That is what traps do in the game. Correct that tripwire is not a trap. It is just something that be detected with the perception skill. I would not even consider it a trap IRL. It is nothing but an alarm system.
Calling names is not mature, and just because someone argues by using the rules on the board that does not mean they play that way. It means they call it like they see it.
TrapsTraps are a common danger in dungeon environments. From gouts of white-hot flame to hails of poisoned darts, traps can serve to protect valuable treasure or stop intruders from proceeding.
An alarm does not stop anyone from proceeding, not does it protect anything. It alerts those assigned to protect treasure that they need to be on their toes.
Pathfinder did not change traps from 3.5.
Elements Of A TrapAll traps—mechanical or magic—have the following elements: trigger, reset, Search DC, Disable Device DC, attack bonus (or saving throw or onset delay), damage/effect, and Challenge Rating. Some traps may also include optional elements, such as poison or a bypass. These characteristics are described below.
I am not saying anything is wrong with houseruling alarm type spells into traps. I am saying, by the rules they are not traps.
Would the minor magic rogue talent work if you chose detect magic? I mean concept wise.
Fine. how would you disable it?
Would the minor magic rogue talent work if you chose detect magic? I mean concept wise.Fine. how would you disable it?
By the rules you are out of luck I guess, but I thought you were just looking for a way to find the alarms not disable them. As a houserule certain spells could be identified as alarm spells for lack of a better phrase and be treated like traps for the rogue. It seems the trap idea was carried forth from earlier editions and never expanded on. Traps back then were meant to maim and kill, not to alert. I do see your point, but I have not answer for you that applies within the rules.
once found (with detect magic i guess, even though range is an issue) you disguise yourself as one of the enemy and walk your party through, if the spell went off for everyone that opened the door or whatever it wouldn't be effective, so I assume looking like one of the bad guys will keep it quiet.
Best I can come up with, sad to see the rogue has another weakness.
.Of course per the wording of the spell Magic Mouth only responds to visual or audible signals. So rogue needs to have a high stealth roll (for silence) and be invisible, covered in supernatural darkness (not normal darkness), or other similar vision imparing magic. Or if the rogue knows where it is through any number of means (detect magic, trapfinding *see below*, casing the house) it could simply have it covered from a distance in some mundane way. I picture a specially designed crossbow bolt that has a cloth attached in such a way as to cover the mouth.then what if the trigger is a window opening, or a door opening.
The spell creates a physical Mouth that must be cast on "one creature or object." You can't simply hang it in midair.
or without for that matter. Detect magic would work from 60 feet away. A first level caster or anyone else with detect magic could find a Magic mouth. If you want to assume the mouth is a trap (as I would) then...I'm a 10th level rogue i didn't realize i needed to carry around all the trappings of a caster, including a way to cast dispel magic, i thought the class stood on it's own.
No class Stands alone all the time. Though as a rogue you can take the Minor magic talent (or whatever the name is) and be able to cast detect magic a few times a day. It could save your life one day. After all Knowing is half the battle.
I think you're caught up on the fact that the spell doesn't specifically call itself a trap. If it looks like a trap, smells like a trap, and walks like a trap...It's a trap.
Magic Mouth has all the makings of a trap. I see no reason why Trapfinding won't work with a good perception roll.
The spell creates a physical Mouth that must be cast on "one creature or object." You can't simply hang it in midair.
I don't believe he implied that it hung in mid air. You can cast it on said door or window. Or heck even somewhere in the room on the opposite side like a picture or a book, or something innocuous like that. It's incredibly difficult to detect a trap that triggers from the other side of the room on the far wall.
Now theorhetically you could stealth the door open to get through it, especially at 20th level but as has been pointed out before what are you rolling against in terms of the magic mouth?
Personally as a wizard I've always used the spell as an anti-pickpocket strategy for my spellbook. It becomes rather difficult for a thief to run off with my book when it's screaming rape at the top of its little magical lungs whenever someone touches it when they're not supposed to.
Personally as a wizard I've always used the spell as an anti-pickpocket strategy for my spellbook. It becomes rather difficult for a thief to run off with my book when it's screaming rape at the top of its little magical lungs whenever someone touches it when they're not supposed to.
It cost 10G per casting, but can be made permanent. If you've got the money than I say go for it. Having a spellbook scream rape is an amusing visual.
Would the minor magic rogue talent work if you chose detect magic? I mean concept wise.Fine. how would you disable it?
