if a rogue makes his perception to spot the symbol, he can them make a disable device to de-activate it, without setting it off (if successful).
Also note, in the description, the symbols are visible only out to 60feet. Core, 355, "Until it is triggered, the symbol of death is inactive (though visible and legible at a distance of 60 feet)."
So you cannot spot it from 65 feet down the hallway by RAW. Hope your perception is up to 23+ so you can take 10.
How, exactly, would they be made an exception?The same way other exceptions are made. By simply stating "other traps work like "x", but symbol traps work like "y" instead".
There is no need to make a convoluted "they are not really traps" reason. Just a "they work slightly different from other traps", which is the general purpose of exceptions.
Then you can't take 20 to search for traps. You broke it.
But that has jack all to do with traps. Perception to detect traps is explicitly listed as something you can take 20 on. If you roll a 1 to detect a symbol trap and set it off by doing so, then Perception to detect traps has a significant failure condition and therefore you can NEVER take 20 to use Perception to detect ANY traps.Or, they were talking about normal, mundane traps. You know, the ones they call "Traps". Magical traps are pretty explicitly called "magical traps" throughout the book. Taking 20 to spot a trap on a trapped door is fine. Normal traps can't go off because you looked at them.
So you can take 20 to search for mundane traps but not magical traps. Ok. Please EXPLAIN how that works.
So you can take 20 to search for mundane traps but not magical traps. Ok. Please EXPLAIN how that works.
Magical traps can go off when you look at them, thus there is a penalty for failing the perception check. Thus you cannot take 20.
Mundane traps cannot do that, you can look all you want, but will never set them off just by looking at them. There is no penalty for failure, thus you can take 20.
So you can take 20 to search for mundane traps but not magical traps. Ok. Please EXPLAIN how that works.Magical traps can go off when you look at them, thus there is a penalty for failing the perception check. Thus you cannot take 20.
Mundane traps cannot do that, you can look all you want, but will never set them off just by looking at them. There is no penalty for failure, thus you can take 20.
Then how can you ever take 20 to search for any traps? It is impossible to tell if any trapped room contains a magical trap or a mundane trap therefore the most strenuous rules apply - those for magical traps. Since that is the case, then you can't take 20 to detect mundane traps either.
Then how can you ever take 20 to search for any traps? It is impossible to tell if any trapped room contains a magical trap or a mundane trap therefore the most strenuous rules apply - those for magical traps. Since that is the case, then you can't take 20 to detect mundane traps either.
This is why I like the sheet of random d20 rolls printed out. Player says "I want to take 20 to search this chest for traps." GM asks what players bonus is. GM sees that it is a magical trap, and player cannot take 20, GM marks off next random roll, adds players bonus, and tells player the results. The rogue was trying to be careful, but succeeded/failed on his skill instead of by taking extra time. Fluff-wise, I'd describe a failure as "you begin examining the chest carefully when your eyes happen across a rune, you start reading it without even thinking before it blows up in your face (or whatever)". Success would be something like "You start checking for tripwires along the crack in the chest, and you feel an etched rune right next to the lock. You hadn't noticed it before, but you recognize the shape as a spell, and make the needed changes to render it harmless before proceeding."
In either case, it only took the normal amount of time instead of the full take 20.
Then how can you ever take 20 to search for any traps? It is impossible to tell if any trapped room contains a magical trap or a mundane trap therefore the most strenuous rules apply - those for magical traps. Since that is the case, then you can't take 20 to detect mundane traps either.This is why I like the sheet of random d20 rolls printed out. Player says "I want to take 20 to search this chest for traps." GM asks what players bonus is. GM sees that it is a magical trap, and player cannot take 20, GM marks off next random roll, adds players bonus, and tells player the results. The rogue was trying to be careful, but succeeded/failed on his skill instead of by taking extra time. Fluff-wise, I'd describe a failure as "you begin examining the chest carefully when your eyes happen across a rune, you start reading it without even thinking before it blows up in your face (or whatever)". Success would be something like "You start checking for tripwires along the crack in the chest, and you feel an etched rune right next to the lock. You hadn't noticed it before, but you recognize the shape as a spell, and make the needed changes to render it harmless before proceeding."
