RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Since it worked when Bob did it for T10/LoreMaster, I went and asked James Jacobs about Perception and Trap Spotter:
The trap spotter talent lets a rogue make a perception check to notice ALL traps he comes wihtin range of. Normally, you have to tell the GM that you're looking for traps.Boom. There you go.You sure know how to end a derailed thread. Nice to hear an answer regarding that. I always felt that the core rulebook was a little ambiguous as to how perception worked with traps. Thanks.
I felt it was a bit ambiguous as well. The clarification was as helpful to me as to anyone.
|
|
I regularly see half-elf druids, rogues, summoners, etc. that have +10~12 at 1st level. I've got a regular synthesist summoner currently who's got a +18 at like 6th level. Skill focus (perception) is not that uncommon at least in the 2 markets I've played in. There's traits to get perception as a class skill, along with a bonus to perception. Masterwork tools for another +2.
I find it hard to a imagine a masterwork tool that helps with passive perception checks for traps, much less one that works for all perception checks.
Not saying a mwk tool would be something that would be all the time perception ability. I'd have to be rather impressed with what idea that the player had for an actual tool to let that fly. But a situational bonus on the skill, you bet.
The sythesist I mentioned never used a tool for a bonus. The +10~12 for 1st level characters never did either. It's really easy to choose the right starting feats, traits, race, ability to get to that range for most any single skill at character creation.
|
It's no secret that perception is the "granddaddy" of skills. For most it is the single most important skill.Fer ye land-lubbers, aye, this tis' the case. But on the open sea, through Besmara's good moods n' bad, a lads skill with the sails be all ye depend on!
But spotting the wake of the sea serpent as it heads for your ship lets you know when to start praying sooner
|
|
A purpose built percepto-bot is going to have a +18 Perception (+20 vs. Traps) at 1st level. Anything less than +14 is just a character with a Perception bonus. Of course, a new PC can go to +24 (+26) with a Synthesist, but I'm betting nobody is building a 1st level character for those numbers.
Nowhere near as problematic for balance as the 1st level Half-Orc Barbarians who can get their STR to 28 under the right circumstances. Especially if one were to consider which type would make for the tougher encounter -- the percepto-bot who knows the party is coming or the two Half-Orc Barbarians who are +10 to hit, (weapon die/dice)+13 damage per hit (under the right tactical circumstances)?
I regularly see half-elf druids, rogues, summoners, etc. that have +10~12 at 1st level. I've got a regular synthesist summoner currently who's got a +18 at like 6th level. Skill focus (perception) is not that uncommon at least in the 2 markets I've played in. There's traits to get perception as a class skill, along with a bonus to perception. Masterwork tools for another +2.
I find it hard to a imagine a masterwork tool that helps with passive perception checks for traps, much less one that works for all perception checks.
Not saying a mwk tool would be something that would be all the time perception ability. I'd have to be rather impressed with what idea that the player had for an actual tool to let that fly. But a situational bonus on the skill, you bet.
The sythesist I mentioned never used a tool for a bonus. The +10~12 for 1st level characters never did either. It's really easy to choose the right starting feats, traits, race, ability to get to that range for most any single skill at character creation.
Right. SO now you have a character specifically designed to detect these things. Why not let him do it with some consistency? Players want to be good at their shtick, and the bonus doesn't matter if the random die roll screws them.
|
|
Right. SO now you have a character specifically designed to detect these things. Why not let him do it with some consistency? Players want to be good at their shtick, and the bonus doesn't matter if the random die roll screws them.I regularly see half-elf druids, rogues, summoners, etc. that have +10~12 at 1st level. I've got a regular synthesist summoner currently who's got a +18 at like 6th level. Skill focus (perception) is not that uncommon at least in the 2 markets I've played in. There's traits to get perception as a class skill, along with a bonus to perception. Masterwork tools for another +2.
I find it hard to a imagine a masterwork tool that helps with passive perception checks for traps, much less one that works for all perception checks.
Not saying a mwk tool would be something that would be all the time perception ability. I'd have to be rather impressed with what idea that the player had for an actual tool to let that fly. But a situational bonus on the skill, you bet.
The sythesist I mentioned never used a tool for a bonus. The +10~12 for 1st level characters never did either. It's really easy to choose the right starting feats, traits, race, ability to get to that range for most any single skill at character creation.
