Singers and Spell Slingers article

[Plane Sailing]

I was reading this article and the following quote struck me:

This is a problem only if you have designed some critical element in the campaign that must be solved by a bard or wizard -- which I would say is bad design on your part and something that should be easier for you to fix than to compel or convince players to play classes of characters that don’t interest them.

So what about the design decisions in D&D that only rogues can disarm traps? Perhaps that should be characterised as bad design on the grounds that it means that there is a whole class of problems (traps) which can't be solved unless you have a bard or wizard along?

(Clerical healing is nearly as bad an issue, although druids, paladins, rangers and bards can perhaps take up the slack somewhat).

Cheers

 

[Arkhandus]

Well, many traps at least can be found and solved by careful, reasonably smart players of non-rogues. A fighter can probe the walls, floors, and ceilings with a ten-foot-pole or longspear or other polearm, generally triggering some traps without harm to himself or the rest of the party. A wizard can summon critters to send running and jumping along every corridor and trigger any traps that way. Some traps, once found, can be bypassed by simply putting some manner of makeshift bridge or ropeway or chalk outline or obstacle on or around it. Though some traps may be strictly rogue-defeatable, most are not likely to be that ironclad in their resistance to other PCs finding and avoiding them.

Personally though, I have no problem with placing some obstacles that require a particular PC's abilities to overcome, or that require some information-gathering and help-seeking or clever plans to do so.

 

[MarkB]

Traps can be 'solved' by putting summoned creatures through them, using the ubiquitous ten-foot-pole to probe the floor ahead, or simply by walking through them and surviving the damage. It would be bad design to include a trap in a camoaign which must be disabled, rather than triggered, in order to progress, but aside from such design decisions, a rogue-free party should still be able to survive traps with some common sense, good luck, and a ready supply of healing.

 

[Infernal Teddy]

You should design you traps / problems with your characters in mind.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

It's terrible design. Some people actually think that rogue class feature is an advantage, when really it is a huge burden. Some people also think rogues having 8 skill points is a huge advantage, when 75% of your skills are spoken for in a standard group before you ever roll your character up. How much choice do you really have when you are expected to take Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Listen, Disable Device, Open Lock, and Search?

 

[Psion]

So what about the design decisions in D&D that only rogues can disarm traps? Perhaps that should be characterised as bad design on the grounds that it means that there is a whole class of problems (traps) which can't be solved unless you have a bard or wizard along?

It's the classical "plot bottleneck" problem I complain about in adventures, except codified in the rules to be present in all adventures.

Perhaps its best to engage in a mixture of old and new school design when it comes to circumventing traps. Rogues may have more options when it comes to traps, but the DM can present more options for circumventing traps by clever application of the PCs other capabilities.

 

[Driddle]

It's terrible design. Some people actually think that rogue class feature is an advantage, when really it is a huge burden. Some people also think rogues having 8 skill points is a huge advantage, when 75% of your skills are spoken for in a standard group before you ever roll your character up. How much choice do you really have when you are expected to take Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Listen, Disable Device, Open Lock, and Search?

Those would be valid points you've made, IF the rogue player gave a flying rat's tuchus what the other players *expected* him to do.

You'll never be truly happy if you try to be the character everyone else wants you to play instead of the character you really want for yourself.

( :\ ... There's a life lesson in there somewhere.)

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

It's terrible design. Some people actually think that rogue class feature is an advantage, when really it is a huge burden. Some people also think rogues having 8 skill points is a huge advantage, when 75% of your skills are spoken for in a standard group before you ever roll your character up. How much choice do you really have when you are expected to take Hide, Move Silently, Spot, Listen, Disable Device, Open Lock, and Search?

Could be worse. You could be a bard and have to Gather Info, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Bluff, Intimidate, and multiple Performs. At least a rogue doesn't have to spend skill points to use sneak attack

With a lot of skills, though, there is no need to max them every level, especially at higher levels. A rogues sneak skills will so outpace most NPCs perceptions skills that after a few levels you can taper off.

 

[Scribble]

Just because the Fellowship of the Ring and the Wizards of the Lance had a wizard in the party doesn’t mean your players need to have one to be a ‘real’ band of epic heroes.

Wait... Wizards of the Lance? Does he mean Heros or am I missing something?