|
I know I've talked about this issue a couple of times before, and maybe it's already been beaten to death on this boards, but it still bothers me. My problem? PCs using 'Detect Magic' and 'Arcane Sight' to avoid magic traps.
Now, I have firmly believed that the mechanics allow this; after all, are not magic traps, uh, magical? It was pretty simple in 3E, because you couldn't have 'Detect Magic' constantly on -- unless you had 'Arcane Sight' made permanent on you (and I think only a single wizard in my group ever did). Ergo, magic traps were dangerous, and made 'Detect Magic' a very valuable spell to memorize (well, even more valuable as it already was in terms of finding magical items).
But not so in PF RPG, because every spellcaster in my group now has it constantly "active" (just to spot magic traps, mind) -- they simply choose it as one of their three "at-will" orisons or cantrips. I've tried implementing Concentration checks every now and then, but the players just shrug and say: "Don't bother -- I'll just cast it again immediately if it fizzles. And nobody moves a single square before it's on!" (followed by a general agreement from all non-spellcasters). Then I tried reminding them that it requires three rounds before they can actually locate any hidden magic traps, but again they thwarted me: "Sure, but we'll move only 60 feet, and then I'm spending the next three rounds concentrating... rinse and repeat, okay? Just like with those 10' poles, which has always been a legit tactic, right?" And that is actually how we've always rolled -- no need to point out every square you're poking into, it's enough to say that you're doing it while going forward.
So, magic traps have become less frequent in my adventures; I just don't see the point anymore, because they detect them anyway. And if they can't disable or dispel them (or circle around), action might grind to a halt.
A couple of days ago I realized that the rules for traps say that only the PCs with the Trapfinding class feature can detect (and disable) them. Whoa... WHAT? Does this mean that 'Detect Magic' and similar means cannot? I checked the "classic" spells that work as magic traps, and indeed the entries seemed to imply that Trapfinding is the only way to notice them. Or maybe I'm just confused, and it refers to the Perception check? (it's 3 AM over here, and I'm too tired ATM to double-check this.)
Anyway, I know I could easily houserule this; we've had all sorts of magical backlashes and potion-addictions for long-term abuse of spells and items. Heck, I could even say that constant concentration gives them a hellish headache that no cure spell or Heal check can remove. But I also know that my veteran players might see it as an underhanded GM method to downplay their crafty (and legit, at least in their eyes) tactic to avoid traps. I *might* go with a compromise; an active DM (or similar spell/ability/item) gives you the Perception check as if you had Trapfinding, but I wish it was more explicitly stated in the rules so that I would not need to houserule it.
Anyone else been having problems with this? How have you ruled it in your games? Or have I misunderstood something?
I believe that the mentions of PCs with trapfinding being the only ones able to spot magical traps means that they're the only ones who can spot them with mundane means. Don't let that dishearten you, though. I would argue that detect magic still gives you only cursory information about a magical trap. Even if you concentrate for 3 rounds, you only know that, for example "there's some type of magic on that treasure chest and it's from the evocation school." Alright, so they know it's probably going to explode when they open it. That doesn't help them disarm it, though, and they still don't know EXACTLY what's going to happen. Remember, detect magic doesn't give you exacting information about what you're analyzing. Even so, there are a few ways around this.
Someone creating a trap is going to want to disguise it as well as they can, and if they're making a magical trap, they plan with magic being in the equation. Magic Aura is a 1st level spell that can mask a magical aura entirely, and I think it's entirely reasonable to say that it can made permanent when being built into a magical trap.
And personally, I like to punish my PCs when they start metagaming like this. If they're waiting around to thoroughly scan every 60 foot area, then have more wandering monsters or patrols happen accross them. It's only logical that the more time they sit about waiting, the higher the chances of random encounter coming their way.
Also, consider pairing your magical traps with time sensitive situations. Give them some type of pressing goal that doesn't allow them to behave this way and still succeed in their ultimate goal.
Actually, not quite true. Magic traps can be detected by anyone with a high enough perception check. The trapfinding class feature just allows them to be DISARMED (and gives a bonus to perception and disable device). So its entirely possible for even mundane characters to find magical traps.
As for Detect Magic, the rules for traps say that only a Perception check will find them. I think it'd be easy enough to rule that all magical traps have a Magic Aura spell built into them, to mask the aura from Detect Magic. It's a low-level spell that lasts days per casting, I doubt it would add much to the cost of the trap. The only exception you might take are "traps" made on the fly, like Explosive Runes written by a fleeing mage or something.
