Search and taking 20: the problem

[Nifelhein]

Pielorinho,

I agree that there is a threshold for the impossible, the epic level handbook took the possible actions to swimming up a waterfall, climbing a perfect smooth horizontal surface (when one is below it) and the like. To me that is what one could never do without magic, as I doubt anyone, no matter their skill, could to that in the real world...

My game is based on the same premises as this world is, so if one coudl not do it ehre, he cannot do it there, and by that I mean a person with that level of skill... that is different than the oriental cultures assumed for some time, as can be seen ion Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon...

 

[Pielorinho]

Nifelhein, let's stay away from Epic right now, because that brings in all sorts of other issues. Do you agree that a character who's not in the same room as a trap, indeed who has an opaque wall between herself and the trap, has zero chance to detect the trap visually? Zero, nada, impossible?

All I'm suggesting is that when something has full concealment against you, when you don't have line of sight to something, you can't see it, no matter how good your search check is. Unless you've got X-Ray vision, you can't see what you can't see.

Daniel

 

[Scion]

Remember, you get a reflex save even when you cant move

After a long time of working with traps the rogues gain a 6th sense about such things, represented in whatever way the dm wishes. I dont think it is out of the question to allow search checks even when something is 'behind that metal panel' over there without having to worry about triggering it just yet.

 

[DarkMaster]

Darkmaster, a spellcaster casts Blindness on a rogue. Do you still allow the rogue to detect traps visually? What about in a cave with no source of light? Do you allow a rogue to detect a trap in another room if the wall between him and the other room is less than ten feet wide?

At some point, the DC becomes an IC.

Daniel

Blindness would lead to no search skill for traps (since you rely on visual cue only), this is like hitting with your greatsword when both your arms are cut, No source of light, I assume you are talking about a human rogue, then might not or have an insanely high DC if there is some very weak amount of light, but what kind of rogue doesn't have a eternal candle in his pocket .

In both case if they were aware of the position of the trap and given a rough description I would still allow a disable device with a big penalty.

Please these only reflect the way I play and cannot be interpreted as official rules.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Remember, you get a reflex save even when you cant move

Debated.

See "Evasion".

-Hyp.

 

[DarkMaster]

Nifelhein, let's stay away from Epic right now, because that brings in all sorts of other issues. Do you agree that a character who's not in the same room as a trap, indeed who has an opaque wall between herself and the trap, has zero chance to detect the trap visually? Zero, nada, impossible?

All I'm suggesting is that when something has full concealment against you, when you don't have line of sight to something, you can't see it, no matter how good your search check is. Unless you've got X-Ray vision, you can't see what you can't see.

Daniel

I don't agree already explained my point of view. Never forget that a trap is in an environement and fulls of hints can be found, that are not directly related to the trap.

I guess you never watch CSI.

 

[Pielorinho]

Scion, is that sixth sense magical? Does it work in an area of antimagic? Can a rogue/wizard use that sixth sense to target the object even if she lacks line of sight to it?

Can the rogue use that sixth sense to search for things other than traps? If the rogue is looking for a spy and knows that the spy is carrying a letter addressed to the queen, can the rogue search a suspect's backpack for the letter without actually opening the backpack up, as long as he's within ten feet of the backpack? (And no fair using sense motive here).

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'll stick to the "you can't see what you can't see" rule.

 

[DarkMaster]

Scion, is that sixth sense magical? Does it work in an area of antimagic? Can a rogue/wizard use that sixth sense to target the object even if she lacks line of sight to it?

Can the rogue use that sixth sense to search for things other than traps? If the rogue is looking for a spy and knows that the spy is carrying a letter addressed to the queen, can the rogue search a suspect's backpack for the letter without actually opening the backpack up, as long as he's within ten feet of the backpack? (And no fair using sense motive here).

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'll stick to the "you can't see what you can't see" rule.

Nothing to do with 6th sense otherwise search would be based on wisdom, since search is based on intelligence it comes directly from your analytical skills of all the clue you can find on and around the trap.

 

[Pielorinho]

I don't agree already explained my point of view. Never forget that a trap is in an environement and fulls of hints can be found, that are not directly related to the trap.

I guess you never watch CSI.

Sure, you can search for those hints, if they're there. To suggest that they're always there, however, is bizarre.

And yes, I've watched CSI. I've never seen them see something they couldn't see, but I sure have seen them move things around in the course of searching an environment, and I've seen them find bodies, for example, only after opening the door behind which the bodies were hidden; were those bodies traps, they woulda died.

Daniel

 

[Pielorinho]

So, Darkmaster, using your interpretation, can you search for the spy's letter?

What about this -- you're in a room with eight doors. One of the doors leads to a room with a banana in it. The banana is five feet from the door. You're telling me you can search for the banana from the room you're in and detect it visually?

This is a bizarre interpretation of the rules. Sherlock Holmes himself couldn't find the banana without opening the door.

At the very least, let's bring epic rules back in and suggest that finding that banana visually will require a search check with three digits to the DC. Similarly, visually locating a trap which you can't see should require a three-digit DC, putting it well out of reach of any non-epic rogue.

Then we're back where I started, with a parenthetical statement: a (non-epic) rogue cannot see what she cannot see, and must use nonvisual means to detect traps she cannot see.

Daniel