Traps

[Kalbron]

They didn't say they wanted parity with a fighter in combat. What they said was that removing traps from rogues makes them even less effective than they'd normally be.

To be honest considering the way in which melee combat rules (and has always ruled) the NWN series, I don't see why there's a pressing need to take away an ability like set trap. Rogues can't go toe-to-toe with a fighter and that's fine. The problem is though that they can't even go toe-to-a-fair-distance-away because of how fast characters can run and the pitiful range of projectile weapons.

I view this issue as essentially the same as removing a random selection of spells from any of the casting classes' spellbooks. Does it harm them? Most certainly. Does it make the class useless? Of course not. Is it neccessary? Completely debateable and in the eye of the beholder, but I say no.

[Mayhem]

To be honest considering the way in which melee combat rules (and has always ruled) the NWN series, I don't see why there's a pressing need to take away an ability like set trap.

Then you need to read Brokenbones excellent 1st post in this thread, which gives some very good reasons to take away - or at least, severely curtail - the ability to set traps.

****
n response to the AI issues BB raises:

If we do implement traps perhaps they can involve a script in which any creature triggering it has a chance - based on their chance of seeing and recognising the trap - of being immune to it.

This would neatly avoid traps being set into which intelligent foes can be led like blind idiots.

Also, as suggested above, make trap-setting take significant time in order to prevent them being used actually on the battlefield. With, perhaps, and option for time spent that effects the difficulty to detect it.

[mishmash]

I don't particularly like being quoted and given a patronising capitalised response, Mayhem, I've not spoken to you before to have the kind of familiarity which would make me comfortable with that and although I may not be an etablished figure in these forums that doesn't give you license to respond like that. What's more now I'm obliged to argue the point which as I said before I really didn't want to do...

Notice I said, "in NWN combat"... The problem being here that NWN doesn't really cater to the style of a rogue, particularly without something like traps... So whereas in dnd a rogue can pick a perfect spot for an ambush using skills such as climb etc, get his sneak attack off and use his skills to attempt to hide again or make a swift escape if the need arise, in NWN its pretty much "sneak up, get one sneak attack off, hope it hits, enter melee"... I know that you can "use magic device" but really any class can do this, in fact any class can do a lot of what rogue can do with a few of the right (often run of the mill) magic items.

I wasn't claiming that rogues should be boosted up to be able to punch above their weight, only questioning why an element of the NWN game which is one of their main combat tools in the game engine has been removed

[AlmightyTDawg]

I view this issue as essentially the same as removing a random selection of spells from any of the casting classes' spellbooks. Does it harm them? Most certainly. Does it make the class useless? Of course not. Is it neccessary? Completely debateable and in the eye of the beholder, but I say no.

One thing I honestly don't know is how ALFA (or PWs in general) handle draw distance - I remember that combat/spawn lag was pretty brutal for that in NWN1. My experience was you got about, at good distances, maybe two rounds of fire, which is reasonably accurate except for plains and deserts (and even generous in forests). But yeah, as a general rule ranged combat in NWN1 blows.

It's tough to call traps a "spell" in the rogue's book as much as they don't really exist as a counterbalance for missile combat stinking. And just mathematically, that's about one to two spike traps (2d6) per character (maybe more based on multiple attacks/manyshot/etc.) with a couple of exceptions (like unloading a quiver full of javelins of lightning). I'd say the rogue's top spell so to speak is in flanking/sneaking below 30 ft, where the encounter distance isn't the real issue anyway. Where traps get tough is in stacking - you can throw an indeterminate number into a fight.

To be fair, I loved using traps as a "fallback" line - I called it a hedge against overaggressive DMs and overblown static content .

At the risk of suggesting something that's way too much work for what it's worth, I'd have considered a sort of "elemental" approach that involved combining "triggers," "camouflage," and "deliveries" that would let rogues create dynamic traps that varied by a) set DC, b) time to set, c) detect/disarm DC, and d) weight. So imagine a rogue getting an a) simple line/rope trigger (would set small line normal to visual), with b) medium camouflage, which launches c) two alchemist fires. Of course balancing would be as much of a problem as making the whole thing work in the first place, but I think it might add a sort of interesting aspect to using traps - and as people have mentioned with setup time could avoid being too easily abused.

I think the reason they were removed is that it's very difficult to manage it from a "soft" rule perspective. What would we say? If you put down more than two spike traps per screen, you have made a powergaming offense? It's too situational I think - what would be interesting would be whether DMs are willing to allow impromptu trapmaking as part of a "preparation" scene.

