As the rogue sniper build loses trapfinding does this mean they lose the ability to detect and disarm, detect but not disarm or disarm but not detect? I have a player who took this build and it has not become an issue until now. The player is a rogue/sorcerer so they have ability to detect magic, I was just wondering how the loss of trapfinding affected the game?
Any help greatly appreciated.
The main thing they lose is the ability to detect and disarm magic traps. They also lose bonuses to detect traps and to Disable Device.
Anyone with a decent Perception and a decent Disable Device can deal with traps. This is a change from 3.5.
- Gauss
The main thing they lose is the ability to detect and disarm magic traps. They also lose bonuses to detect traps and to Disable Device.
Anyone with a decent Perception and a decent Disable Device can deal with traps. This is a change from 3.5.
- Gauss
actually losing trapfinding just loses the ability to disarm magical traps, not find them.
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.
Asthyril, we are both half right. A number of spells require trapfinding to detect the magic trap they create. Spells or magic traps which do not state they require trap finding to detect them do not.
Examples: Fire Trap, Glyph of Warding, and Spike Growth all state in the spell description that they require Trapfinding to use Perception to detect the trap. Most, but not all, magic traps created by spells have that clause.
- Gauss
Thank you. This will make tomorrow nights game an interesting one. Running Serpent Skull adventure path and they are investigating the ruins of Ilmurea. I have designed the Hall of Human beauty as a heavily mechanical and magical trap Mecca filled with undead, constructs and at the pinnacle, a Demi-lich (serpentfolk).
Looking forward to it
Magic traps can also be found via detect magic although it requires the person doing the detection to walk in front of the group because there cannot be a constant source of magic in front of the detector.
Example of how it works: Cleric walks in front using detect magic. When he comes upon a magic trap he senses the presence of magic (round 1). At that point he stops and waits for two rounds until he localizes the location of the magic trap or other source of magic.
Example of why the cleric needs to be in front: If the Cleric's buddy is in front the cleric the cleric constantly detects the buddy, because of this he never knows to stop and localize the magic.
Note: the spells Identify and Arcane Sight do not have these problems but they are limited use. Also, there are a number of ways to mask the magic aura of a magic trap so that detect magic does not work.
- Gauss
'thin sheet of lead' :)
asthyril, a thin sheet of lead should absolutely be used on occassion as one of the methods to mask the magic aura. :) However, it may also blind the trap itself as a result so it cannot be used every time.
- Gauss
Booksy, I love it. I will have to consider it next time I GM a group that does not have someone with Trapfinding.
- Gauss
Defraeter:
Detect Magic takes 3 rounds to pin down a magic location. There are any number of ways to defeat it. Multiple auras, constant magic in the area, lead sheeting, false positives (thanks Booksy), a trap having a longer than 60' detection range etc etc.
Magic traps radiate magic, there doesn't have to be wording to enable Detect Magic to work. This is normal functioning. There would have to be wording to deny Detect Magic its normal functioning. Regarding your 'detect and disable' quote, it usually states that Perception must be coupled with trapfinding in the case of magic traps. Not that Perception is the only means.
As another example of detect magic vs a higher level spell: detect magic can even detect invisible creatures. It just doesn't do it very well. Even Paizo staff members have stated this.
- Gauss
I do want to note that the Rogue talent= “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.” Is super great and makes the rogue very useful.
DrDeth, I thought so too but it has been explained to me that it is not that useful as long as the rogue does a movement check every 30 feet. All traps within sight range are checked for (with minor penalties due to range).
When a group is moving at single move speed the rogue can check every round.
- Gauss
But with the talent the rogue still kinds traps even if the player forgets oR if in combat.
