Scout and Disable Device

[sfedi]

The Characteristics section of the class says:
"...she can find and disable traps as well as any rogue."

Yet, she doesn't have Disable Device as a class skill.

So, what's up?

 

[Shellman]

That was my exact thought on the class. So what good does it do to find the traps if you can't do anything about them?

Other people have told me that the designers did this purposely, but I think it is a major flaw.

 

[Thanee]

It's purpose... disabling traps is the rogue's schtick.

Scouts can find them, that is what they have the ability (and Search class skill) for, but they are more wilderness-oriented and do not share the rogue's mastery about trap-mechanisms.

A good design decision and no flaw at all.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I agree. But if you're looking for a good compromise, give the scout a bonus on disabling wilderness traps (snares, leaf-covered pits, etc.).

 

[FireLance]

That was my exact thought on the class. So what good does it do to find the traps if you can't do anything about them?

Other people have told me that the designers did this purposely, but I think it is a major flaw.

The advantage is that you know the trap is there. Even if you can't disable it, you can avoid it by other means. Think of it in terms of a more cinematic style of play (some people do enjoy it even if others do not) - does the action hero stop, pull out his tools and fiddle with some mechanism until the trap is disarmed? No, he dodges the swinging axe blade (+4 dodge bonus to AC), ducks under the blast of flame (evasion), leaps over the pit trap (Jump skill), and so on. A scout's style of defeating traps is different from a rogue's, but it can be just as much fun.

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

A scout's style of defeating traps is different from a rogue's, but it can be just as much fun.

While I agree with what you are trying to say I disagree with your example.... In your example even the fight and cleric could do that,

A scout is like Indiana Jones (in Raiders of the Lost Ark) walking into the first temple noting that stepping on certain weight sensitive plates would shoot an arrow at him.

He doesn't disable them he walks slowly around them. (but he does know they are there.)

 

[silentspace]

Examples like this, where the flavor text doesn't match the rules text, is why I rarely read the flavor text anymore. Why bother reading it, when they mean the opposite of what they say?

 

[FireLance]

While I agree with what you are trying to say I disagree with your example.... In your example even the fight and cleric could do that

Sure they could (apart from evasion) - if they knew the traps were there. I guess the cleric could cast find traps, but the fighter will need someone to point them out to him (usual caveats about traps with a Search DC of 20 or less, and dwarven fighters and stonework traps).

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

While I agree with what you are trying to say I disagree with your example.... In your example even the fight and cleric could do that,

Neither can search well for the trap*, both would have flatfooted ACs without a special bonus to AC & neither has particularly good odds to beat the trap with their reflexes.

*The cleric could use a spell.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Btw, I am not defending the scout at all. The flavour text appears a mess but not only that it seems to be treading on the Ranger/Rogue multiclass option. I'm afraid to say that it is a class that doesn't deserve to exist, even though I like the skirmish mechanic.