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.
SO how DOES a rogue disable a trap that has a DC to disable it but all logic should trigger if he ever gets close enough to actually disarm it?!
some magic traps can possibly be bypassed but others may not, a fireball trap for instance.
There is no support in raw to say a rogue can disarm a trap from range so i assume he can't. but then how is it disarmed?
Is it.
1) a rogue can disarm from range?
2) an Arcane Trickster only can disarm them?
3) the rogue with his ubber skills in magic traps can somehow (fluff not important how) role a disable device check if he passes somehow trick the trap into not "seeing him"? but in this case a failed role would trigger it and usually it has to be failed by 5 or more to do that.
4) other
some other ways i could see a stealth check VS the disable DC to "trick" the trap to get in range and then a normal DC to disarm it.
im thinking it should be #2 as that is the only case supported by raw.
also relating with range:
Trap Spotter (Ex): Whenever a rogue with this talent comes within 10 feet of a trap, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice the trap. This check should be made in secret by the GM.
i know it doesn't state it but it would make sense and within the powerlevel to allow in the case of ranged traps to allow a check within 10' of the traps range...
ok i found something that inclines how a rogue can disable a ranged trap supported by raw.
PRD-
A rogue who beats a trap's DC by 10 or more can study the trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it without disarming it. A rogue can rig a trap so her allies can bypass it as well.
this supports my above point #3
the rogue would role at a safe distance to try to "figure out how it works, and bypass it without disarming it. which would then allow him to safely navigate to the trap to attempt a new disable device check to actually disable it.
i like this way cause it still gives arcane trickster the ability to disarm a ranged trap if a check is failed to safely bypass it.
Few things. One, please note that ranged legerdemain that the arcane trickster gets, is limited to 30 feet. Still can't get that symbol trap. Ranged legerdemain has the advantage that say, if you are disabling a fireball trap, from 30 feet away, and it blows up, you're not in the area of effect, making it even less of a hazard.
The problem with what you found, is that it is for bypassing the trap while still leaving it active. The regular disable device check, is to bypass the trap, and render it inactive. I do believe avoiding the effects of a symbol trap are included in your disable device check.
Core, 94, Disable Device, "If the check succeeds, you disable the device. If it fails by 4 or less, you have failed but can try again. If you fail by 5 or more, something goes wrong. If the device is a trap,"
As long as you haven't failed by more than 5, it won't go off. Also note, most magical traps fall in the "Extreme" range, and take 2d4 rounds to disable. This is plenty of time for the rogue to move over to the symbol, before disabling it.
"One, please note that ranged legerdemain that the arcane trickster gets, is limited to 30 feet."
noted, was not aware of that
i did not mention a symbol trap, what i mention is ANY trap with range that can not be bypassed using logic. A symbol trap can be, you can close your eyes walk up and through paint on it...
"A very strong case can be made that if it's a trap, then it is meant to be able to be disarmed by Rogues."
i agree but some may not. It's seems the whole point of a trap with range is purposely made just to prevent you from getting close.
while i can except that "if it has a DC then the rogue can throw on his cloak of lead fooling the alarm spell and disable the magic trap" i can see others point of view that ,no he cannot as if he gets within the proximity it will set off. being able to disable a trap and finding a way to get to it could be considered 2 separate challenges...
|
PRD-
A rogue who beats a trap's DC by 10 or more can study the trap, figure out how it works, and bypass it without disarming it. A rogue can rig a trap so her allies can bypass it as well.this supports my above point #3
the rogue would role at a safe distance to try to "figure out how it works, and bypass it without disarming it. which would then allow him to safely navigate to the trap to attempt a new disable device check to actually disable it.
i like this way cause it still gives arcane trickster the ability to disarm a ranged trap if a check is failed to safely bypass it.
Put a bag on his head; since he can no longer see the trap, the trap can no longer see him, so he can walk down the hallway.
Well, it works for Bugblatter Beasts...
Trap Spotter (Ex): Whenever a rogue with this talent comes within 10 feet of a trap, she receives an immediate Perception skill check to notice the trap. This check should be made in secret by the GM.
i know it doesn't state it but it would make sense and within the powerlevel to allow in the case of ranged traps to allow a check within 10' of the traps range...
I agree with this interpretation of Trap Spotter. As for exactly HOW a rogue is supposed to foil an alarm spell I'm not sure, but I'm inclined to believe that the point is moot. Rogues don't need to be weakened further. The rules say a rogue can disable a magic trap (even a ranged one) if he perceives it before it goes off. How is apparently left to the GM to describe.
|
Wouldn't it make more sense to think of the trap itself and the triggering mechanism for trap as separate pieces. So you of course could disable a crossbow turret 100' down the hallway if the floor switch that sets it off is within reach. You don't need to actually go down the hall and deal with the crossbow part, just the trigger and your fine.