Edit: Ack! Double-ninja'd!
|
Detecting magic takes a really long time. It also puts the spellcaster in the front.
Use these to your advantage.
Time) Put them on a deadline in-game. Make it realistic, but only if they don't search for traps/detect magic. Make it clear that they are running out of time. Then have them deal with the consequences. Since you are expecting them to fail the first time you do this, don't make the consequences too horrible.
Front) Put them in a 5 ft hallway. Then put a high-damage dealing monster in front - used a secret door to surprise them. The wizard/sorcerer/bard will think twice before going in front all the time.
detect magic DOES require concentration. Make them recast the spell. Make everyone else wait. Give the enemies this extra round to buff up.
If the caster isn't up front, then he/she needs to wait 2 rounds before the party can move. First round - detects magic. This isn't surprising because the party members ahead have magic items/magic effects up. Second round - detect number and strengths of magic. No unexpected auras, it's ok to proceed.
Remember, detect magic doesn't give you exacting information about what you're analyzing.
While true that Detect Magic only talks about identifying the school of magic, there are other things you can do. First, note that it also says "If the aura eminates from a magic item, you can attempt to identify its properties (see Spellcraft)," also known as Identifying a magic item. One could argue that a magic trap falls under that definition. I'm not saying it's RAW, just saying it's not outside the realm of possibility.
I was also considering pointing out the "Identify a spell effect that is in place" option under Knowledge:Arcana, but on second though I figured it doesn't apply here. The spell effect is not likely "in place" (unless an illusion is disguising a mundane trap or something along those lines), it's just waiting to be triggered. If it was a Stinking Cloud trap, you'd be able to ID it after it went off but not before.
|
|
Thanks, guys -- those are solid pieces of advice! 'Magic Aura' would indeed be a nice (and "legit") way to work around this; at the moment the PCs are in an old dungeon complex that has seen many wizards (and wizard cabals) carving out their individual domains (i.e. controlling a few rooms) within its halls. Last session I used a single CR 9 trap which was laughably easy for the to disable ('Detect Magic' and Rogue), and I felt so disheartened that I removed any and all magic traps I had originally placed there. Now I could put them back, and I won't even need to feel bad about it -- after all, some of them were crafted by spellcasters who used the place as a safehouse/storage/lair for years.
@Martinaj: I'm not too keen on metagaming, either, but using 10' pole has been a legitimate and time-honoured tactic for decades in my group (and others, too). It's kind of hard to argue about denying the same with DM, especially as the players noted that "It's faster than the pole, you know?". I *do* use random encounters occasionally when I get tired with players metagaming too heavily, or if they get involved in OOC discussions. I try to avoid it, though -- usually my adventures involve more than enough combat encounters.
@ZappoHisbane: Weird, after reading your post I checked this from PRD, and turns out you're entirely correct; anyone *CAN* indeed notice magic traps with a successful Perception check. I'm still too tired to check the Core Rulebook, but I'm fairly sure that my 1st printing copy disagrees with this (I have not implemented the Errata yet). Or maybe I'm just confusing things with Beta mechanics (wouldn't be the first time)?
I can see where you're coming from, and some metagaming is going to happen (and I'd argue essential). If players aren't making effective characters it can be a struggle to keep them alive, and a little number crunching leads to some interesting scenarios and practices (I hate it when a combat boils down to a series of attack rolls round after round after round). But when a player starts to view their character as little more than a list of numbers, or begins to partake in entirely unfeasible practices because "the rules allow it," that's when I start to get irritated and feel compelled to punish players for bad behavoir. It might just be me, but I feel that stopping every 30-60 feet to stare into space for 12 seconds falls under this category.
Astergion you misread what trapfinding does:
A rogue adds 1/2 her level to Perception skill checks made to locate traps and to Disable Device skill checks (minimum +1). A rogue can use Disable Device to disarm magic traps.
ANYONE can find a magical trap. The fighter, the barbarian, the cleric, the monk, the witch, the summoner, the mook, the goblin, the commoner, the sorcerer, the dwarf, the gnome, the Flind, The Flumph -- anyone.
Trapfinding only allows you to disarm magic traps with the disable device skill.
Please note that it allows the rogue to use the skill -- anyone can disable a magical trap with other means -- such as spells, direct damage (breaking the trap), or some other way that does not use the disable device trap.
This makes since -- why would a character capable of being able to make a trap not be able to find one? And since anyone can make traps everyone should be looking for them.