Wand of silence or dispel magic. I know that UMD is not Rogue only, but that does not lessen the fact that it is a crucial part of the Rogues arsenal, especially at that level. I mean non- rogues can take disable device, but you are still taking that.
There are a number of magical things that a high level rogue is going to want to be able to detect, what about an illusionary floor over a pit? is that classified as a trap by Raw? Even forgetting traps, what about something important concealed by illusion, like a secret door? I just see UMDing a detect magic wand as an integral skill for high level rogues given the magical nature of most fantasy settings.
Wand of silence or dispel magic. I know that UMD is not Rogue only, but that does not lessen the fact that it is a crucial part of the Rogues arsenal, especially at that level. I mean non- rogues can take disable device, but you are still taking that.
That's fine - but PCs with trapfinding are supposed to deal with magical traps. Only rogues can use Disable Device with magical traps.
Of course not every class should be able to do everything, I just think that the rogue should be put in condition to do what they are supposed to do.
Wand of silence or dispel magic. I know that UMD is not Rogue only, but that does not lessen the fact that it is a crucial part of the Rogues arsenal, especially at that level. I mean non- rogues can take disable device, but you are still taking that.That's fine - but PCs with trapfinding are supposed to deal with magical traps. Only rogues can use Disable Device with magical traps.
Of course not every class should be able to do everything, I just think that the rogue should be put in condition to do what they are supposed to do.
So what about a statue that magically animates and attacks when someone enters a room, is that a trap? You see its a slippery slope where magic is concerned
What about a trip wire thats tied to a guard's pinky finger? You kick the tripwire, his finger gets pulled, and now he knows people are stomping about in his area. Hell, have different areas attacked to different fingers, now he knows where to go to find you. Would that be a "trap"? What is the difference between being tied to a guards finger, and tied to a bell?
An even better way to screw the rogue, is to have the mouth inside a room, triggered to "when the door opens". Have it just yell "DOORBELL DOORBELL DOORBELL!". Bad guys know when people are coming and going. If they aren't expecting people, they get ready for trouble. No way for the rogue (or even a wizard) to easily defeat this without having say, clairvoyence into the room to spot the mouth, then passwall/phasedoor/teleport/dimensiondoor/etc through the door. What is the rogue going to do? Sorry, this isn't in his ballgame. You want to play with the magic, get some of your own.
So what about a statue that magically animates and attacks when someone enters a room, is that a trap? You see its a slippery slope where magic is concerned
True - I just feel that in this case.. well, is not a magical trap. I just see that should be doable, for a rogue (or at least, an high level one) undo alarms, mechanical and magical, like should be normal for a barbarian have a chance to beat up and destroy the above statue.
I wouldn't mind too much, but the more i see the Rogue, the more I think that a little more care and love for the class was needed. I DM a large group now (up to 12 players, they switch PC because of the campaign and of all the classes played (18 IIRC) the rogue is the only one that multiclassed. Shadowdancer dip.
I don't know if you're sarcastic or not, but the rogue has together with the barbarian and more than those two the monk, been considered the classes that are "weakest" in PF. Of course, some of it is hyperbole, but with statements like that, you're going to have to explain what would be broken with it.
I don't know about that. I mean the rogue has 8+ their Intelligence mod in skill points. Madness!
What about a trip wire thats tied to a guard's pinky finger? You kick the tripwire, his finger gets pulled, and now he knows people are stomping about in his area. Hell, have different areas attacked to different fingers, now he knows where to go to find you. Would that be a "trap"? What is the difference between being tied to a guards finger, and tied to a bell?
An even better way to screw the rogue, is to have the mouth inside a room, triggered to "when the door opens". Have it just yell "DOORBELL DOORBELL DOORBELL!". Bad guys know when people are coming and going. If they aren't expecting people, they get ready for trouble. No way for the rogue (or even a wizard) to easily defeat this without having say, clairvoyence into the room to spot the mouth, then passwall/phasedoor/teleport/dimensiondoor/etc through the door. What is the rogue going to do? Sorry, this isn't in his ballgame. You want to play with the magic, get some of your own.
A clevery designed trap, Magic or otherwise, can outsmart anyone even the most badass rogue or wizard, or (fill in the blank). No trap is an "I win" trap. Like in most things in life Knowledge is the key. If you know that there is a trap and how it's set up there is a way disable and/or bypass it. You just have to know how.
With Trapfinding you get a bonus tt perception and disable device checks in regard to traps. Additionally can disable magic traps with disable device (Dispel magic not necessary).