For magic traps you'd have to think how you'd bypass the magic part of them.
Wouldn't it make more sense to think of the trap itself and the triggering mechanism for trap as separate pieces. So you of course could disable a crossbow turret 100' down the hallway if the floor switch that sets it off is within reach. You don't need to actually go down the hall and deal with the crossbow part, just the trigger and your fine.
For magic traps you'd have to think how you'd bypass the magic part of them.
And thats just it. it's magic traps that im having the problem with. If a magic trap has a trigger of say "proximity" is it as simple as "yes the rogue can stroll right up and disarm it with a Disable device check cause that's what rogues do". even though by logic the trap would go off before he could get to the trap itself. Im not picking on rogues im just trying to find Raw support one way or the other. I allow rogues to make a disable device check and stroll right up unless the trap specifically says otherwise even if it is proximity, line of sight, or something else as the trigger. but is this right? this also has some odd side effects.
for instance, say it is a fireball trap and the rogue fails. unless he fails by 5 or more the trap doesn't go off. but if he doesn't fail by 5 or more but still fails the proximity still doesn't sense him? so in essence if the rogue can't fail by 5 or more because his disable device check is so high that means he's completely immune to ranged traps as long as he detects them first? just because i do it this way doesn't mean im right. i just do it that way because i dont have much evidence supporting one way or the other.
|
|
Well apparently the rules specifically let the thief (or whatever) try and find it (and I would say disarm it) before it goes off so that's a point. I'm not saying the thief/etc gets a free perception check because of this mind you, just that if they are looking then they get one.
Magic: 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.
* Magic traps permit a saving throw in order to avoid the effect (DC 10 + spell level × 1.5).
* Magic traps may be disarmed by a character with the trapfinding class feature with a successful Disable Device skill check (DC 25 + spell level). Other characters have no chance to disarm a magic trap with a Disable Device check.Magic traps are further divided into spell traps and magic device traps. Magic device traps initiate spell effects when activated, just as wands, rods, rings, and other magic items do. Creating a magic device trap requires the Craft Wondrous Item feat.
Spell traps are simply spells that themselves function as traps.
Of course that's just regular rules stuff since this is a game and not a real-life simulator. The people get a chance to avoid the trap because otherwise that'd be lame for them since everyone is supposed to be having a good time playing together. Obviously this is the internet and that's not anywhere close to good enough for everyone so let's try something else.
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.
Some magic device traps have special proximity triggers that activate only when certain kinds of creatures approach. For example, a detect good spell can serve as a proximity trigger on an evil altar, springing the attached trap only when someone of good alignment gets close enough to it.
Okay so there we've got something to use though I'm sure the wording isn't specific enough for everyone to agree with my take on it; that the area of the alarm spell would reasonably seem to be limited to the area that the spell it's going to trigger's area of effect. If that were the case the thief/etc should be close enough to disable said trap for some spells or at least notice the area is trapped and let the rest of the party come up with solutions. Unfortunately Alarm is a transmutation spell rather then a divination so a lot of those spells won't be as useful.
Honestly this seems like a good question for Skip Williams over at Kobold Quarterly in their Ask a Kobold section.
And thats just it. it's magic traps that im having the problem with. If a magic trap has a trigger of say "proximity" is it as simple as "yes the rogue can stroll right up and disarm it with a Disable device check cause that's what rogues do". even though by logic the trap would go off before he could get to the trap itself. Im not picking on rogues im just trying to find Raw support one way or the other. I allow rogues to make a disable device check and stroll right up unless the trap specifically says otherwise even if it is proximity, line of sight, or something else as the trigger. but is this right? this also has some odd side effects.
for instance, say it is a fireball trap and the rogue fails. unless he fails by 5 or more the trap doesn't go off. but if he doesn't fail by 5 or more but still fails the proximity still doesn't sense him? so in essence if the rogue can't fail by 5 or more because his disable device check is so high that means he's completely immune to ranged traps as long as he detects them first? just because i do it this way doesn't mean im right. i just do it that way because i dont have much evidence supporting one way or the other.
There is the problem right there. You understand how the trigger plate for the crossbow works and thus can understand how the rogue gets past it. In this example the trigger plate is the "senses" for the crossbow trap. A magic trap also has to "sense" the target to know to go off. In the real world this could be the magic equivalent of say a motion sensor, or a heat sensor, or a vibration sensor. A rogue knows how to foil the senses of the magic trap by moving slow, hiding body heat, or walking softly. It is up to the DM to fluff it... or just accept the rule and allow the thief to try and disarm the trap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is the problem right there. You understand how the trigger plate for the crossbow works and thus can understand how the rogue gets past it. In this example the trigger plate is the "senses" for the crossbow trap. A magic trap also has to "sense" the target to know to go off. In the real world this could be the magic equivalent of say a motion sensor, or a heat sensor, or a vibration sensor. A rogue knows how to foil the senses of the magic trap by moving slow, hiding body heat, or walking softly. It is up to the DM to fluff it... or just accept the rule and allow the thief to try and disarm the trap.And thats just it. it's magic traps that im having the problem with. If a magic trap has a trigger of say "proximity" is it as simple as "yes the rogue can stroll right up and disarm it with a Disable device check cause that's what rogues do". even though by logic the trap would go off before he could get to the trap itself. Im not picking on rogues im just trying to find Raw support one way or the other. I allow rogues to make a disable device check and stroll right up unless the trap specifically says otherwise even if it is proximity, line of sight, or something else as the trigger. but is this right? this also has some odd side effects.