DrDeth, agreed (I assume kinds = finds)
- Gauss
As another example of detect magic vs a higher level spell: detect magic can even detect invisible creatures. It just doesn't do it very well. Even Paizo staff members have stated this.- Gauss
gauss could you link where that is please?
i have always argued that the whole reason detect invisibility exists is because the magic that hides you also hides the magic of the spell, and you need a higher level spell specifically designed to detect it.
but that was based on me believing that detect magic shouldn't be able to find an invisible opponent, and the existence of detect invisibility, especially since it is a higher level spell, is what i used to prove my point.
is there a thread somewhere with different viewpoints on this? i would like to read it.
Here is one. There may be more but I am fried atm. Perhaps I will search later.
James Jacobs on Detect Magic vs Invisibility
James Jacobs on Detect Magic vs Invisible Arcane Mark
- Gauss
And tired or not, I decided to keep looking. Here is SKRs post on the topic
Arcane sight, like detect invisibility, lets you detect the location of an invisible creature's aura, but doesn't let you attack them as if they were visible. Basically, these spells let you pinpoint the invisible creature's square (thus, you know which square to attack, but still have the 50% miss chance).
Note: He is talking about Arcane Sight but since the main difference between Arcane Sight and Detect Magic is how long it takes to see auras. The fact it can see the invisible creature's aura of illusion is still relevant.
How many GMs include magic aura in their traps?
If so, do you increase the perception DC?
Chief Cook and Bottlewasher, I generally do not include much in the way of 'anti-detection techniques' for my traps. In part that is because when I do I want it to really surprise the players. If they expect it all the time it loses it's surprise value.
As for increasing the detection DC, no I wouldn't do that for Magic Aura since I do not feel that it really has anything to do with a rogue's trapfinding abilities.
- Gauss
Defraeter: Nowhere it is written that dead people cannot act. There is many things that are not written.
What is written:
Detect Magic detects anything that radiates magic.
There are two types of magic traps:
Magic Device trap (magic item, requires craft wondrous item, thus radiates magic as a magic item)
Spell Traps (a spell that is in place and thus radiates magic as a spell does).
Your statement about a spell or spell effect is effective when the trap is triggered is only partially correct.
First, a Magic Device trap is a magic ITEM. It radiates magic as an item. Second, a Magic Device trap have either Alarm, Arcane Eye, Clairvoyance, or True Seeing in order to detect its victims. These effects all radiate magic in their own right. Finally, Spell traps that have not yet been triggered are still spells. Example: Explosive Runes, Fire Trap, Glyph of Warding all radiate magic before being triggered because they are spells.
Magic Devices also use Arcane Eye, Clairvoyance, or True Seeing in order to detect things. All three of these effects are magic effects and can be detected via Detect Magic.
I do not understand your line regarding 'comfort their vision'.
People have been using detect magic to detect spell traps for a very long time. Since second edition at least.
BTW, James Jacobs has stated that you can use detect magic to locate the magic aura of a trap. However, he also stated that finding the aura does not tell you anything about the trap (beyond the type of aura) or how to disarm it. Which I agree with. This is not an 'I WIN' button against magic traps. It is a tool that allows you to notice a magic aura and then investigate it normally.
- Gauss
Here is one. There may be more but I am fried atm. Perhaps I will search later.
James Jacobs on Detect Magic vs Invisibility
James Jacobs on Detect Magic vs Invisible Arcane Mark
- Gauss
And tired or not, I decided to keep looking. Here is SKRs post on the topic
Arcane sight, like detect invisibility, lets you detect the location of an invisible creature's aura, but doesn't let you attack them as if they were visible. Basically, these spells let you pinpoint the invisible creature's square (thus, you know which square to attack, but still have the 50% miss chance).Note: He is talking about Arcane Sight but since the main difference between Arcane Sight and Detect Magic is how long it takes to see auras. The fact it can see the invisible creature's aura of illusion is still relevant.
thanks gauss, that actually makes sense. i had made that ruling about the existence of see invisibility back in 2nd ed, but with current rules i like that, it seems elegant solution too. plus i will have to remember that in certain first steps scenarios i play in the future:)