The only remaining question is defining "trap."
According to dictionary.com
TRAP
1. a contrivance used for catching game or other animals, as a mechanical device that springs shut suddenly.
2. any device, stratagem, , or the like for catching a person unawares.
Magic mouth qualifies.
True - I just feel that in this case.. well, is not a magical trap. I just see that should be doable, for a rogue (or at least, an high level one) undo alarms, mechanical and magical, like should be normal for a barbarian have a chance to beat up and destroy the above statue.
I wouldn't mind too much, but the more i see the Rogue, the more I think that a little more care and love for the class was needed. I DM a large group now (up to 12 players, they switch PC because of the campaign and of all the classes played (18 IIRC) the rogue is the only one that multiclassed. Shadowdancer dip.
Just so we're on the same page-- the issue here isn't that it is impossible for Rogues to deal with magical alarms, but that they should be able to deal with them specifically through the Trapfinding class ability, because it takes away from the Rogue's sauce when other classes can do his iconic "thing."
That is what this boils down to, yes?
So what about a statue that magically animates and attacks when someone enters a room, is that a trap? You see its a slippery slope where magic is concerned
True - I just feel that in this case.. well, is not a magical trap. I just see that should be doable, for a rogue (or at least, an high level one) undo alarms, mechanical and magical, like should be normal for a barbarian have a chance to beat up and destroy the above statue.
I wouldn't mind too much, but the more i see the Rogue, the more I think that a little more care and love for the class was needed. I DM a large group now (up to 12 players, they switch PC because of the campaign and of all the classes played (18 IIRC) the rogue is the only one that multiclassed. Shadowdancer dip.
So what do you consider each "role" to be?
For me I see:Barbarian: Damage/Tank
Bard: Utility
Cleric: Healing/tank
Druid: Utility/healing
Fighter: Damage/Tank
Monk: Fancy monk things?
Paladin: Tank/healing
Ranger: Damage/tank/utility
Rogue: Utility
Sorcerer: Damage/utility
Wizard: Utility/damage
Yes, I agree, rogues are underperformers compared to other straight classes. Bards can do almost everything a rogue can, except trapfinding. Even then, they can take an alt. class feature in APG to get it!
Rogues aren't great, no disagreement here, but crying because "thats not a trap and traps are what rogues do!!!!!" isn't going to get any sympathy from me.
Also, any class that gets "trapfinding" you can argue is its job to disable magical traps. That's bards, rangers, and rogues.
Just so we're on the same page-- the issue here isn't that it is impossible for Rogues to deal with magical alarms, but that they should be able to deal with them specifically through the Trapfinding class ability, because it takes away from the Rogue's sauce when other classes can do his iconic "thing."That is what this boils down to, yes?
With Trapfinding you get a bonus to perception and disable device checks in regard to traps equal to half you rogue level. Additionally can disable magic traps with disable device (Dispel magic or other magic tricks not necessary).
Rogues aren't great, no disagreement here, but crying because "thats not a trap and traps are what rogues do!!!!!" isn't going to get any sympathy from me.
My point is more
"why magic Mouth and alarm are not a Magical trap, and symbol is one?"
BTW, with good teamwork rogues are decent damage dealers in my game, because of buffs, flanking, and a well played Order of the Dragon Cavalier.
(take away the flask thing has been a mistake IMHO, but could be nice homebrew a talent able X round of flask sneak attack/day where X is the int modifier, or the level/4..)
With Trapfinding you get a bonus to perception and disable device checks in regard to traps equal to half you rogue level. Additionally can disable magic traps with disable device (Dispel magic or other magic tricks not necessary).
Right. plus "A rogue can use Disable Device to disarm magic traps."
Any class can use disable device, but only a class with Trapfinding can disarm magical traps. Eric and Kaiyanwang assert that spells like alarm and magic mouth are magical traps and should be subject to disable device. The rules however, disagree, and this is the sticking point.
We can all argue until we're blue in the face over what a "trap" really is, but in a gray area like this (and there are many, many gray areas in the PFRPG rules), This stuff should be left for individual GMs to rule.
It's a slippery slope when you start applying hard and fast rules to things. Should one be able to use Disable Device against a magic mouth that's clearly not employed as a trap or alarm, and does that tread on the role of the magic user? Can illusory script be a magical trap?