In either case, it only took the normal amount of time instead of the full take 20.
That is a house rule on top of a house rule. You cannot take 20 on a skill where a significant failure condition exists.
That is a house rule on top of a house rule. You cannot take 20 on a skill where a significant failure condition exists.
No, it isn't. Perception is a "hidden roll" by the GM. The player asked to use perception to check for traps, and wanted to take 20. The GM rolled for him (using the sheet instead of dice, as dice let the player know a roll was made and that he wasn't taking 20). And told him the effects. Afterwords, the GM can let the player know that a roll was made, and that it only took the normal amount of time.
No house rules here at all. (Unless you think using a sheet of randomly generated numbers for secret rolls is a house rule, in which case, sub that for the GM just rolling a d20 instead.)
1) Rules are rules. I know you've recognized that you've changed the rules in this case, but I generally prefer following RAW unless there are compelling reasons not to.
...
To other people: as for failure on Perception: No. Just no. If you trigger the trap through triggering the trap, fine, but you cannot set off a trap by looking for it.
Sorry, but the rules are: Core, 355, "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."
No, it isn't.
Yes, it is.
When you have plenty of time, you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.
You are introducing a penalty for failure therefore you can NOT take 20. The fact that it IS hidden only serves to reinforce my point that by saying magic traps work a certain way means mundane traps have to behave the same way.
Sorry, but the rules are: Core, 355, "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."1) Rules are rules. I know you've recognized that you've changed the rules in this case, but I generally prefer following RAW unless there are compelling reasons not to.
...
To other people: as for failure on Perception: No. Just no. If you trigger the trap through triggering the trap, fine, but you cannot set off a trap by looking for it.
Sorry, by the rules a symbol of death is a trap with a DC to find it using Perception by a character with trapfinding. And, by the rules, using Perception to find traps is a use of the skill where you can take 20 because it carries no penalty for failure in and of itself.
The fact that a Perception DC to find it exists means that the ambiguous trapfinding/disabling rules override all the stuff in the symbol spell text that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to perceive or disable without setting it off.Either it IS a trap and it follows the rules or it isn't and it screws over Rogues and everyone else.
1) Rules are rules. I know you've recognized that you've changed the rules in this case, but I generally prefer following RAW unless there are compelling reasons not to.
I think the rules are flawed in many ways, hence I am making a rather large amount of houserules to fix some stuff and make the game more interesting. I'd rather do that than stick to a mantra of "rules are rules" without further justification. In game terms I would call that "Lawful Stupid". :P I'm not saying that you *actually* do this without justification but throwing this statement in my face without further justification isn't really impressive to me.
I know, when I'm looking for my car keys or something, that a quick sweep or once over is likely to miss them. If I find them, great! If not, I go back to searching carefully, looking through the crap on my desk several times. That's taking 20.
That supports my point. You *know* your car keys are there somewhere, so you take the time to search. :) You do *not* know, however, (for the sake of argument) there is a trap on the dark altar. So you search because there might be (it is suspicious after all), and find nothing. The conclusion in-char is: "i did not find anything". How should the char know he didn't do a good job so he should search some more? I think they shouldn't. That does not forbid him to roll again but it does forbid him, in my mind, to do it over and over. But whatever they think it shouldn't be "I know I rolled low so I'm going to reroll until I get 20".
If you know there is a trap (for instance because it is magical and the sorc used a detect magic), then I'm fine with taking 20 because you have some method of feedback.
Taking 20 doesn't represent 'how well you searched'...Basically, taking the time to get it right. Instead of forcing the rogue to roll over and over and over until s/he gets a 20 (which is the sucky, very much metagaming alternative)
It represents doing things over until you get it just right, so I agree. Which I think reasonably requires some way to know what "just right" is. In case of perception there *is* no way, unless there is a trap and you succeed in finding it, but you don't know that in advance. A character has no way ingame to discern the result of a roll of 5 or a roll of 18.