EDIT: AND I'm ninja'd a few times over... but it's important enough to bear repeating since it comes up regularly.
|
|
I can see where you're coming from, and some metagaming is going to happen (and I'd argue essential). If players aren't making effective characters it can be a struggle to keep them alive, and a little number crunching leads to some interesting scenarios and practices (I hate it when a combat boils down to a series of attack rolls round after round after round). But when a player starts to view their character as little more than a list of numbers, or begins to partake in entirely unfeasible practices because "the rules allow it," that's when I start to get irritated and feel compelled to punish players for bad behavoir. It might just be me, but I feel that stopping every 30-60 feet to stare into space for 12 seconds falls under this category.
Heh, we usually roleplay a lot even during combat, and it rarely (usually only if we're gaming late into the night) comes down to "I attack... hits AC 21". But for some reason my players are extra careful about traps; maybe they've been conditioned by so many ultra-lethal traps of the AD&D era, especially in "Gygaxian-style" modules? Or perhaps 3E taught them that far too many magic traps (and far too many enemy spellcasters) employ mostly SoD/SoS -type of effects? In any case I don't think they metagame too much, except when it comes to saving throws and traps.
Your last sentence reminds me of how I've dealt with overly-zealous paladins who constantly try to use 'Detect Evil'; at first people start to comment on his odd behaviour ("Quit staring at me, weirdo!"), and later on he might begin seeing evil everywhere (confusing angry thoughts, jealosy and other negative feelings into lesser degrees of evil). Hmmm... maybe I should try with my players? You know, constantly perceiving magical auras -- especially trying to separate and analyze individual auras from the spells and items on the party -- might confuse the PCs so that they see magic everywhere. ;)
While we are getting into the realm of homebrew:
I once started setting up rules for magical addictions and over exposure to magic that I was planning on using in a campaign -- I've always thought that such a mechanic would be very nice in some types of games and could help explain why some casters or those reliant on them act the way they do.
I guess it's something I just haven't had to deal with yet. Traps are probably the feature I most often overlook when designing dungeons, except as a way to make a combat encounter more interesting or lethal. It's something I'm trying to implement more often.
i would just design a trap that would trigger when a spell is active in its area-which would be further than detect magic "evil grin".
And personally, I like to punish my PCs when they start metagaming like this.
@Martinaj: I'm not too keen on metagaming, either...I *do* use random encounters occasionally when I get tired with players metagaming too heavily
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
i would just design a trap that would trigger when a spell is active in its area-which would be further than detect magic "evil grin".
Yeah, but make a magic trap with detect magic as its trigger spell. When anything magic comes within 60' of the trap, boom...
Of the suggestions raised, I particularly enjoy picturing the party's squishy mage out on point, vulnerable to enemy ambushes. (Of course, my Greyhawk barbarian wore a hat of disguise to convince foes he was a wimpy-looking elven mage type. When they charged him, things got ugly for them...)
I've found that false alarms help lull players into carelessness. Put in a few misleading auras, spells once cast for utilitarian purposes such as self-lighting braziers or magical transport. These can also serve as "unintentional" traps as they dramatically malfunction. (As examples: A self-lighting brazier might accidentally detonate flammable gases, magical moving stonework could trigger a collapse in adjacent areas, or a teleporter bring PCs into a water-filled room.) After three rounds of analysis and Spellcraft, tell the players what they find, not "you find a trap". "The braziers radiate weak evocation and divination magic."
False alarms also eliminate arguments that "I always do XXXX when we encounter a potential trap!" If they didn't do it when they encountered the false trap, they can hardly argue they would have done differently for a real trap.
Without home rules or the GM metagaming the party's approach, there are ways to sucker PCs into magical traps. Approach it like a magician (or trap builder) would: What would distract or confuse the trap's potential victims? Some environmental details immediately grab some players' attention, such as doors, statues, or tapestries. These can distract them from the true threats around them.
Once some people find a trap, they stop looking further. Place a magical trap where they're sure to find it and can easily evade or disarm it. Make the obvious way around lead right into another trap, around a corner or immediately behind a door.
Threatening foes also lead PCs to forget other details. How many times have your players' PCs blundered into a fight without assessing their environment? "You detect magic, but the orcs down the hall begin heaving javelins at you. What do you do next?" I'd be very surprised if the answer was "continue analyzing that spell aura".
*breaks out anti rules lawyering newspaper*
WHAP... don't even start thinking like that. Don't even think of thinking like that. Magical traps are indeed magic and yes, they will show up on detect magic unless you have a non detection built into it or something.Otherwise i'm going to staple mouse traps all over my rogues for an impromptu invisibility spell.. "hah! you can't see me!"
the problem/trend i've seen with my groups is a decrease reliance on trap finding and dungeon crawling and more emphasis on combat.