There are even different rules that govern Perception vs. magical hazards like spike stones and teleportation circle. Wouldn't handling magical alarms in this way be more appropriate? Of course, that would mean that other classes could also deal with them effectively.
This argument seems to be more about some strongly held perceptions about what the Rogue's role in a party really is, and the truth of the matter is that this is completely up to the player and GM to define. The rules are just a guideline.
I am not saying anything is wrong with houseruling alarm type spells into traps. I am saying, by the rules they are not traps.
Elements Of A TrapAll traps—mechanical or magic—have the following elements: trigger, reset, Search DC, Disable Device DC, attack bonus (or saving throw or onset delay), damage/effect, and Challenge Rating. Some traps may also include optional elements, such as poison or a bypass. These characteristics are described below.
Then the rules are wrong.
Sounding an alarm is an effect which changes the status of the party.
A trip wire connected to a loaded crossbow is a trap.
A trip wire connected to a bell is an alarm, and also a trap and likely more dangerous.
An ability to detect traps that works on the first should also work on the second.
The same principle should apply to magical traps and alarms.
A tripwire attached to a crossbow is an trap(even in game terms) but that fits the rules since the crossbow gets to make an attack roll.
The bell is not a trap in game terms therefore the rules are correct.Magical traps are detectable by the rogue. Magical alarms are not.
I do agree that an alarm detecting feature would be nice.
PS:The tripwire alone does not determine if something is a trap or not. the end affect of the trip wire determines if it is a trap.
Course there is the otherway you defeat a rogue using trapfinding against them.
You don't have any traps anywhere, but make them think there is traps. Besides, I search for invisible traps all the time. Learned it from my sick lumberjack grandmother.
Does the magic mouth have a volume control? I mean one could assume that the volume is set at normal conversational volume from the description
"enchanted mouth that suddenly appears and speaks its message the next time a specified event occurs. The message, which must be 25 or fewer words long, can be in any language known by you and can be delivered over a period of 10 minutes"
Emphasis mine on speaks......not shouts, not rages, not yells; speaks
Also it is not a recorder that throws out the casters voice either....
I mean it would have to be in the room with the person wanting to hear it......
my first copper....
Second copper
anything set as a trap should be detectable as a trap, right
There is no set volume for speaking so it is really up to the DM who will most likely rule in his favor.
It is not a trap though. The game is binary in many regards. Either it is or it isn't.
Magic mouth can also but it can also be used to deliver messages or warnings. There is no way for a rogue to determine the intent of the magic mouth, and the mouth has a range of 15 feet per caster level. It is pretty hard to disable something you can't get to even if it is a trap.
I would have had two versions on the spell. One for messages or warning that spoke in a regular voice, and the trap version would be able to yell, but the distance would not be so great.
The only remaining question is defining "trap."
According to dictionary.com
TRAP1. a contrivance used for catching game or other animals, as a mechanical device that springs shut suddenly.
2. any device, stratagem, , or the like for catching a person unawares.Magic mouth qualifies.
Surprise parties also fall under this definition by the way. I am not sure what the DC is to disarm a surprise party.
Detect Magic and a little bit of cleverness is really all it takes to deal with this though. If a 20th level rogue is having issues with Magic Mouth, I am really not sure they are trying to their full potential. Silence, Dispel Magic, Tripping the trap every day on purpose for a week straight at the same time until the owner becomes tired of waking up and checking every night, there are plenty of ways to get around it.
Maybe i didn't explained myself correctly.
Of course not every class is suited for every challenge. A lot of times obstacles are overcome through use of a magic item (UMD, or a fighter with boots making him fly). I'm fine with that.
Nevertheless, it's odd when a class must use magic to deal with something you expect is the main field. And so much lower level.
It's like a 20 level barbarian needing magic for streght based checks. Maybe against a dragon - ok. But not against kobolds.
Ok, explain to me this:
A wealthy homeowner can afford a 3rd level mage to cast Magic Mouth.
Somehow, the 20th level rogue is NOT able to do the same? I don't see how that makes sense.
Aside from the fact that a) this is a trap and can be removed...
and b) rogues get a skill to deal with these things, it's called Use Magic Device. In addition to a activating a scroll like Dispel Magic, the skill also includes "emulate class or race". So pretend that you're the homeowner, who presumably can open his own windows.
c) the rogue can ALSO afford to hire a spellcaster. A non-detection spell should do the job nicely, as would any number of other spells.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Asking the rules to think for you is always a bad idea. It doesn't say in the rules that humans only have two arms, but they do.
