[Skills] Solutions to the oblivious rogue problem

[DogBackward]

I am kinda more worried about the Thief Tool's thing. Now only Rogues can open locks with tools. That's too absolute and makes the Rogue almost a required class for dungeoneering.

This is flat-out untrue. There are dozens of ways to get past traps and locked doors without a Rogue. All you need to do is find the trap, which anybody can do. Then you go around it, jump over it, trigger it from a distance, or one of many other ways to bypass a known trap. You only need a Rogue if you want to mechanically disable a trap. That's not the only way to disable a trap. And for locks, just give the Fighter a big hammer. No more locks. Sure, it's noisy and likely to draw attention. But that doesn't mean the Rogue is required, just more convenient.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

This is flat-out untrue. There are dozens of ways to get past traps and locked doors without a Rogue. All you need to do is find the trap, which anybody can do. Then you go around it, jump over it, trigger it from a distance, or one of many other ways to bypass a known trap. You only need a Rogue if you want to mechanically disable a trap. That's not the only way to disable a trap. And for locks, just give the Fighter a big hammer. No more locks. Sure, it's noisy and likely to draw attention. But that doesn't mean the Rogue is required, just more convenient.

I want everyone to be able to learn how to disarm a trap. Not run around it.

If you have a trapped chest, you can't go around it or jump over it. Well, at least not for opening. You can only trigger it. And it doesn't make sense to me that a smart individual could not event try figuring out how to disarm such a trap and only the Rogue can do this.

I can accept some role protection, but it can go too far. I think role protection is done sufficiently if you are the one that can do it best and by default. You don't need to be the only one capable of it.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think the problem is less a problem with the rogue and more a problem with how D&D in 3e and 4e uses perception to search and to prevent surprise. I'm reminded of the old d6 rolls to determine surprise and the % rolls to find traps. There's other mechanics that can (and probably should) handle this.

Needs Moar Thought, but that's where my brain is going on it.

 

[Ferrous]

I think the problem is with Wisdom counting as the perception stat. I think if it was Inteligence that makes just as much sense and you get an archetype of a smart, quick witted rogue.

 

[BobTheNob]

I think the problem is with Wisdom counting as the perception stat. I think if it was Inteligence that makes just as much sense and you get an archetype of a smart, quick witted rogue.

Yea, I have a bit of trouble with the "Wisdom = Perception" thing. Sure, Wisdom gives you understanding of mens hearts and how to look into mens souls, which makes it a great stat for insight style perceptions. But how does that give me the ability to spot a trap?

At a push I would say "Its instinctive, you can instinctively see it", and the ability to know a traps heart and soul helps me spot it...hang on, no it doesnt. Traps dont have hearts and souls! (except some fleshy demon traps...ahhh, thats just confusing!)

I have always found intelligence to be a better fit for spotting and for searching.

Whenever In doubt, I like to ask "What would jesus do?" After all, he is one of the wisest dudes that ever was, and he spotted HEAPS of trap in his time...hang on...no he didnt! (Well, maybe spiritual traps, but certainly not mechanical ones. You dont hear many people talking about "The poison dart at the wedding at Cana" or "The last supper where Jesus thwarted the pit trap under the table")

 

[mlund]

I think the problem is with Wisdom counting as the perception stat. I think if it was Inteligence that makes just as much sense and you get an archetype of a smart, quick witted rogue.

"Smart" and "Stupid" are relative pejoratives. There are many people with exceptional intelligence and education that are myopic, clueless in social situations, and lack a well developed capacity for intuition or inductive reasoning. They have high Intelligence and terrible Wisdom and Charisma scores. They do not have the attributes of a smart, quick witted rogue. They do have huge bonuses to knowledge skill checks and logic puzzles.

The core skills of a rogue aren't any more academic or logic-based than the fighter knowing how to best employ a weapon. Beyond the physical graces the Rogue's skills are practiced crafts, talent for deception, honed intuition, street-smarts, and awareness of his physical and social surroundings.

You could certainly have a Rogue with higher Intelligence who is good at designing traps, plans, organization, and is pretty well-read to boot - it just isn't strictly necessary to be an able tomb-robber.

The straw that breaks the camel's back when it comes to searching and spotting would be animals. High animal intelligence is a 2 or 3. That's a -4 to Intelligence checks. They see and sense things humans with 18 Intelligence have no hope of becoming aware of. They fall into traps not because they don't perceive the physical presence of the mechanism but because they can't imagine the threat it presents. When it comes to things they instinctive identify as a threat or food source they spot and respond with amazing speed and accuracy.

If you have Intelligence and Wisdom in the same game Awareness and Intuition largely fall into the sphere of Wisdom while Recall and Reason largely fall into the sphere of Intelligence.

- Marty Lund

 

[Hypersmurf]

I can accept some role protection, but it can go too far. I think role protection is done sufficiently if you are the one that can do it best and by default. You don't need to be the only one capable of it.

You run into another magical/non-magical class divide, though.

The Rogue is the best at disarming traps, but anyone is capable of it.

The Wizard is the best at throwing fireballs, and nobody else can do it.

Apart from that, though - would you be satisfied if the Tools of the Trade feature were also available in a Background? That way, you could have a Cleric who could pick locks, or a Wizard who could pick locks... but it still wouldn't allow for the Wizard with the Aristocrat Background to, at some point in his career, learn to pick locks.

-Hyp.

 

[variant]

I just don't see a problem with a rogue that uses his Wisdom as a dump stat having a worse modifier to detect traps than a cleric. Rogues already get a chance to automatically succeed a DC of 10 + their modifier.

 

[Mercutio01]

I don't see why you couldn't just use Intelligence for the rogue to find traps. Search was based on Int in 3E and Spot on Wis. I think that breakdown sort of makes sense to me.

 

[mlund]

I don't see why you couldn't just use Intelligence for the rogue to find traps.

The more time you have to do things methodically, the better an argument you have for using Intelligence to find something. The less time you have to spend the more likely you are to be using Wisdom.

If you're spending 6 seconds to determine whether or not there is a trap, or your just advancing the party cautiously and putting the Rogue in the front of the marching order he's making a Wisdom Check for traps.

If you want to take 1 minute to search over a particular wall / doorway / room feature or take 5-10 minutes to toss a whole room I'm inclined to let people use their Intelligence instead if they so wish.

Of course in those circumstances the Int 18 Wizard is better at searching for secret doors and treasure than the poor, uneducated rogue that grew up on the mean streets, so you've just traded one complaint for another.

- Marty Lund