A look at the Search Skill.

[metaquad4]

30 feet is as long as a character can see in a darker area with a standard lamp. Its not too bad. Plus, we can always change it for the server's purposes. We don't have to set ourselves up for failure by trying to clone PnP into NWN2. Modifications should happen to better represent the medium. In this case, just remove the sight limit. Or include it, and let players enforce RP themselves (like we do with all other sight rules present in PnP, but not truly present in NWN2. Light, Vision Limits, etc..).

In this case, we can fairly smoothly transition a better representation for blindsight into nwn2, and make it into something more than the "see invisibility for clerics, druids, and wizards who can't cast divination spells". It gives the spell something to distinct itself, and it allows it to introduce new RP. Hardly a bad thing.

I'd remove the "see invisibility" aspect of it, if these changes were introduced, though. Scent lets you sense invisible targets, not sure if you can attack them though.

As for search being able to find magical traps:

Why not! Seems to be like it would be a good bit of fun.

"The spells explosive runes, fire trap, glyph of warding, symbol, and teleportation circle create magic traps that a rogue can find by making a successful Search check and then can attempt to disarm by using Disable Device. Identifying the location of a snare spell has a DC of 23. Spike growth and spike stones create magic traps that can be found using Search, but against which Disable Device checks do not succeed. See the individual spell descriptions for details."

We do have glyph of warding (I think?), spike growth, as well as teleportation circle. This idea could interact with those, as well.

[Asmodea]

If the Blindsight spell as described in PnP rules was implemented where the spell granted the PC the ability Blindsight it would literally grant a person the means to bypass all manner of concealment currently in game (Including Displacement, Blur and Greater Invisibility) ignore stealth in a radius of 30 ft around them entirely for all things other than gaze attacks and does not at all reduce their ability to use their normal vision or senses.

The only usual way to avoid it in PnP is by being Ethereal which should make someone undetectable by any means other than See Invisible or True Sight (When focused).

In other words Rules As Written it is absurdly powerful, the fact that Dragons get the dumbed down version (Blindsense) should say something.

As for the original topic: Some means of detecting but not bypassing alarms seems sensible.

[Blackman D]

the limited range stays, at 3rd level it will already be a horrible spell for sneaks, with unlimited range there would be no reason to even play sneaks anymore even if the spell level is changed to like 7th or 8th

we would also be talking about making it so you cant use magic items that require a command word for the duration of the spell since you cant read, which would mean no scrolls for sure and arguably no wands or anything else but potions

since you also lose your ability to tell the difference between colors theres no real way for you to accurately tell the difference between certain items, so it would be fairly easy to pick up a wand and use the wrong command word for it

probably more things that blinding yourself would cut out being possible that would need to be mechanically limited so it doesnt become some god mode spell

[metaquad4]

We don't have to implement it as per PnP, though. We changed Ethereal, because of that whole walk-in-walls business. A lot of things are changed for this medium. We can do the same to this.

Hence, why I proposed -60 spot, +60 survival, scent (and, ofc, removal of the see invisibility aspect) for it. Nice, clean, and it gives the spell a place of its own. The spell lets you sense near-by things (represented by survival and scent), and it removes your ability to see (represented by -60 spot). An immunity to gaze attacks would be interesting, if possible to implement. Though, not really necessary.

As for all the RP nuances (not being able to use scrolls, etc), I'm sure players will find a way. You can already RP a blind wizard on the server, after all. Or a blind anything (we do have blind characters who use scrolls and wands already).

And, thanks to the new spell-removal system, one can easily turn it off if it becomes too cumbersome for their character.

If the DMs want to keep blindsight in reserve as an NPC only thing, there are lots of ways to do that. One way is to dub this as granting "lesser blindsight", or some such. Its not entirely necessary to do that but, if that is a concern, it can be addressed in that manner.

[Blackman D]

except it would need to be more like a -90 spot and make your screen black like some of the UD areas... and only allow you to see certain things within 30 ft, since only living creatures are really gonna work it would also mean you would run into objects if you are not careful

people rping being blind and using braille is slightly different as they are also not gaining any major mechanical benefits with no mechanical downsides

survival and scent also wouldnt really work for what the spell is intended either, they would only affect the mini map

[metaquad4]

except it would need to be more like a -90 spot and make your screen black like some of the UD areas... and only allow you to see certain things within 30 ft, since only living creatures are really gonna work it would also mean you would run into objects if you are not careful

people rping being blind and using braille is slightly different as they are also not gaining any major mechanical benefits with no mechanical downsides

survival and scent also wouldnt really work for what the spell is intended either, they would only affect the mini map

We already addressed the 30 ft debacle. Read above. Same with with -90. It could be -120 spot and +120 survival. The effect would be the same. It just needs to be an arbitrarily high number.