Think about what would happen if the rules outlined every conceivable circumstance. Pathfinder would read like the Tax Code, and then everyone would be mad about that. I've tried to play that game (looking at you, Rolemaster), and it's not better.
Asking the rules to think for you is always a bad idea. It doesn't say in the rules that humans only have two arms, but they do.Think about what would happen if the rules outlined every conceivable circumstance. Pathfinder would read like the Tax Code, and then everyone would be mad about that. I've tried to play that game (looking at you, Rolemaster), and it's not better.
Generally speaking, you are right - you cannot ask everything to the rules. Nevertheless, one wonders WHY symbol is a trap and is clearly explained, and magic mouth is not. the general mechanic is explained in the trap session of the rulebook: so, either every spell should have a DC, or none.
If you leave some spell with the DCs calculated and others emptyy, you can create confusion. Which is BAD. I houserule it easily, but one can never say.
Maybe I'm just a little bit confused by things already explained in above posts about the rogue and what should do without multiclass, and I put things like this together.
I didn't read the whole thread, but I'd like to cite a passage from core (regarding magical traps) if ithis wasn't stated here before:
The proximity trigger used most often for magic device traps is the alarm spell. Unlike when the spell is cast, an alarm spell used as a trigger can have an area that's no larger than the area the trap is meant to protect.
I'd say it actually IS in the rules that you can disable alarm since you'd probably have to do so to disable many other magic traps (i.e. stop those traps from triggering). This is not "Magic Mouth", but you might just see this as an example where the devs just didn't think about this issue before and thus not mentioning if it's a trap or not.
|
Magic Mouth is not a trap. It is just a warning device. It is no different than dropping an alarm spell in the hallway out side of the BBEG's door to give him enough time to buff up.
Traps are traditionally things that do damage in some form or cause status affects. I can see how some can see an alarm as a trap, but that is not the game definition of a trap.
Shouldn't the ability to detect and bypass an item or effect be based on objective criteria, such as how the item/effect is constructed, rather than the subjective criteria of the creator's intent?
PF merged the skills Disable Device and Open Lock for a good reason. It made no sense that a person could be skilled at manipulating the DC45 latches on the Tomb King's Corridor of Doom, but come back home and be stymied by the DC20 latch on the tavern's lavatory door.
If a highly-skilled burglar is able to deal with a motion sensor, then he should be able to deal with a motion sensor. Whether that sensor is connected to a flamethrower, a canister of poison gas, or a child's Buzz Lightyear Bedroom Buddy.
The fact that one burns him, another chokes him, and the last one shouts out "Zargoids on the Starboard Bow! To Infinity and Beyond!!!!!!" should not come into it.
One could argue that a Fire Giant leader could set up a glyph that shot a sheet of flame down the hallway, and that didn't count as a trap, because all the people who are supposed to live there aren't harmed by it. To them it's 'just a pretty visual display'.
What if the human rogue who walks down that hall had resist fire running? Would that 'not count as a trap', because he was protected?
If the answer is 'No, because it would have hurt him but for the protection spell', then what about a tiefling? They're a playable race with +0 level adjustment. Do they find themselves clueless when it comes to traps that involve flame? Do they wave their friends through the danger zone, because they can't detect the trap, or because it doesn't register in their brain that this is worth mentioning?
"All clear!"
<FWOOM>
"Aaaaaaaagh"
"What wrong with you guys? It's just the air-conditioning!"
I don't have an issue with "the rogue can use some other class ability to handle it". My problem becomes when its UMD or something anyone else can get. Or heck- other folks will even be far better at. Oracle or Sorc for example will have far higher UMD rolls because it is their primary stat.
To me it becomes: if the rogue has to UMD to find the trap and UMD to disable the trap then why are we using the rogue to bother with it at all? Why not just hand the wand(s) to the casters with the spells on their list, kick the rogue out of the group and get a better member? Afterall- super stealth and trap disabling are supposed to be "his thing". His melee is sub-optimal because he is a skill monkey right? If he's really a skill mosquito instead of a skill monkey because the "skill" he has to use is to just use everyone else's class abilities why is he here at all?
I mean sure- it is neat for an NPC rogue to be able to "break into" places using wands and such but this isn't an NPC class. It is a PC class. "hand me the wand, I don't have a failure chance" would grate me- even though it would be an accurate assessment of the situation. It'd be like the rogue having the CLW wand when the cleric is standing right behind him.