Also, I prevent chars rolling over and over because they have to go on what they know. They don't know their roll, they just know "found a trap" or "not found a trap" and have to deal with that.
JrK is definitely off in house-rule land.
Damn straight brutha. :box:
When you have plenty of time, you are faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.You are introducing a penalty for failure therefore you can NOT take 20. The fact that it IS hidden only serves to reinforce my point that by saying magic traps work a certain way means mundane traps have to behave the same way.
Sorry, by the rules a symbol of death is a trap with a DC to find it using Perception by a character with trapfinding. And, by the rules, using Perception to find traps is a use of the skill where you can take 20 because it carries no penalty for failure in and of itself.
The fact that a Perception DC to find it exists means that the ambiguous trapfinding/disabling rules override all the stuff in the symbol spell text that makes it IMPOSSIBLE to perceive or disable without setting it off.
Either it IS a trap and it follows the rules or it isn't and it screws over Rogues and everyone else.
Okay, lets try this again from the traps section of the rulebook. Under Traps; Magic, Core, 417, "Many spells can be used to create dangerous traps. Unless the spell or item description states otherwise, assume the following to be true.
• A successful Perception check (DC 25 + spell level) detects a magic trap before it goes off."This means if you FAIL the perception check, the trap goes off before you detect it. So by RAW, you cannot take 20 for magical traps, because there is a penalty for failure.
Correct, within 60 feet anyways. Doing anything from more than 60 feet away won't trigger it. Also, that is one of several possible triggers, and it is up to the GM to decide which triggers are there.
All that being said, Symbols have to be visible and in an obvious location. It doesn't take a Perception check to find one; they're just there. Therefore, it's not a failure of a Perception check, it's triggering the trap by other means. It would still get set off as soon as anyone's eyes glanced over it. Since the symbol is in a highly visible place, that's inevitable.
Logically, the Perception check is not what triggered the trap, and the trap going off is not a failure of a Perception check, therefore there is no penalty for failure on a Perception check. Thus, nothing in the rules stops a take-20 roll for traps.
Yes, the trap is limited to being triggered by those within 60 feet.
Actually, no, it doesn't have to be obvious. Requirements are that it be on a surface, in plain sight, and in a prominent location. Its quite easy to have a door to a room, you open the door, and nice big in the center of the room is the symbol of death, ready to kill that poor rogue.
I disagree with this point. Logically, by the act of failing to notice that it was a trap, and still looking at it, you have set off the trap. Whereas had you not looked that way at all, you would not have set it off. As I showed above, a successful perception check detects a magical trap before it goes off, a failed perception check does not. Thus, by taking 20, (while not prohibited), you will set the trap off before you see it unless you succeed with a roll of 1.
Okay, lets try this again from the traps section of the rulebook. Under Traps; Magic, Core, 417, "Many spells can be used to create dangerous traps. Unless the spell or item description states otherwise, assume the following to be true.
• A successful Perception check (DC 25 + spell level) detects a magic trap before it goes off."
This means if you FAIL the perception check, the trap goes off before you detect it. So by RAW, you cannot take 20 for magical traps, because there is a penalty for failure.
And this is what it says under the mechanical section:
Creatures that succeed on a Perception check detect a trap before it is triggered.
Therefore mechanical traps are set off as well by a failed Perception check! Oh wait, that's wrong because then it would have been stupid to ever say you could take 20 on a Perception check to find traps. Saying a successful Perception check to find the trap before it is set off implies that failing that check sets it off is wholly unfounded and baseless.
That supports my point. You *know* your car keys are there somewhere, so you take the time to search. :) You do *not* know, however, (for the sake of argument) there is a trap on the dark altar. So you search because there might be (it is suspicious after all), and find nothing. The conclusion in-char is: "i did not find anything". How should the char know he didn't do a good job so he should search some more? I think they shouldn't. That does not forbid him to roll again but it does forbid him, in my mind, to do it over and over. But whatever they think it shouldn't be "I know I rolled low so I'm going to reroll until I get 20".
<snip>
It represents doing things over until you get it just right.