Survival and scent cover it as well as it will ever be covered with the medium of nwn2. We can only do so much in this game but, if you open you mind and allow for concessions [as we have proven willing to do by even playing this game], we can do a fair bit. Rather than limiting oneself to strict definitions that were not even made for a video game setting (as are present in PnP). In this case, we can replicate it to a fair enough degree, using survival+scent.

The matter of RP nuances makes it the same in that it is the same principle, within RP. We are merely separating out your RP concerns, so they can be addressed properly. And, in this case, they have been. People will handle being blind as they already handle being blind IG. Its not a foreign concept we would need to suddenly deal with, its one we already have.

[Mallore]

This topic is about search and trap spells along with abj spells such as alarm.

I've no current view on the other ability


This is a request to have the rest of the search skill text added for in game reference by players and dms when needed for the rare occasion of coming across guild halls or DM plots with such spells

I would like to extend the topic and see that alarm spell be search able as its suppose to be able to. I would further like to see alarm spell be rule the same as a trap and thus illegal to place on a transition or immediately behind a closed door like traps are required. Character deserve a chance to react if possible, and alarm should not be exempt from the trap rules.

[Mallore]

If a magical alarm is to be searchable, then there should be DC amps available to modify the alarm's detection threshold higher than even well invested tier search due to the Elven always-on search.

Why? The DC is pretty simple. It's the check plus level of spell.

Just because you cast it more powerfully doesn't make it harder to see. In fact t is arguably the exact opposite. That the more powerful the spell the greater the near invisible energy or the flux of the area can be detected. Simply put, more power, easier to see.

Sometimes more power should be a bad thing.

Then again I suppose it's not a big deal be cause a caster level 30 means the spell still gets spot with 20 ranks in search. Which remember this is a rogue class ability. So not everyone with search could do it.

[Lighters]

immediately behind a closed door like traps are required

Where is this stated?

I understand not trapping a transition, that is metagaming an OOC mechanic. Trapping a door or the area on the other side of a door is or should be fair game.

[metaquad4]

I would further like to see alarm spell be rule the same as a trap and thus illegal to place on a transition or immediately behind a closed door like traps are required. Character deserve a chance to react if possible, and alarm should not be exempt from the trap rules.

Sure, why not. This kinda falls under player decency but we all know that is a myth ( ).

I'd also extend this to AoE spells on the same principle. But, that would open its own can of worms too (for example: if an enemy moves too close to the transition as the player AoEs it, do you punish them for having an AoE too close to a transition?).

Save, of course, for behind closed doors. That, as mentioned above, is fair game.

Personally, I'd bump the DCs up a bit (since players are able to get higher skills in this video game than in many PnP games), probably to something like 30+spell level or 35+spell level. Not too much, but just an added touch to account for that difference in medium.

Perhaps being able to use it to detect anti-magic wards or anti-teleport wards present in some areas, as well.

[Mallore]

Met,


You got the idea. There are also wards that places have that are only around in DM monitored things.


As for bumping the DC I'm not to against that. But it's not like we made that consideration for disguise, hide, ms or any of the like our stealthers have to use and face daily.



As for doors. It is against the rules last I checked and I will find the quote when I'm not on a mobile. This is because some doors are just like transitions. Think a door to an inn.

[metaquad4]

Met,


You got the idea. There are also wards that places have that are only around in DM monitored things.


As for bumping the DC I'm not to against that. But it's not like we made that consideration for disguise, hide, ms or any of the like our stealthers have to use and face daily.



As for doors. It is against the rules last I checked and I will find the quote when I'm not on a mobile. This is because some doors are just like transitions. Think a door to an inn.

The DC for stealth/detection isn't flat (Its Spot/Listen+D20 vs Hide/MS), unlike this DC (X [25]+[1-9, depending on the spell level). Both sides of the party have access to the similar levels of inflation. For this, there is no way for the defender to raise the DC. And 34 (the max DC) is exceedingly easy to beat on this server.

Having a DC based on caster level (say, 15 or 20+Caster Level) would be even better, since neither party's DC is a flat one. Though, the caster level for guild wards and such would need to be determined (that is better with DM oversight anyway). The DCs for area wards (such as no magic or no teleportation) in NPC locations could also have their own separate DC (say, 20+The CR of the area).

Arguably, sneakers have an even greater advantage (or at the very least have been evened out) due to the new stores that have been added recently (as well as the sneak gear that was previously present), and due to the nerfs to detection spells. Recent changes have had that very consideration in mind.