If he needs to use someone else's class abilities to find even low level traps (3rd level spells) why is he even there? Just let the wizard/sorc/oracle/witch/cleric/druid go first with Detect Magic on and leave the rogue at home. Bring another caster or another meat shield.
This, I believe, is the point the OP was trying to make.
-S
Must...Beat....Dead...Horse...
Must...Beat....Dead...Horse...
Must..start...houserule..rogues...
I have to admit, I'm a little confused on why they LET rogues deal with magic traps...
Just taking the rules and the dice and such out of it... HOW is the rogue disarming magic?
What is he actually DOING?
I can picture him cutting wires, or forcing a pressure plate... but what is he doing to the glowing rune?
Finding a magic Mouth on the window... What process should he use to make it go away? If he's not dispelling it or silencing it, I'm not sure what his plan is for 'disarming' it.
For that matter, Would he be able to 'disarm' three guard dogs who'll make a ruckus if the window opens??
In-character he still needs tools and items to do the job. Whether it's a potion of invisibility or wand of dispel... I don't see my DM ever allowing,
"I disarm the magic trap",
"Ok, How?"
"I just don't want it to be there..." /rolls dice. "It's gone."
I like rogues, and i like thieves... but in 2nd edition, magic screwed them over all the time. Anyone who can and does bend the will of the universe to suit his needs.... SHOULD be able to cause a street smart and well accomplished 2nd-story man from getting in his house.
on a seperate note, I have to agree with Wraithstrike up there, The rules are WRONG...
if there's a tripwire going into the wall, whether it's attached to a bell alerting the guards... or a lever dropping the ceiling... it's still a trap.
what the wire is attached to should have NO bearing on whether i SEE the wire!
The problem here is actually the magic system. If low level spells like levitate can completely outclass a DC 40 climb check, then there's no reason NOT to have the awesome power of magic on your side.
Pathfinder didn't deal with this because it would make backwards-compatibility impossible. But others (Iron Heroes, Kirth Gersen's houserules, etc) have tried.
Ultimately, this is a world-building choice. Do you feel that high-level magic should overcome high-level fighting and high-level skill use? If so, no changes are needed.
If not, then you've got to make some adjustments. Making Magic mouth a trap is one of them.
HOW is the rogue disarming magic?
What is he actually DOING?
I can picture him cutting wires, or forcing a pressure plate... but what is he doing to the glowing rune?
Yet, creating a glowing rune in the first place, that's somehow fine? I don't understand this at all.
It sounds to me like "Wizards are cool, and can do cool things with magic, but rogues are normal people, and therefore lame"
I don't have an issue with "the rogue can use some other class ability to handle it". My problem becomes when its UMD or something anyone else can get. Or heck- other folks will even be far better at. Oracle or Sorc for example will have far higher UMD rolls because it is their primary stat.
To me it becomes: if the rogue has to UMD to find the trap and UMD to disable the trap then why are we using the rogue to bother with it at all? Why not just hand the wand(s) to the casters with the spells on their list, kick the rogue out of the group and get a better member? Afterall- super stealth and trap disabling are supposed to be "his thing". His melee is sub-optimal because he is a skill monkey right? If he's really a skill mosquito instead of a skill monkey because the "skill" he has to use is to just use everyone else's class abilities why is he here at all?
I mean sure- it is neat for an NPC rogue to be able to "break into" places using wands and such but this isn't an NPC class. It is a PC class. "hand me the wand, I don't have a failure chance" would grate me- even though it would be an accurate assessment of the situation. It'd be like the rogue having the CLW wand when the cleric is standing right behind him.
If he needs to use someone else's class abilities to find even low level traps (3rd level spells) why is he even there? Just let the wizard/sorc/oracle/witch/cleric/druid go first with Detect Magic on and leave the rogue at home. Bring another caster or another meat shield.
This, I believe, is the point the OP was trying to make.
-S
Ah, I understand now. The point is "rogues can't deal with magic traps in a unique way!"
In that case, sorry, but the rogue doesn't fit your worldview. Either change your view, houserule the rogue, or understand that it just does not have what you wish it did, and multiclass/play something else with lots of skills/magic use.
HOW is the rogue disarming magic?
What is he actually DOING?
I can picture him cutting wires, or forcing a pressure plate... but what is he doing to the glowing rune?
Yet, creating a glowing rune in the first place, that's somehow fine? I don't understand this at all.