But all of that is just spitballing.

[Leevoth]

I bet this could be solved by making them weaker, taking a while to set-up, and limiting the amount that can be used.

Although some people have said that already, I want to get in on this 2 cent action.

[Mulu]

*Goes off to build a castle in a day, for fantasy fun*

With a Wish spell you could.

[Brokenbone]

Mulu mentioned something interesting about weight. Just Googled "Bear Trap", clicked one of the first sporting goods results, got this:

Real "mountain man" Bear Traps, as last seen working in the wilds of Canada and Alaska! There are 2 sizes, both solid steel, with cast jaws (with serious teeth) and hand-forged cross and bottom pieces. I recommend them for decor rather than for trapping lion or bear... for legal reasons, and because these can literally snap a 2 x 4 in half! Use extreme caution.
Give your home or cabin, indoors or out, an impressive look from the days of the wild frontier... snap yours up ONLINE now!

#15 Grizzly Bear Trap
35 1/4" long. Weighs 38 lbs.


#16 Grizzly Bear Trap
42 1/2" long. Weighs 48 lbs.

Went elsewhere to look at how much landmines weigh... seems an M-18 Claymore is 3.5lb, I didn't look up the other 50 kinds of antipersonnel mines you're likely to find in modern warfare (high tech explosives are compact, and I'd envision way out of the reach of Faerun alchemists).

Anyhow, NWN traps are about the weight of say, a potato or a roll of pennies. We could muck with that. Note I'm not proposing 3.5lb, and I'm not proposing 48lb either, just saying it's something that technically, we do have the ability to alter.

It sounds like there's a few variables then that've gotten highlighted over discussion:

(1) Damage & other output of the varied traps
(2) Which traps to keep vs. cut
(3) Time to set
(4) Which skill required to set
(5) Weight

My own thinking, if it's not clear already, is that I favour "things that are comparable to other alchemical items in other D&D sourcebooks." I.e., fairly low damage output unless it's vs. a particular subset of creatures, not duplicating a spell effect, but at the same time much more affordable than a magic item. Haven't thought much about weight yet, though you'd probaby figure these things are heavier than the much more portable wands, scrolls, and other spell flinging devices one can get into.

[Mayhem]

I wasn't claiming that rogues should be boosted up to be able to punch above their weight, only questioning why an element of the NWN game which is one of their main combat tools in the game engine has been removed

That's probably the cause of the disagreement here. I'm looking at it froma PnP background, where the rogue is not (house rules aside) expected to be able to set up lethal traps into which to lure those he wishes to dispatch. (If any class were about this, I'd think ti were the Ranger, but thats only due to my own vision of said class as a "guerilla" combatant)

You, I'm assuming, have come from the CRPG background in which every class is expected to be able to deal with enemies by killing them. I may be wrong, but thats the impression I get.

ALFA has always tried to move away from the "violence is the answer" methodology encouraged by the NWN solo campaigns, and towards more RP orientated solutions, as made possible by playing in a mixed group with a DM.

You should find that imaginatively applied, the wealth of skill-points and class skills that a rogue has available makes them far more valuable to a party that a fighter (who is, pretty much, a 1 trick pony) - just not in combat.

Although even then, as long as you are adventuring with a decent, co-operative party, you will be getting plenty of use out of your sneak attack...

[Brokenbone]

While it's not about traps, I noticed but didn't comment on the "rogues in combat" tangent.

Parties where everyone has a rogue level or two can be truly scary against most opponents, if there's some smart skirmishing. Seems every time you turn around, you're scoring another sneak attack. Yeah this falls apart vs. say, the undead or constructs, but it can be pretty amazing when the stars align. For the last year I've played an NWN1 multiclassed rogue (stick to rapier and leathers, no wpn finesse feat), often with other rogues in the party, and I'm definitely not complaining. Skill monkey with a decent chance of pulling off some pretty surprising results in combat, through proper teamwork.

Of course a solo rogue, no companions, that's a whole different vibe. Combat is a lot scarier in such cases. However, if alone, it may be in cases that you're protecting your toe-to-toe vulnerability by not drawing attention to yourself. I.e., be sneaky, it's one of your strengths! If you do happen to get detected by someone cranky, your combat effectiveness is watered down by having no allies to work with (i.e., flank = sneak), so while you can take your chances going toe to toe, you end up needing to pick your battles. Toss some choking powder and hope to daze someone, drink an invisibility potion and run away, toss caltrops behind you... whatever you gotta do.

