Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Phazonfish" data-source="post: 7157978" data-attributes="member: 6855766">I agree with this, just because you don't know it's there doesn't mean it's not in line of sight. That said, pretty sure that means any trap that is built into something like a wall or a door or a container can be considered out of line of sight. This is not as significant a drawback as Iry was making it out to be, but it is another sizable drawback that I had yet to notice.I get what you mean, it's definitely still a usable spell. 5e is very well designed so it's tough to say a spell is the worst because it's probably still not useless. The only really quantifiable bad spells tend to be blasting spells, and I find "it does sub-optimal damage" to be a boring thing to complain about, so I'm ignoring those. There may be times where Find Traps could really be a life saver, but there are so many second and even first level spells that do their jobs so much better than it. Compare Detect MagicFind Traps is a 2nd level spell. Detect Magic is a 1st level spell.Find Traps has to be within range of what it's trying to find at time of casting. Detect Magic has to be within range at any time during it's 10 minute duration.Find Traps always requires a spell slot. Detect Magic is a ritual.Find Traps is limited by what is in sight. Detect Magic can see through up to a foot of stone, an inch of metal, or three feet of dirt or wood.Find Traps informs you of some traps. Detect Magic shows you ALL sources of magic in range and even reveals the school of magic associated with it if you take an action to check.Find Traps just isn't as reliable as other spells. I kinda like how imperfect Find Traps is, because it says to me that if all spells were this unreliable at what they did, maybe martial classes other than rogue wouldn't feel like they lack so much utility.</blockquote>

Verification