It sounds to me like "Wizards are cool, and can do cool things with magic, but rogues are normal people, and therefore lame"
Lame is a strong word... Personally, i prefer them to mages. I like the quick witted, street smart, con men better.
Regardless.. in this world, yes. A mage creating a glowing rune is perfectly fine. In a world where magic exists... it just exists. It's what they do.
Rogues, ARE normal people. As ara Fighters and... well rangers and paladins get iffy since they get spells.
But with all the dispelling, and counterspelling and items that are specifically required to 'stop' magic... I can't visualize how the Rogue is disarming these things.
i have NO problem with rogues IDENTIFYING Arcane marks and symbols and KNOWING that a trap is there due to their years of experience... but how do thieves 'remove' spells?
|
i have NO problem with rogues IDENTIFYING Arcane marks and symbols and KNOWING that a trap is there due to their years of experience... but how do thieves 'remove' spells?
Using murmured countercharms, salt, maybe some powedered bone, and a bit of lead foil. Or some other odd and amusing series of tools and ingredients.
All of this sort of anti-magical gear is naturally part of a set of Thieve's Tools.
And only the rogue can do it, even with the gear, for the same reason he gets Minor Magic as an option and Use Magic Device as a class skill, because Rogues are good at faking the little magics.
|
Seeing as how you're not looking for anything rules wise to explain the 'rune disabling' then I will put my 2CP in. This is, of course, putting myself at risk to everyone who chooses to yell and argue.
Honestly, I just always envision the rogue knowing a bit of the trade to disable them. For instance, the glowing runes, he could simply take a dagger and scratch away part of the rune - thus ruining its use.
Using murmured countercharms, salt, maybe some powedered bone, and a bit of lead foil. Or some other odd and amusing series of tools and ingredients.
This as well. Maybe its flavor, but so what? Its a game. Anyone looking to have everything be defined via RAW is, in my opinion, looking for that proverbial route to "Winning PF." Feel free to use flavor. Why? Because its FUN.
----
In the end, there is no definitive answer for how or why a Rogue knows what he knows. Its up to the GM to define what constitutes a trap and what constitutes something else.
----
And before anyone argues that I don't know a thing about Rogues, I play rogues almost exclusively because I like the stealth, guile, and quick wit aspect of them. However! If one GM says that I can't disarm a Magic Mouth, then I may argue for a few minutes, but in the end, I will always realize that the GM usually has a good reason for it. Same goes for the opposite effect. If I have a GM that allows it, then cool. Maybe afterwards I can convince those two GMs to get together and figure out why and how each of them feel the way they do.
I don't know.
Maybe I'm living in a fantasy world. =P
I don't have an issue with "the rogue can use some other class ability to handle it". My problem becomes when its UMD or something anyone else can get. Or heck- other folks will even be far better at. Oracle or Sorc for example will have far higher UMD rolls because it is their primary stat.
To me it becomes: if the rogue has to UMD to find the trap and UMD to disable the trap then why are we using the rogue to bother with it at all? Why not just hand the wand(s) to the casters with the spells on their list, kick the rogue out of the group and get a better member? Afterall- super stealth and trap disabling are supposed to be "his thing". His melee is sub-optimal because he is a skill monkey right? If he's really a skill mosquito instead of a skill monkey because the "skill" he has to use is to just use everyone else's class abilities why is he here at all?
I mean sure- it is neat for an NPC rogue to be able to "break into" places using wands and such but this isn't an NPC class. It is a PC class. "hand me the wand, I don't have a failure chance" would grate me- even though it would be an accurate assessment of the situation. It'd be like the rogue having the CLW wand when the cleric is standing right behind him.
If he needs to use someone else's class abilities to find even low level traps (3rd level spells) why is he even there? Just let the wizard/sorc/oracle/witch/cleric/druid go first with Detect Magic on and leave the rogue at home. Bring another caster or another meat shield.
This, I believe, is the point the OP was trying to make.
-S
Ah, I understand now. The point is "rogues can't deal with magic traps in a unique way!"
In that case, sorry, but the rogue doesn't fit your worldview. Either change your view, houserule the rogue, or understand that it just does not have what you wish it did, and multiclass/play something else with lots of skills/magic use.
Did you even read the thread? The OP is talking about Magic Mouth defeating a 20th level rogue's ability to find and/or disarm a trap be it magical or otherwise. By RAW the MM spell completely bypasses the rogue's ability to stealth/sneak and find it and/or disarm it. There isn't even a roll involved: it just completely bypasses the rogue. Is it a mistake by the editors? do they think it is a trap and the language didn't make it into the spell?