[Sintaqx]

One thing to realize, especially with something like a bear trap, is they are recoverable and reusable once they have been triggered. A hinged sharp stick leg trap? Not reusable, but not 48lbs either.

I am all for limited traps in ALFA, especially since setting the trap requires a d20 roll. Spike traps are near-perfect (some would want to nerf the dmg of course, whatever), Tangle traps are great, acid traps (single target), fire traps (single target) and gas traps are doable, elemental traps are magic devices and should be crafted as such (and hence horridly expensive). Basically anything that could theoretically be made in a D&D setting without the use of magic could be crafted into a trap my a non-magic user, and any trap could be set by a person with the appropriate skill. If you tone down the damage, a good number of trappers will simply layer more traps to be effective.

Length of time to set a trap is a big issue, most of these trap kits would take a couple minutes or longer to set properly. Increasing the set time in game is perfectly acceptable.

Concerning AI. If I place a trap as a character, I am going to place it in a high traffic area, or in a place between myself (or some other bait) are sitting. With this is the possibility of farming new characters. A potential problem, especially if guards/npcs don't prevent traps from being set. Out in a wilderness setting this is fine, roads are dangerous, and a low level trapper becomes a low level encounter... just without the experience.

Now for the fun part. Huge elaborate traps. Oh. Hell. Yes. The one stipulation is they require DM involvement to construct, place, and trigger. Here is an example. My current character in TSM is a hunter/trapper. Lately gnolls have been invading what she has claimed as her home territory, so she has begun construction (purely RP at this point) of rambo-esque traps such as spiked pits, natural tangle traps, and swinging logs. Yes, I put ranks in Craft Trap, Craft Weapon, and Set Trap, and no, I do not plan on rebuilding the character to re-allocate the skills. If necessary I will only use them for my own RP or with a dm-backed project. Whether or not the traps are effective is up to the DMs, but I'm RPing it anyway.

The bottom line is whether or not the trap kits are allowed, player created traps themselves should be allowed in my opinion.

[danielmn]

Right on, Sintaqx!

[mishmash]

OK Mayhem, I see your point and I think its a very valid one. I do agree that there should be an awful lot more to RPing your character in hostile situations that using violence, and that's one of the main reasons I like playing in ALFA. Any person who has RPed with me or any of the very few people who have been dmed by me in the short time I did that in Alfa1 will know that fighting wasn't usually a big part of the agenda for me...

Please don't misinterpret what I was saying though, which is a comment on game mechanics of NWN making it difficult to play inventively a a rogue... I don't want to rehash what other people have said already on this point, but I will say that DMs aren't always around to implement the cunning use of those skills points which are a rogue's main feature. Anyway please read my second post, I think that should make it clear I'm not particularly interested in arguing the point about this...

[Killthorne]

I'm sorry, but I disagree with Mayhem's perception on rogues. He doesn't think of them as assassins for one, which is nuts considering their sneak attack ability. Two, he doesn't believe that they should have anything to do with traps ( a ranger's skill), yet they're the ones bypassing locks, traps, and the like, to get to whatever treasure lies beyond, i.e.: acting as scout.

And thirdly, the usage of RP in ALFA is already prevalent. When a violent mob is trying to kill you and your allies, there is no amount of points put into persuasion that's going to save your arse from getting killed. Violence is a part of Dungeons and Dragons, and if you really can't accept that, or if you think ALFA should be nothing but RP drama ( " Stop orcs! Let's parlay, as you run at us full speed with swords raised!!" *puke*), you really need to find a different game ( like the Sims or something cute, warm and fuzzy). I'm not saying screw RP, but I am saying screw the idea that there's some anti-violence going on.

Everytime I play a rogue, I make sure to cover as many aspects as I deem valid for the character. I've played rogues that do not pickpocket, that are made entirely from sneaking up behind someone and jabbing in between the third and fourth rib. I've also made smooth charmers, no-good thieves, treasure hunters, scouts, etc., because that is what a rogue is!

I think you're mixing up the bard with the rogue a lil' too much there.

~Killthorne~

[Mulu]

Speak for yourself, my bard uses a Greataxe.

[Amar]

PnP Rogues by Comparison to NWN Rogues: -/+

- Didn't have traps
- Had a lot more trouble getting sneak attacks mid-combat
- Couldn't stealth in broad daylight without anything to hide behind.
- Had a lot more skills to choose from that wouldn't be of use in NWN, and so had less points to focus towards important abilities.
- Tumble was a LOT harder, and often ignored by the DM.
+ Could RP their way out of more situations.