Search and taking 20: the problem

[Black Knight Irios]

From the same initial premise I took a different solution and ruled that *anyone* can find a trap with any DC that they can make. If a fighter puts all his skill points cross-class into search, I'd let him search for traps. Why have a situation that *requires* a rogue in a party, that *nobody* else will do?

Perhaps the Track ability is a good indicator, and make Trapfinding a feat which is available to all characters (as well as being automatic for 1st Rogues). This then puts it on exactly the same footing as tracking for rangers (except that it is a far more necessary ability, of course).

But making the Trapfinding ability available for other classes, makes it less special and makes the rogue class weaker.
If I allow everyone to cast spells it is nothing special anymore, an extreme version of your doing.

So getting back to the example -- if a guard just says he looks at the potential spy and takes 20 on his search check, you're saying you'd give him what DC to find the notes? Or would it be impossible? Whereas if he cut open the scabbard, you'd give him what DC to find the notes? Or would it be automatic?

First is the observed person moving, if he is an the guard keeps his square he can't T20 at all because the observed one leaves 10ft. after/within the first round of movement.
If the observed one is standing right in front of the guard for 20 rounds and the guard T20 for search without touching anything by just looking or smelling or what ever, I would say increase the DC by 20 it's like hiding when running, so the DC is now 30, it is not very easy to find it now, especially without using T20 at all.
But that fact I think is already included in the Trapfinding DCs, therefore you should not make it harder for rogues to find traps or make it impossible or call it whatever you like.

 

[Pielorinho]

If the observed one is standing right in front of the guard for 20 rounds and the guard T20 for search without touching anything by just looking or smelling or what ever, I would say increase the DC by 20 it's like hiding when running, so the DC is now 30, it is not very easy to find it now, especially without using T20 at all.
But that fact I think is already included in the Trapfinding DCs, therefore you should not make it harder for rogues to find traps or make it impossible or call it whatever you like.

First, where do you find support in the rules for increasing the DC in this manner? Second, where do you find support in the rules for the idea that this is already included in trapfinding DCs?

My position is that the search skill assumes you've done what's necessary to find something, which sometimes involves having moved things around.

Daniel

 

[DarkMaster]

So, Darkmaster, would you be willing to assign the same dual-DC to my cabinet-trap above -- a DC of 30-40 to find the trap if you just look at it without touching it, but a DC of 15 or less if you manipulate it?

Daniel

The default for searching trap is that you don't risk to activate it while you search for it, touching it and lowering the DC would make the search risky therefore no T20, but the DC is considerably lower. I see it as a more acceptable solution to your problem. having a DD put somewhere not to break the mechanic. I personnaly would not because I am perfectly fine with the mechanic as it is but you can do what you want. Like a lot of people say here changing the mechanic can impact some classes and I usually don't want that.

another think about it if the DC to look is 35 and you can T20, but by touching it goes down to 15, the search 15 rogue will find it anyway and faster. This is actually lowering the challenge for the group

 

[The Souljourner]

Keep in mind - the person who set the trap generally needs a way around it himself. Sure, some traps are "blow you up" type traps, but most are protecting something. If there's a way around the trap, a rogue should be able to find it.

If it is just a "blow you up" trap, then in general it'll be in a place where the rogue isn't going to think to search (3rd 5' square in a 40' long hallway), so it'll just get set off or not regardless.

How does the owner of the treasure inside the cabinet in the example above actually get into the cabinet if he wants to retrieve his stuff?

Also, I assume all traps that go off just from touching an object should be pretty visible. Contact poison on the handle, pressure plates, etc, so most traps aren't built that way, because they're too easy to find. And with manipulation, you can find just about any trap given the right amount of skill and time.

-The Souljourner

 

[DarkMaster]

First, where do you find support in the rules for increasing the DC in this manner? Second, where do you find support in the rules for the idea that this is already included in trapfinding DCs?

My position is that the search skill assumes you've done what's necessary to find something, which sometimes involves having moved things around.

Daniel

Agree with the last part and the necessary for finding a trap without activating it is most of the time not touching it

 

[DarkMaster]

First, where do you find support in the rules for increasing the DC in this manner? Second, where do you find support in the rules for the idea that this is already included in trapfinding DCs?

My position is that the search skill assumes you've done what's necessary to find something, which sometimes involves having moved things around.

Daniel

Black knight just maked a suggestion, obviously it is not in the rules

 

[Pielorinho]

How does the owner of the treasure inside the cabinet in the example above actually get into the cabinet if he wants to retrieve his stuff?

Sorry, I thought that was clear from the description: turning the handle a total of 180 degrees bypasses the trap entirely, but at 90 degrees the handle clicks and the door can be opened (although that'll set the trap off).

Daniel

 

[glass]

I don't at all see how they are clearly the "general" case. If you're confused on this, I invite you to email the Sage and ask him if you can ransack a chest from 10' away without touching it.

They are the examples right there in the PHB. Of all the things that they could have given as examples of things for which you could use the search skills they chose these. Do you think they sat around trying to come up with the most obscure cases to use as example?

I am not confused, except perhaps how the sage could help, given his reputation around here for ignoring the RAW.


glass.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

First of all you have asked how to handle such a situation, DarkMaster and I gave you let's say the same answer.

Second there is nowhere stated, that searching for a trap will trigger it and that, I think includes the fact why the DC does not increase or it is possible to find traps without touching things. Some people argue wether it is a Six Senth or not, fact is given the rules as they are, there is nowhere stated that the rogue has a Six Senth, but it is stated that you are not at risk of springing a trap by searching for it. You can spring it indeed when you try to disarm it but that is a different skill, DD respectively and doesn't matter at all in this question. But another point, if the game designer intended to make undetectable traps, why is there is no one given in the DMG or even better is there a non-detection component for traps that can be added?!? -No, what might be the reason...could it be that the intention was that any trap can be found with the search skill with a high enough skill level to beat the DC!

 

[Pielorinho]

Glass, I don't see we've got enough common ground to discuss this, then, if you think you can ransack a chest without touching it.

Black knight just maked a suggestion, obviously it is not in the rules

Bingo. That's because the rules don't cover this area, and so each DM has to figure out how to handle it. The search rules if read in the hyperliteral fashion Glass is suggesting lead to bizarre counterintuitive results; the key is in the word "generally," and recognizing that exceptions should be based on common sense.

I tend to think that DCs for traps are set based on the idea that you can see some component of the trap -- a false floor, arrow-holes, a recessed needle, pressure plates, etc. For most traps, it's impossible for the builder to design them in such a manner that all trap components are hidden from the intended victim until the trap is sprung. In fact, other than the poison-gas-behind-a-door trap, I'm having real trouble thinking of another example of such a trap.

So I assume that DCs will go up in cases where for one reason or another the character can't see any component of the trap -- whether because of blindness or darkness, or because all components of the trap have full cover or concealment from the character. In these rare cases, I prefer to disallow a check entirely, but setting the check in the epic range will have the same effect.

Note, again, that this works in the characters' favor too: a sneaky character can hide things far more easily.

Daniel