A Merc's Life [OOC 02]
Leif
Adventurer
Sounds peachy to me, think Mowgli will go for it?Naw... we just won't face any traps
Coolnesseseses!
Maidhc O Casain
Na Bith Mo Riocht Tá!
I've got my copy but have only been able to glance through it. It's way cool, but as far as I can tell it's not primarily about adding rules or clarifying those already in existence. There's some good stuff about making sessions run more smoothly, how to handle different player styles and keep the game fun. And - the 'meaty' part - lots of convenient ways to make session and game prep easier. Tables for generating all those little things that add flavor to the game but are generally too much trouble to prepare in advance unless they're gonna be a featured aspect. But as I said, I've only had a chance to leaf through it quickly.
Naw... we just won't face any traps
I'm afraid the cat's already out of the bag on this one - it's plain as day those statues are trapped, and I'm nowhere near mean enough to retroactively effect a house rule that limits the party.
Maidhc O Casain
Na Bith Mo Riocht Tá!
So, I looked at the discussion - some excellent points by everyone, and thanks for you input! - and did some more reading and thinking.
I found some other info that might shine some light on the writers' intentions here:
Detect Snares and Pits is a first level Druid/Ranger spell that detects 'simple' traps, and specifies that it's useless for detecting anything other than a basic snare, deadfall, potentially collapsing wall etc. It will detect magical traps, but only of the types mentioned above (the Snare spell was mentioned specifically).
So I'm thinking that if a first level spell intended to detect traps and only available to two classes allows detection only of a limited sort of mundane or magical traps, a zero level spell that is much more general and available to every casting class probably isn't supposed to detect whatever magical traps are in the area.
So, from this point forward the ruling is this:
This seems to me to strike the best balance between 'autodetect' and 'worthless for detecting,' and takes into account the fact that Perception checks for detecting magical traps are specified in the rules as written, while detecting them with Detect Magic is not.
I found some other info that might shine some light on the writers' intentions here:
Detect Snares and Pits is a first level Druid/Ranger spell that detects 'simple' traps, and specifies that it's useless for detecting anything other than a basic snare, deadfall, potentially collapsing wall etc. It will detect magical traps, but only of the types mentioned above (the Snare spell was mentioned specifically).
So I'm thinking that if a first level spell intended to detect traps and only available to two classes allows detection only of a limited sort of mundane or magical traps, a zero level spell that is much more general and available to every casting class probably isn't supposed to detect whatever magical traps are in the area.
So, from this point forward the ruling is this:
- Rather than forcing the caster to specify each time he faces a different direction with his 'cone,' Detect Magic will be considered a '360' Sense. This is the only part of my ruling that directly goes against the RAW, but it cuts down on the most cumbersome aspect of the spell (especially in PbP) and on the opportunities for me to screw with you guys if I'm having a bad day ("You didn't specifically state you were facing North by Northwest, so the magic never showed up!")
- Detect Magic will not automatically detect magical traps - trap detecting is a 'specialty skill' of the Rogue class and one of their primary contributions to the party, so we're gonna let them shine in this area.
- Using Detect Magic will grant a +2 'favorable conditions' bonus to the caster's Perception check to detect magical traps.
This seems to me to strike the best balance between 'autodetect' and 'worthless for detecting,' and takes into account the fact that Perception checks for detecting magical traps are specified in the rules as written, while detecting them with Detect Magic is not.
Last edited:
Maidhc O Casain
Na Bith Mo Riocht Tá!
Yep - if he makes his Perception roll. The Perception DC on these traps is 26. Since it was his 'Passive Detection' shtick - something Tsadok would have known without you specifying an action - I resolved it in the background.
Since his 'Take 10' Perception wasn't enough to spot them I rolled for him back on the 23rd (Perception (Trap Finding) (1d20+10=19)). That didn't do the trick either. If it had, I'd have let you know that the traps on the statues set off Tsadok's Spider Senses (and the location of the traps as well)!
If you'd posted that Tsadok was actively searching for traps before Keeland found them I'd have rolled another check for him, and let you know either that he found some (and the locations of the ones he found) or that he didn't.
Technically I should've made the roll for Keeland as well since this is one of those cases where knowing the result of the roll could influence actions. But in this case the cat was pretty well out of the bag with the whole 'Detect Magic discussion' anyway.
Since his 'Take 10' Perception wasn't enough to spot them I rolled for him back on the 23rd (Perception (Trap Finding) (1d20+10=19)). That didn't do the trick either. If it had, I'd have let you know that the traps on the statues set off Tsadok's Spider Senses (and the location of the traps as well)!
If you'd posted that Tsadok was actively searching for traps before Keeland found them I'd have rolled another check for him, and let you know either that he found some (and the locations of the ones he found) or that he didn't.
Technically I should've made the roll for Keeland as well since this is one of those cases where knowing the result of the roll could influence actions. But in this case the cat was pretty well out of the bag with the whole 'Detect Magic discussion' anyway.
Last edited:
Maidhc O Casain
Na Bith Mo Riocht Tá!
Should have - that was my mistake, but I only realized it as I went through it on my last post.
We'll make it all tidy and fair: Keeland finds the trap on the Baboon Headed statue, and Tsadok's finely tuned senses alert him to traps on the two Pharoahs. Neither of you detects a trap on the figure shrouded in cloth - but it makes a certain amount of sense that one is there . . .
Trap Spotting (1d20+10=29, 1d20+10=30), Trap Spotting (Final Statue) (1d20+10=21)
We'll make it all tidy and fair
: Keeland finds the trap on the Baboon Headed statue, and Tsadok's finely tuned senses alert him to traps on the two Pharoahs. Neither of you detects a trap on the figure shrouded in cloth - but it makes a certain amount of sense that one is there . . .Trap Spotting (1d20+10=29, 1d20+10=30), Trap Spotting (Final Statue) (1d20+10=21)
mleibrock
First Post
beating a dead horse
OK, I'm really trying hard hear to let this go but I still want to be sure I understand for next time.
You said if I'd have specifically stated I was searching for traps, I would have a second roll opportunity. If Tsadok's trap sense alerted him to something abnormal, he would of course, search more intently. So does this mean he'd have another opportunity at the one the missed? As a sidenote if we logically suppose the last statue is trapped, does that give any kind of DC bonus?
Part of the issue here is my late posting (so sorry about that).
OK, I'm really trying hard hear to let this go but I still want to be sure I understand for next time.
You said if I'd have specifically stated I was searching for traps, I would have a second roll opportunity. If Tsadok's trap sense alerted him to something abnormal, he would of course, search more intently. So does this mean he'd have another opportunity at the one the missed? As a sidenote if we logically suppose the last statue is trapped, does that give any kind of DC bonus?
Part of the issue here is my late posting (so sorry about that).