for instance, say it is a fireball trap and the rogue fails. unless he fails by 5 or more the trap doesn't go off. but if he doesn't fail by 5 or more but still fails the proximity still doesn't sense him? so in essence if the rogue can't fail by 5 or more because his disable device check is so high that means he's completely immune to ranged traps as long as he detects them first? just because i do it this way doesn't mean im right. i just do it that way because i dont have much evidence supporting one way or the other.
yeah i agree, im not worried about the fluff. As a veteran GM i can embellish quite a story that my players can except. It just the very mechanics of it that im ify on. And i agree that this is the ONE thing that should not be taken away from rogues as its the only real ability that other classes can't duplicate easily, if at all, and the one thing at higher levels rogues are still useful-disarming magic traps.
i've had the party rogue encounter one magic trap so far and this is how i explained.
PC searches for traps and detects magic trap (cant remember what the magic trap was). me- "you search the area for traps but dont find any mechanical traps, just as you go to proceed you detect a slight tingling feeling. Remembering back to your training with master Yoshu you recognize it as a magic trap. You close your eyes and focus in on the energy and can feel the the magics pulse, recognizing its signature as (insert magic trap). You pull out your masterwork tools and secure a lead lined jar to a pole with some tacky paste. You carefully place the jar over the magic trap and move in. Pulling out the countering alchemical ingredients you begin to disarm the trap. Suddenly you hear a dull thump sound underneath the jar and can tell the magic has been released safely..."
Well, since the average person picking up Disable Device can't disarm a Magical Trap at all, we can assume that the Rogue is doing something "special" to interact with a magical trap.
In a world of magic, defenses and interactions with magical things should be acceptable.
Here's a few ideas of fluff:
- Magical traps with areas have to define that area in some fashion. Perhaps as well hidden runes or substance that fill or run along the proximity line. This is how a Rogue could interact with the trap without needing to be at the point where the effect is based out of.
- Deactivating a magical trap can be as simple as careful ruining the inscriptions or markings.. in such a manner that it's done "quickly enough" to not set off the trap, but ruin it's ability to manifest.
Think of smudging an arcane rune so that it means something different (akin to wiping the tail end off an R to make a P), making the trigger nonsensical and thus disarmed.
The rogue doesn't know the exact meaning of what he changed (no linguistics or particular knowledge), he just knows that ruins the spell trap.
- The Rogue could do something similar to Use Magic Device in a manner of fooling the trap by changing how he is "felt" by the trap. So just like he can think "I'm a Paladin. I'm honourable. I like bunnies and hate thieves and I'm going to use this thing to kill a Balor" while he picks up the Holy weapon... he can think "I'm just a rat, I'm nothing to be concerned about, no need to set off over every little vermin that might cross this trap's path" and get through the trap's field to a point he can disarm it.
These all fit for a non-magical way to interact with a magical thing. He just knows how they work, and how to fool them. Special knowledge, beyond just disarming something mechanical.
|
As Kaisoku said, it's perfectly fine to assume that you don't have to remove/disarm the actual source or point of origin (for example, a statue that "breathes out" a lightning bolt) of a magic trap. I've run things so that if a rogue is careful and makes the required perception check, I'll think of a reason how he could disarm it. Using that lightning-breathing statue as an example, it might be that the rogue has "fooled" the Alarm spell, or maybe there's a triggering rune for the Alarm 60 ft. down the hall (counting from the point of origin) or so? Or, as Kaisoku pointed out, the whole area of effect might be encircled with runes for the rogue to erase/sabotage/smudge. Or maybe he's spotted some ancient runes carved by the trap's creator so that his allies can whisper the word(s) aloud to bypass/dispel it?
Good stuff there.
Another thought.. someone that makes a trap at a critical point (such as a door or hallway), will probably have some method of bypassing the trap without having to walk all the way up to it and getting hit with the trap's effect.
Sure, it can be a secret word... but likely it's something like "cover a particular rune in a secret spot", or "press a specific hidden/invisible button", etc.
Just like a trapped toilet doesn't make sense, a trap that has no method of being bypassed is all kinds of silly in most situations that would expect *some* kind of friendly entry at some point.