I was saying that a mwk tool to aid perception would be situational. It would depend on what the tool was. Say a magnifying glass would help find minute visible evidence but wouldn't help listen for an oncoming threat or an ear horn would help listening for noise, but wouldn't help find a trip wire, etc. If you're coming up with a generic masterwork tool, you need to be able to describe what it is, so that the GM can interpret when the circumstance bonus can apply. It's especially necessary (IMO) for a skill like perception that is a conglomeration of the 3 old 3.5 skills and covers the 5 senses.
I have no problem with a character searching for traps taking 10 to use their phenomenal perception, if that's the character they built. A character with trapspotter could walk along taking 10 and probably find every mundane trap he passes within 10 feet of in PFS from what I've seen in most scenarios.
|
|
A character with trapspotter could walk along taking 10 and probably find every mundane trap he passes within 10 feet of in PFS from what I've seen in most scenarios.
Yep. And that's their thing. They spent a talent on that ability instead of on something for combat. I will let them take 10, walk past and see every trap, and congratulate that player on being awesome.
As far as a passive perception masterwork tool....I would allow it as long as it was not something they had to take out and hold. Say...a set of goggles that took up the eye slot for equipment.
|
|
SO now you have a character specifically designed to detect these things. Why not let him do it with some consistency? Players want to be good at their shtick, and the bonus doesn't matter if the random die roll screws them.
Skill focus perception does, and should, give you a 15% increase in detecting the traps.
Adding it to the take 10 rules and a few other goodies gives you a 99% increase in detecting traps.
|
|
A character with trapspotter could walk along taking 10 and probably find every mundane trap he passes within 10 feet of in PFS from what I've seen in most scenarios.Yep. And that's their thing. They spent a talent on that ability instead of on something for combat. I will let them take 10, walk past and see every trap, and congratulate that player on being awesome.
As far as a passive perception masterwork tool....I would allow it as long as it was not something they had to take out and hold. Say...a set of goggles that took up the eye slot for equipment.
My problem with the MW tools is not the concept of having one that works - holding or otherwise. It's the fact that players are not being told they have to mention they are using it. A Judge will never know if there is being a circumstance bonus being added in. Many players will buy, and add it to thier skill bonus, a MW tool.
And that, I think is more a communications problem, than a rule problem IMO. Any time a player adds a circumstance bonus to a roll, it should probably be mentioned to the GM, and I'd put the onus to do so on the player. The character is going to know his equipment a lot better than the table GM will, and how he's coming up with a bonus.
It won't fit everyone's playstyle, but it's usually how I treat them. Someone could add in mwk tools to a roll, and I'd never know...unless they told me, which IMO is why the onus should the player to tell the GM upfront about the tool.
I know you were quite open about the hearing horn and clear ear you used, and that is what I more or less expect/assume players will do for a table GM.
I hate to rain on the MW Perception Tool parade, but srsly? Not at Golarion's level of technology.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I hate to rain on the MW Perception Tool parade, but srsly? Not at Golarion's level of technology.
Periscopes, magnifying glasses and spyglasses exist; not to mention firearms and friggin' portable alchemist's labs. They're all nonmagical and PFS legal.
I'm afraid your argument doesn't really hold water.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I hate to rain on the MW Perception Tool parade, but srsly? Not at Golarion's level of technology.Periscopes, magnifying glasses and spyglasses exist; not to mention firearms and friggin' portable alchemist's labs. They're all nonmagical and PFS legal.
I'm afraid your argument doesn't really hold water.
All good for certain things. Not so great for noticing traps as you walk down the hall.
Nor as a generic bonus to all Perception.
I was only replying to the suggestion that Golarion possessed insufficient technology for a masterwork perception tool. I wasn't saying such a tool would necessarily be used by a Trap Spotter or that it would apply to every perception check. Just saying that the idea that the tech level is too low for producing a tool to aid with perception checks at all is erroneous.
|
My problem with the MW tools is not the concept of having one that works - holding or otherwise. It's the fact that players are not being told they have to mention they are using it. A Judge will never know if there is being a circumstance bonus being added in. Many players will buy, and add it to thier skill bonus, a MW tool.
Exactly right. I have seen characters who apparently walk around with their climbing kit on all the time.
IMO, a MW tool is exactly what it appears to be, a mundane item that require you to actively equip it. That usually means they are not effective in combat, nor are they always active. Can a player describe their tool as something special that sounds like it should be always available? Sure, but I believe that goes against the spirit of the MW tool rules, so I typically don't allow it. Since the rules are unclear on the subject, you are free to rule otherwise at your table.