Another fun option is to have the players find traps at very inconvient times. Like when the BBEG is getting away he runs down a trap filled hallway. Make sure you stay in initiative order, that was the wizard would actually have to waste a turn casting detect magic.
I've found that false alarms help lull players into carelessness. Put in a few misleading auras, spells once cast for utilitarian purposes such as self-lighting braziers or magical transport. These can also serve as "unintentional" traps as they dramatically malfunction. (As examples: A self-lighting brazier might accidentally detonate flammable gases, magical moving stonework could trigger a collapse in adjacent areas, or a teleporter bring PCs into a water-filled room.) After three rounds of analysis and Spellcraft, tell the players what they find, not "you find a trap". "The braziers radiate weak evocation and divination magic."
I like the magical braziers trap. Just putting magical braziers all over the places alone would make it very difficult for players to use detect magic to find traps.
Another things to remember. Divination spells are blocked by a thin layer of lead or 3 feet of stone. If the trap makers didn't use non-detection in their magical traps, they could incorporate thin lead into the design to prevent most kinds of magical detection.
|
|
And personally, I like to punish my PCs when they start metagaming like this.@Martinaj: I'm not too keen on metagaming, either...I *do* use random encounters occasionally when I get tired with players metagaming too heavilyYou keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Oh, I think I do; players using knowledge their characters do not possess. What would you call it when a group of PCs with Int 8 and Wis 7 (except for the wizard, but he's usually keeping to the background) start employing these tactics because they know my GMing style? And regarding the adventure we're currently playing, two of them played it couple of decades ago; it's a 'Return to...'-kind of thing with heavy modifications, but the aforementioned CR 9 trap is right where it was in original module.
Also, I meant my comment as a generic observation; looking for traps in a dungeon is not metagaming, but these PCs are just a bit too inventive and cunning for my taste (regarding their stats, backgrounds and demeanors). But, that's another issue which I do not wish to delve into on this thread; my original post is meant as a discussion on what to do, in general, with PCs employing at-will or permanent detection spells to thwart magic traps. And whether it is/should be even possible, mechanically.
i would just design a trap that would trigger when a spell is active in its area-which would be further than detect magic "evil grin".Yeah, but make a magic trap with detect magic as its trigger spell. When anything magic comes within 60' of the trap, boom...
Makes me glad I keep an unseen servant in front of the party at all times 60 feet out with red robes and a glowing staff.
I skimmed the thread, but let me add to what I think someone else already mentioned. Detect magic takes at least 3 rounds before you start getting specific data. Get the players used to thinking in those terms. That might not change anything if they're being really methodical and systematic, but that is going to slow them down.
Bear that in mind if other events are happening in the encounter area (or "dungeon"). Also don't be afraid to penalize the detecting character's perception checks, because they are otherwise focused on something else.
Traps... that is what a sorcerer is for. ((Bards work to :)
Sorcerer with 18 Charisma cast Charm Person (1day/level) on one or more Fighters (fodder), .. have fighter walk 30 feet ahead, opening doors, walking over floor, opening chests, etc...
Trap problem Solved
To add another, casting a spell must be done in a loud commanding voice (can't cite, I'm on my phone). That is sure to draw a crowd.
You could also have secondary sound traps, like a ceiling that could cave in if you are too loud.
Does Detect Magic detect Invisible creatures?
There is a speficic spell, See Invisibility, for that.
There is a specific spell, Find Traps for trapfinding. (adds half level, up to +10, and allows a check whenever within 10')
How can a zero level spell outperform a second level spell?
I would disallow Detect Magic as an auto-detect for traps. Assume that part of the trap is it's concealment. The sigils are hidden from view (and thus require an experienced trap-smith (high Perception!) to find.
GNOME
Does Detect Magic detect Invisible creatures?
There is a speficic spell, See Invisibility, for that.
There is a specific spell, Find Traps for trapfinding. (adds half level, up to +10, and allows a check whenever within 10')
How can a zero level spell outperform a second level spell?
I would disallow Detect Magic as an auto-detect for traps. Assume that part of the trap is it's concealment. The sigils are hidden from view (and thus require an experienced trap-smith (high Perception!) to find.
GNOME
thats a very good point! i would say detect magic does NOT detect magic traps...
Does Detect Magic detect Invisible creatures?
Yes. It does. Its a magic spell in place, and is not immune from being detected by detect magic. See invisibility is a complete negation of invisibility (or even improved invisibility). Detect magic makes you concentrate (a move action) for three rounds in order to pinpoint someone, otherwise you just know that they're "somewhere in your 60 foot cone" when the spell reveals the presence or absence of magic.