Dunno.But as it stands now- a 5th level wizard protecting his house with magic Mouth spells set to scream when a door/window opens trumps a 20th level rogue's ability to detect and/or bypass traps.
-that- is the problem.
20th level Rogue: I am the trap finder in the group.
20th level Wizard: Me too, since he can't detect Magic Mouth.. yanno, that near-apprentice level spell that the Rogue here can't even *see*, but that I can use a 0 level cantrip an unlimited times per day to detect. At range. With no perception check. *score*
It isn't "my world view". Rogues are skill monkeys and trap disarmers. Read the class. it is what they do. They have specific abilities to do these things. Why is there a 3rd level spell that 100% guarantees the rogue *can not* do these things without resorting to the Wizard's bag of tricks? I mean really- does the rogue now have to carry around wands or scrolls of detect magic and dispel magic just to do the job his class abilities lead you to believe they can do on their own? It'd be like suddenly finding out that your wizard has to swing a sword to cast his spells. wtf? Swinging swords is someone else's job.
(yes I realize the analogy isn't perfect- some folks do EK or magus or whatnot- but the core of it remains accurate ;p )
-S
I can see part of the issue one has with mechanics (it is an odd definition for trap), but another issue of play-style. I once saw in a book of traps a two-stage trap- a chest with a needle trap in its lock, and a second spring-loaded blade in its lid, with the intention of forcing rogues to start making two search for traps rolls. Like this was a good idea, somehow. This might be funny- once. Early on. After that, it just gets old. Hiding a trap on another trap on another trap just means there's a larger series of rolls involved, it doesn't make you more clever or make things more dramatic. Treat it all as one more difficult roll and wow them with the awe-inspiring pile of debris that was once seven layers of magical hell-death for intruders. Then get to the good stuff- you know, rescuing your maiden, one-upping your rival back in the Court, stealing the power of the nine Dragon Cakes, that kind of thing.
As for treating non-trap Trap spells as such? I would go with Spell DC. +2 to the DC for Knowl. Arcana 5 ranks, +2 more for Spellcraft 5 ranks. For a Perception skill for Magic Mouth, I would go with caster level, with a possible bonus of spell level and a bonus for school specialists (something like +2 or +3). I would assume it's always taking 10.
Edit: As for stealthing by a Magic Mouth spell? This is 20th level. You're near the epics, and you're a rogue. You don't order an ale anymore, the bartender just makes one then forgets it ever existed.
Maybe, the writers thought we were smart enough to think for ourselves.
Personally, there is no confusion at all for me. There is no issue. Magic mouth is a trap because is does the things traps do.
And no, I'm not going to wait for a personal post card from Jason Bulmahn to say so.
Why? Because I know that books have page limits, and that editors have deadlines, and that some things are obvious enough to some people that they are left out, even if other people look at it differently.
You're welcome to play however you like, but I'm not convinced that your way is more fun than mine. Exact opposite, really.
Did you even read the thread? The OP is talking about Magic Mouth defeating a 20th level rogue's ability to find and/or disarm a trap be it magical or otherwise. By RAW the MM spell completely bypasses the rogue's ability to stealth/sneak and find it and/or disarm it. There isn't even a roll involved: it just completely bypasses the rogue. Is it a mistake by the editors? do they think it is a trap and the language didn't make it into the spell?
Dunno.
Yes I have. You know what else a rogue can't disable without UMD? Alarm. Yes, a FIRST level spell. I don't have any problem with this. Rogues do not have magic. Rogues can disable some magical traps, the ones that explode when they are trying to steal things. Other than that, they can either rely on other casters, or ... Use Magic Devices to make up for what they cannot do themselves. Alternately, take a level of wizard and buy some wands, now you don't need UMD checks for most things.
It does not completely bypass their ability to stealth sneak. It has a specific visual or audible trigger. Don't do whatever its trigger is, and you are fine. Invisibility lets you get past a visual trigger. Moving silently (read: stealth) lets you get past an audible trigger. It also only works once. Set it off, leave, let them check it out, then do it again, repeat till they stop putting one back up. If they have one on every window, go set off 10 of them. Hide out and watch which ones they don't put back. Its not game breaking. It just doesn't fit with your view that rogues should be able to do all things sneaky even when magic is involved.
Do you have a problem that knock completely negates a rogues disable device for opening locked doors too?