One thing that came up since you are talking about masterwork tools...
I had a player with a Tome of Knowledge (nature) described as a MW tool that let them "look up" relevant information on natural topics, giving them a +2 to Knowledge (Nature) checks. I allowed it and later on someone asked me about doing the same thing for any other skill. In hind sight I should have made him make the book more specific. BUT Why not let someone open up their lock picking manual when trying to pick a lock outside of combat? Would other GMs allow such tools?
|
|
There's actually Pathfinder Chronicles in the ISWG that are the equivalent of mwk tools for knowledges. You have to buy one for each knowledge skill that you want to use it for.
If there's already a mwk tool specified out there, such as mwk thieves' tools/healer's kit/chronicles, I think that's what should be used for the mwk tool. The generic mwk tools are more for the skills that do not have specific tools out there IMO.
|
|
One thing that came up since you are talking about masterwork tools...
I had a player with a Tome of Knowledge (nature) described as a MW tool that let them "look up" relevant information on natural topics, giving them a +2 to Knowledge (Nature) checks. I allowed it and later on someone asked me about doing the same thing for any other skill. In hind sight I should have made him make the book more specific. BUT Why not let someone open up their lock picking manual when trying to pick a lock outside of combat? Would other GMs allow such tools?
the inner sea world guide has these. They're collections of pathfinder adventure pamphlets and grant a +2 circumstance bonus on relevant knowledge checks.
I'm having a lot of trouble imagining a tool that helps you dance better.
Ditto acrobatics.
Ditto bluff, sense motive, and so on and so forth.
I'm having a lot of trouble imagining a tool that helps you dance better.
Ditto acrobatics.
Ditto bluff, sense motive, and so on and so forth.
Depends on the kind of dancing, though most things I can think of involve shoes, like tap shoes for tap dancing or those special steel-toed shoes for ballerinas.
Acrobatics would maybe be something to help with your balance.
Bluff would also be situational, like a fake badge or papers to help get past a guard, etc.
But for others, yeah, I got nothin'.
And that is a big problem with the generic MW tool. For many skills, there can not be a single generic tool, as there are too many specific situations that could call for a totally different tool than another situation. I personally think that the generic MW tool should not exist and that you should have to buy a different tool for every situation for every skill. The generic MW tool should not be the equivalent of the Swiss Army knife.
Enevhar:
The perfect tool for bluff, in the way of badges, documents, etc. is Illusory Script: "this document is exactly what the person who handed it to you says it is."
|
while I might also have problems with finding "the perfict tool for the job", I would like to point out that the MW tool write-up is generic. And with the way it is currently being handled, a player will never say what his MW tool is. Most will not even mention that they have bought one.
Judge: "Give me a bluff roll for that!".
player A: "38".
Why would you pass on a chance to be creative, and describe your "you can trust me" bowtie? Why not treat it like a set of MW Thieves' Tools, pay 100gp and assume a variety of 'tools', one of which is perfect for the job?
There are better ways than deliberately withholding information to get a perceived advantage.
|
|
I described the whole issue in a different thread somewhere else here.
The problem (in my view) started when MW tool changed from a special quality you paid 50 gp in addition (3rd edition) to an item in itself.
So in 3rd edition you could buy a rope, spend 50 gp extra and it would be a MW rope giving you a +2 bonus on checks related to the rope. Most likely climbing (using the rope and not having it in your backpack) but maybe as well it might increase the Escape Artist check for someone bound by the rope.
In PFS a Masterwork tool (any skill) for 50 gp and 1 lb weight is RAW and has been confirmed by the developers that they exist for any skill.
There have been discussions about active / passive skill checks. About a MW tool (climbing) that RAW is cheaper and lighter and therefore frowned upon.
But all this is akin to the T10 discussion and limitations by GMs about skills or situations they dislike it.
As a GM I can't rule out such a tool in PFS. A player is entitled to use the rules as they are in the book.
And I know Nosig this time feels rather similar to me that there should be restrictions.
Thod
PS: An Acrobatics tool exist in the books. It is a balancing pole. It gives a +2 on balancing on narrow ledges or walking on a rope. But an untyped, nondescriptive MW tool (acrobatics) for 50 GP and 1 lb is rules legal as well.