Don't think about it as doing things over until you get it just right. Taking 20 isn't a guarantee of success. It just means you've searched (or accomplished some other task) to the best of your ability to do so. That's why I don't agree with your take on finding the keys. Maybe you don't really know they're in the desk, but by taking 20 (in this case digging through multiple times, maybe pulling out all the drawers, lifting out papers, etc) you've searched is as thoroughly as you know how. In the case of the trapped altar, the rogue taking 20 has searched it in every way he knows how. Maybe he found something, maybe he didn't.
Therefore mechanical traps are set off as well by a failed Perception check! Oh wait, that's wrong because then it would have been stupid to ever say you could take 20 on a Perception check to find traps. Saying a successful Perception check to find the trap before it is set off implies that failing that check sets it off is wholly unfounded and baseless.
Personally, I have no problem with not being able to take 20 to find traps. That said...
Reading these sections without applying my pre-conceived notions to them makes me think they are discussing reactive perception checks to setting off a trap. I.E. the barbarian goes to open the door, GM rolls a perception check, the barbarian passes, and the GM says "You go to turn the handle, but feel more resistance than you expected, looking closer, you see some extra gearing that leads to a blah blah blah..."
I see that for the rogue opening a door to a symbol. I.E. Rogue opens door, GM makes perception check, rogue passes, GM says, "You open the door, and as you look into the room you see a magical symbol out of the corner of your eye, realizing it is a trap, you quickly avert your gaze to avoid setting it off."
Taking 20 on the door for the barbarian? Sure, he can. Looking doesn't set off the trap.
With symbol traps, I think I'll go with this: If outside of 60', if the rogue states they want to take 20 to check "that prominent symbol" over there to see if its a trap, from where they are, sure they can do that, and realize it before setting it off. If they are within 60', and say "whats in the room?" they get to roll perception to notice the trap before setting it off per the traps section. If they fail that, it goes off.
I don't often see rogues declaring to take 20 on traps from beyond 60' (I don't even see 60' paths in dungeons often), but if the rogue saw the symbol, and just said "I want to go over and check that out." They'd get the reactive check once they were 60' away.
I'm having a tough time thinking of a situation where the rogue would be suspicious of the symbol, but within 60', but also not have set it off yet, while not also having possibly triggered it and gotten the reactive check instead. Maybe you creative guys can help me here.
I'm having a tough time thinking of a...
Just because the spell says you can doesn't mean that you always will. Some casters might choose to leave "looking at the symbol" off the trigger list. Saves time teaching everyone the password or linking people together. Or the symbol could have been keyed to not trigger against people of an alignment the rogue just so happens to have.
I'm having a tough time thinking of a...Just because the spell says you can doesn't mean that you always will. Some casters might choose to leave "looking at the symbol" off the trigger list. Saves time teaching everyone the password or linking people together. Or the symbol could have been keyed to not trigger against people of an alignment the rogue just so happens to have.
Very true. It just seems that everyone is all hung up on the "looking at it is the trigger" and I can't think of a way the rogue would be able to take 20 checking for a trap, be in the area of effect, but not have already had to reactively make a check to avoid setting it off by looking.
Quite obviously many of the other triggers (touch) could easily be seen and have a 20 taken against them to verify it is a magical trap before the rogue disables it.
oking at it is the trigger" and I can't think of a way the rogue would be able to take 20 checking for a trap, be in the area of effect, but not have already had to reactively make a check to avoid setting it off by looking.
Quite obviously many of the other triggers (touch) could easily be seen and have a 20 taken against them to verify it is a magical trap before the rogue disables it.
I wouldn't worry about it too much. I've seen a lot of talk on this board since I joined about specific trumping general. Well, in this case, Perception is general, trapfinding is specific, and symbol is even more specific. Take 20 doesn't work on symbol, but does on normal traps.
I wouldn't worry about it too much. I've seen a lot of talk on this board since I joined about specific trumping general. Well, in this case, Perception is general, trapfinding is specific, and symbol is even more specific. Take 20 doesn't work on symbol, but does on normal traps.oking at it is the trigger" and I can't think of a way the rogue would be able to take 20 checking for a trap, be in the area of effect, but not have already had to reactively make a check to avoid setting it off by looking.