Does it? Or does it allow you to see the magical aura? Specfically, does it mean the invisible target is still forcing perception checks on the Detect Magic caster? (at a +20 to the invisible creature's stealth, +40 if it's standing still).
That is *specifically* does a zero level spell trump a second level spell? With no roll? And if it does, why do we have Spell Levels if not to express relative power of spells? (which brings up using Spell Craft as a 'BAB' for casting... :) )
I don't mean to sound antagonistic, and I apologize if I am coming off that way :)
GNOME
|
|
Does it? Or does it allow you to see the magical aura? Specfically, does it mean the invisible target is still forcing perception checks on the Detect Magic caster? (at a +20 to the invisible creature's stealth, +40 if it's standing still).
That is *specifically* does a zero level spell trump a second level spell? With no roll? And if it does, why do we have Spell Levels if not to express relative power of spells? (which brings up using Spell Craft as a 'BAB' for casting... :) )
I don't mean to sound antagonistic, and I apologize if I am coming off that way :)
GNOME
A bag of flour can, temporarily, trump a second level spell (Invisibility) .
Does it? Or does it allow you to see the magical aura? Specfically, does it mean the invisible target is still forcing perception checks on the Detect Magic caster? (at a +20 to the invisible creature's stealth, +40 if it's standing still).
That is *specifically* does a zero level spell trump a second level spell? With no roll? And if it does, why do we have Spell Levels if not to express relative power of spells? (which brings up using Spell Craft as a 'BAB' for casting... :) )
I don't mean to sound antagonistic, and I apologize if I am coming off that way :)
GNOME
You don't actually SEE the magical aura. you're just aware of it.
Merlin gets an arrow stuck through his pointed hat while in an empty 60 by 60 foot room. He calls out "Invisible critter!" to his party and on his turn casts detect magic. He then has a cone in front of him
You know whether or not he's in the cone in front of you. (you don't actually see him) and can shout "he's over here" or "he's not over here" to his allies.
The next round as his standard action, if the opponent is still in front of him merlin knows the Number of different magical auras and the power of the most potent aura. So he can probably give a "He's buffed to the hilt!" or "he's not packing anything too heavy" assesment.
On the third round he knows the location "10 feet forward at 8 o clock" He still doesn't see the person.
Since concentration is a standard action thats all the wizard can do. Its harly an auto defeat of invisibility.
Does it? Or does it allow you to see the magical aura? Specfically, does it mean the invisible target is still forcing perception checks on the Detect Magic caster? (at a +20 to the invisible creature's stealth, +40 if it's standing still).
That is *specifically* does a zero level spell trump a second level spell? With no roll? And if it does, why do we have Spell Levels if not to express relative power of spells? (which brings up using Spell Craft as a 'BAB' for casting... :) )
I don't mean to sound antagonistic, and I apologize if I am coming off that way :)
GNOME
You don't actually SEE the magical aura. you're just aware of it.
Merlin gets an arrow stuck through his pointed hat while in an empty 60 by 60 foot room. He calls out "Invisible critter!" to his party and on his turn casts detect magic. He then has a cone in front of him
You know whether or not he's in the cone in front of you. (you don't actually see him) and can shout "he's over here" or "he's not over here" to his allies.
The next round as his standard action, if the opponent is still in front of him merlin knows the Number of different magical auras and the power of the most potent aura. So he can probably give a "He's buffed to the hilt!" or "he's not packing anything too heavy" assesment.
On the third round he knows the location "10 feet forward at 8 o clock" He still doesn't see the person.
Since concentration is a standard action thats all the wizard can do. Its harly an auto defeat of invisibility.
yeah it seems that is something we're missing, knowing something is invisible and negating the invisible bonuses are 2 different things. after reading over Detect magic i think the only thing that can be gained through Detect magic and magical traps is the presence of auras and locations of them. you can't discern the actual spell or even school of magic as a trapped room is not an "item or creature"
pathfinder prd-
"If the items or creatures bearing the auras are in line of sight, you can make Knowledge (arcana) skill checks to determine the school of magic involved in each."
therefore i would rule a magically trapped room is not a legal item or creature and the spell gives no further details other then power and location. and since a lot of magic spells use ALARM as the trigger the location is a 20' radius. this doesn't necessarily reveal a magic trap per say, only that there is a magical aura present. Also you still need a rogue to disable a magic trap, unless he party wizard wants to Dispel magic through whole dungeon using up his spell slots...