[Mallore]

The DC for stealth/detection isn't flat (Its Spot/Listen+D20 vs Hide/MS), unlike this DC (X [25]+[1-9, depending on the spell level). Both sides of the party have access to the similar levels of inflation. For this, there is no way for the defender to raise the DC. And 34 (the max DC) is exceedingly easy to beat on this server.

actually its not. the DC for stealth/detection is Spot/listen+20 vs Hide/ms+d20. the spotter gets an auto 20 on the roll with a detection done twice every six seconds. so this is horribly unbalanced and unfair. Yes with both groups getting gear to match, with the exception that almost all spot gear comes with AC while only half of the Sneak Gear comes with ac.

While the "defender" in this case of wards is considered easly beat, it cane only be matched by one class with sufficient skill investment, (not an easy thing at all) Though this is one of the few cases where More Power, doesn't mean better.

Having a DC based on caster level (say, 15 or 20+Caster Level) would be even better, since neither party's DC is a flat one. Though, the caster level for guild wards and such would need to be determined (that is better with DM oversight anyway). The DCs for area wards (such as no magic or no teleportation) in NPC locations could also have their own separate DC (say, 20+The CR of the area).

I am utterly against 20+caster level for the reason its set to spell level, more power isnt better, plus 20+caster 30/32 would mean 50/52 skill dc on the rogues part, which would mean at least 30 ranks in the search skill is majorly unfair, as the class has to reserve skill points for Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Lores, for roleplay, Slight of Hand, Traps, Disarm, locks, as functions, and then UMD, Tumble and others for serviceability, this is unbalanced.

Caster level requires no additional investment that was not already being put in. These wards are not harder to detect because of more power. It should be the inverse, more power the easier it is. Sometimes things just roll that way.

If some feel its to easy to find their alarm, well cast it at a higher level spell slot. So an alarm cast at level 9 spell slot would be 32 dc? some where about. maybe 33 or 34. that seams fair.


also note there is not a lot of +4 search skill on the server, even less +4 search +4ms//hide and near to none with +4 ac +4search +4hide/ms. So the rogue is already punished on this server and forced to carry more suits of gear then any other toon, and further punished by being forced to sacrifice in areas of skill that no other class in the game has to.

Arguably, sneakers have an even greater advantage (or at the very least have been evened out) due to the new stores that have been added recently (as well as the sneak gear that was previously present), and due to the nerfs to detection spells. Recent changes have had that very consideration in mind.

Sorry no, arguably its still busted, see the above on how Stealth actually works. Not till sneaks are given an auto 20 roll on non hostiles will it be balanced. I do not understand why Stealth characters are the only class where we expect to fail half the time to 90% of the time. Could oyu imagine an caster class miss casting half the time? there would be a revolt!

So why do we expect stealth toons (rogues and rangers) to have barely NO success going against toons of equal level at the foundation of the class? This is what rogues do. Sneak. Casters Cast, fighters Fight. Only one class on this server is not allowed to succeed regularly against toons of equal level of any class.

[Blackman D]

its because blind people like being blind but complain that they cant see

even with that and the arms and legs sacrificed to remotely balance the issue of detection vs stealth, do not ever expect stealth to get a sustainable advantage over detection when set on actual equal terms because it will simply never happen

on the DCs tho, i already suggested a more than reasonable buff to the DC

normal casters will have a normal DC, casters that happen to have set trap will have the skill added to the DC, which if you have a 30 CL caster with a 30 casting stat they will have a 21 DC alarm, then if they have a 30 set trap they will have a 51 DC alarm

which is not out of the detection range of a trapper who should have max ranks in search (33) plus w/e INT, say +3, for a 36 search without gear, a 15 on a d20 gives you 51

a static bonus is absurd tho since there is no reason to give it a bonus just because its a low level spell

[Mallore]

its because blind people like being blind but complain that they cant see

even with that and the arms and legs sacrificed to remotely balance the issue of detection vs stealth, do not ever expect stealth to get a sustainable advantage over detection when set on actual equal terms because it will simply never happen

on the DCs tho, i already suggested a more than reasonable buff to the DC

normal casters will have a normal DC, casters that happen to have set trap will have the skill added to the DC, which if you have a 30 CL caster with a 30 casting stat they will have a 21 DC alarm, then if they have a 30 set trap they will have a 51 DC alarm

which is not out of the detection range of a trapper who should have max ranks in search (33) plus w/e INT, say +3, for a 36 search without gear, a 15 on a d20 gives you 51

a static bonus is absurd tho since there is no reason to give it a bonus just because its a low level spell

This makes sense, I do agree that set trap should be added to the skill, will be very interesting for arcane tricksters. Ability to set a trap would make it harder.

Though it seams like we can make the adjustment to the skill text?


((as a note "not ever expect stealth to get a sustainable advantage over detection" Sure, but lets get them equal to start.... atleast!))