Quite obviously many of the other triggers (touch) could easily be seen and have a 20 taken against them to verify it is a magical trap before the rogue disables it.
The problem is you can't do that because it causes a domino effect.
to the best of your ability to do so.
Then we are back at my starting position. How does a character know this is the case? My take: they cannot for this particular skill use. So if they do have a method of finding what the best of their ability is ingame, they are allowed to take 20.
This as an aside of course, as the Core rulebook is pretty clear on that it assumes take 20 to do a task over and over (in order to get the best results). "Just right" isn't the right choice of words though, I agree, but that doesn't change the core of my statement. The focus is on the "over and over". Why should the chars do a search over and over?
I find this idea of searching "every way you know how" to be pretty vague. There's only one way of searching: searching. I assume any character worth his salt is going to check everywhere when searching, and the result of the check should mean (like a perception check to notice enemies) that you either noticed it or not. Why should they do things differently each time?
The case of the desk is a good example: we don't search the desk 'differently' each time (this wouldn't make any sense to me), we search it multiple times to make sure a place we went over didn't actually had the key that we missed. But that is because we have a certain item in mind (the key) we *know* is there somewhere. Maybe not on the desk, but we're going to search every place it might be until we find it, precisely *because* we know it is somewhere.
Consider us being told there *might* be a key there that a friend left and the friend isn't sure he left it at your place anyway. This time a more reasonable way of going about, in my mind, is to go over the desk once or twice, and if you don't find the key, you conclude the key just isn't there. Only once the friend becomes sure he left it at your place, would you be more inclined to search over and over. This case would be more analogous to the case of the trap on the altar.
The problem is you can't do that because it causes a domino effect.I wouldn't worry about it too much. I've seen a lot of talk on this board since I joined about specific trumping general. Well, in this case, Perception is general, trapfinding is specific, and symbol is even more specific. Take 20 doesn't work on symbol, but does on normal traps.oking at it is the trigger" and I can't think of a way the rogue would be able to take 20 checking for a trap, be in the area of effect, but not have already had to reactively make a check to avoid setting it off by looking.
Quite obviously many of the other triggers (touch) could easily be seen and have a 20 taken against them to verify it is a magical trap before the rogue disables it.
Not if I (as GM) say it doesn't. I'm quite content to adjudicate things when ambiguity prevents a definitive ruling as per RAW.
The problem is you can't do that because it causes a domino effect.
This is why I like my conclusion the most. Yes you can take 20 on any trap, provided you haven't had to make a reactive perception check to avoid triggering it. No domino effect, and no weird circumstances.
Basically, either the rogue can state "I am searching this door for traps, and taking 20." And he does. Or, the fighter can say "there's no time for that! I'm opening the door!" and get a reactive perception check to realize there is a trap and avoid triggering it before he opens the door. Of course, if the fighter passes this, he can tell the rogue, who can then disable the trap. (Debatable on if the rogue has to make his own perception check to find the trap too, I figure the fighter can just point it out to him.)
Not if I (as GM) say it doesn't. I'm quite content to adjudicate things when ambiguity prevents a definitive ruling as per RAW.The problem is you can't do that because it causes a domino effect.I wouldn't worry about it too much. I've seen a lot of talk on this board since I joined about specific trumping general. Well, in this case, Perception is general, trapfinding is specific, and symbol is even more specific. Take 20 doesn't work on symbol, but does on normal traps.oking at it is the trigger" and I can't think of a way the rogue would be able to take 20 checking for a trap, be in the area of effect, but not have already had to reactively make a check to avoid setting it off by looking.
Quite obviously many of the other triggers (touch) could easily be seen and have a 20 taken against them to verify it is a magical trap before the rogue disables it.
Is this thread suddenly in the house rules forum? No? Then everyone's house-rules trying to shoe-horn the system's internal consistency are irrelevant.
Fact 1: You can take 20 on Perception checks to find traps because searching for a trap, no matter how poorly, does not trigger it.
Fact 2: A failed Disable Device check triggers a trap, not a failed Perception check.
Fact 3: Symbols have DCs to find and disable them.
Fact 3 corollary: Symbols follow the same trap rules as all other things that are traps.
The problem is you can't do that because it causes a domino effect.This is why I like my conclusion the most. Yes you can take 20 on any trap, provided you haven't had to make a reactive perception check to avoid triggering it. No domino effect, and no weird circumstances.
Your "conclusion" is just as much a house-rule as his!
Either a Symbol is a trap and follows the trap rules or it isn't. There is none of this bs middle ground where symbols are special traps that ignore both the trap rules and the take 20 rules.
Moreover, a "reactive perception check to find a trap" is some thing you just made up. The point is obviously to benefit players when otherwise they would have triggered the trap by being morons or incapable of finding it.
Fact 1: You can take 20 on Perception checks to find traps because searching for a trap, no matter how poorly, does not trigger it.
Fact 2: A failed Disable Device check triggers a trap, not a failed Perception check.
Fact 3: Symbols have DCs to find and disable them.
Fact 3 corollary: Symbols follow the same trap rules as all other things that are traps.
I think it's funny that in a system full of exceptions to the rule you refuse to accept this one instance.
Edit: Moreover, you've already stated your outright refusal to accept a clarification of RAI from the Creative Director of the company, so at this point you're just arguing RAW out of a stance of obstinance.
Then we are back at my starting position. How does a character know this is the case? My take: they cannot for this particular skill use. So if they do have a method of finding what the best of their ability is ingame, they are allowed to take 20.
The way I see it, they're out of ideas on how to search differently. My assumption here is that if they've thought of a way or place to search and applied it, they've done so with reasonable competence. If the perception DC to find the Playboy hidden under the mattress is a 15 and the PC takes 20 searching the bed (assuming they don't have a net -6 modifier), then they thought to check under the mattress. If their modifier is a 5 and the money stashed in the mattress through a popped seam is a DC 26, then checking along the seams was an idea they did not have. Ultimately, when the PC takes 20, he feel's he's spent long enough working at the task, applying search ideas, to believe he can't do a better a job.
I find this idea of searching "every way you know how" to be pretty vague. There's only one way of searching: searching. I assume any character worth his salt is going to check everywhere when searching, and the result of the check should mean (like a perception check to notice enemies) that you either noticed it or not. Why should they do things differently each time?
The case of the desk is a good example: we don't search the desk 'differently' each time (this wouldn't make any sense to me), we search it multiple times to make sure a place we went over didn't actually had the key that we missed. But that is because we have a certain item in mind (the key) we *know* is there somewhere. Maybe not on the desk, but we're going to search every place it might be until we find it, precisely *because* we know it is somewhere.
Consider us being told there *might* be a key there that a friend left and the friend isn't sure he left it at your place anyway. This time a more reasonable way of going about, in my mind, is to go over the desk once or twice, and if you don't find the key, you conclude the key just isn't there. Only once the friend becomes sure he left it at your place, would you be more inclined to search over and over. This case would be more analogous to the case of the trap on the altar.
To me, searching the same thing over and over in the same way expecting to get different results is one of the definitions of insanity. But I'd bet that, in reality, if someone were to observe your every move, they'd find that when you succeeded in finding the key it was because you had done something differently. Perhaps you moved the papers covering it when you had not before.
But even searching for keys, I find that I do engage in different levels of searching. I scan for them visually. If that doesn't work, I start to lift things that might be obscuring them, if that doesn't work, I move those things into piles to make sure they can't continue to hide whatever it is I'm looking for. But eventually, I can be pretty sure I've searched the desk/dinner table/whatever for my keys and done the best job I can. And being more experienced than my kids, when I have reached the point where I believe I've done the best job I can, it's a considerably better job than they would have done when they came to the same conclusion.
When it comes to searching for traps, I take more ranks as having better techniques for using the senses and other tools as well as having better and more ideas based on knowledge of how traps could work. Thus, they can find more devious traps once they've exhausted their ideas when searching the altar for traps. They've applied them all and either found something or have come to the conclusion that they've given it their best shot.