Detect Traps

[Lobo316]

How do you handle the spell Detect Traps. The spell states that it detects both traps magical and mundane, but does that include the trigger if it's seperate from the trap, or just the trap?

A few examples...
A 30x10 corridor with a door at the end. The corridor is lined with holes on the right and left walls. The holes will fire darts when triggered and the door is the trigger. When the door is opened without disabling the trap (or failing a disable roll) darts are fired from all the holes. So, what would detect traps shows as being the "trap"?

A. The entire length of the corridor (the holes that fire the darts)?
B. The door at the end (the trigger)?
C. Both?

Another example...
A 30x10 corridor with a door at the end. The door has an ancient rune carved into it. Every 10 feet along with hallway there is a trigger in the floor that, if stepped on, causes the rune to activate, filling the corridor with fire. What detects as a trap?

A. Each trigger in the floor (three seperate triggers)?
B. The rune in the door (the trap)?
C. Both?

One more example (and this is one we come across last night)
The cleric casts detect traps on a gargoyle (statue, not a creature) and finds a trap on the gargoyle. The Trap: The walls to the right and left, as well as above the gargoyle, were set to fire poisoned darts if the statue was messed with without disabling the trap. So, should the clerics detect traps have detected the walls that would fire the darts INSTEAD of the gargoyle (which was simply the trigger)? Or should BOTH the walls and the gargoyle have been detected?

In otherwords, does revealing a trap also reveal it's trigger, especially in cases where the traps and triggers are seperate?

[Treebore]

Perfect example of why I prefer the 3E version, Detect Snares and Pits. As it is, I only allow the spell to detect the trap itself. It doesn't turn them into a Thief who can find and identify the triggers too. Its nice enough that it reveals the trap.

[Fiffergrund]

Put yourself in the player's position. You have the presence of mind to prepare a Detect Traps spell, and cast it in a suspicious location, only to walk down the corridor and be informed that you couldn't detect the *triggers*, only the dart holes/scything blade/falling rocks. Your party takes damage and maybe even suffers a couple of fatalities. How irritated would you be with the CK?

In my view, it defies the spirit of the spell to treat the trigger as separate. The trap wouldn't exist without the trigger. It is all part of the same system/mechanism, therefore triggers are detected by the spell.

[Arduin]

How do you handle the spell Detect Traps. The spell states that it detects both traps magical and mundane, but does that include the trigger if it's seperate from the trap, or just the trap?

If it is part of the trap, it detects it. The "Trap" is the ENTIRE mechanism. It isn't "Detect Damaging Mechanism of Trap" spell.

[Omote]

It simply informs the caster of the presence of the trap. Nothing more.

~O

[Lobo316]

It simply informs the caster of the presence of the trap. Nothing more.

~O

I agree with this in spirit, but again, look at my examples...would the cleric detect "exact locations"? In the 2nd example, would it detect each trigger in the floor, plus the sigil at the end of the hall? Or would the cleric just know there was a trap "thata way", but nothing more? No distance, no location?

[Treebore]

Bottom line, my recommendation is don't let the spell turn the cleric into a thief, just knowing a trap is present is a good thing.

[Lobo316]

Put yourself in the player's position. You have the presence of mind to prepare a Detect Traps spell, and cast it in a suspicious location, only to walk down the corridor and be informed that you couldn't detect the *triggers*, only the dart holes/scything blade/falling rocks. Your party takes damage and maybe even suffers a couple of fatalities. How irritated would you be with the CK?

In my view, it defies the spirit of the spell to treat the trigger as separate. The trap wouldn't exist without the trigger. It is all part of the same system/mechanism, therefore triggers are detected by the spell.

Yea, we've had this discussion 6 ways to Sunday. That's why I gave those examples. I'm leaning towards Omotes suggestion of just saying "there is a trap that way" (range of the spell) and nothing more. Then I cover all bases. There's a trap...and presumably, the trigger and everything else in that general direction.

I'm leaning towards this being a case of the cleric's magic tells him there is a trap "in the range of the spell". From there, its up to the rogue to find and disable it (and I'll even give the rogue a bonus on finding the trap, since the clerics let him know there is one there to be found).

[Lobo316]

Bottom line, my recommendation is don't let the spell turn the cleric into a thief, just knowing a trap is present is a good thing.

Yup, this is more and more the way I am leaning. I'm really not sure what to reveal or not reveal in these cases, and not only does keeping it a bit vague prevent me from unintentionally misinforming the players, but it protects the "domain" of the rogue. Again, knowing there is a trap in the area does not reveal the trap, nor does it disable the trap.

In the case of a tripwire, does the tripwire detect as the "trap", or does the "scythe" that it releases detect as the trap? Or both?

If I just say "you detect a trap", they know its in that 10x50ft range, and that's that. They don't know if its the trigger, or the trap, it's all the same. They know "something" is there.

[Treebore]

If I just say "you detect a trap", they know its in that 10x50ft range, and that's that. They don't know if its the trigger, or the trap, it's all the same. They know "something" is there.

Thats pretty much how I do it.

[Fiffergrund]

FWIW, YMMV and all that, but the 1E AD&D Find Traps spell specifically says the cleric can see the trap. Granted, that's not C&C, but that's where I pull my framework - the traps glow much the same way magic items glow when using Detect Magic. The DMG actually mentions that for magical traps, the Cleric may be able to determine the type of magic. That's not a vague intuition, that's pretty specific. And it probably should be, considering Find Traps was a second level cleric slot in an era where every Cure spell counted.

I don't think this infringes on the rogue at all. First, the rogue can't necessarily see it to disarm it. Second, rogues can't see magical traps unless they have a physical component. That leaves a nice niche for this spell. Third, I think it is hilarious when a cleric's player has to describe how to avoid a complicated trap to a party that has to traverse a corridor or doorway. Someone is going to fail a roll.

I think it's fun either way, but the players need to have an understanding, because the "vague intuition" interpretation would completely stun me if I ran across it unprepared.

[Treebore]

If they are bothering to read the spell they are having their character pray for, like they should, they aren't being surprised.

[Arduin]

If they are bothering to read the spell they are having their character pray for, like they should, they aren't being surprised.

I read it. It says that you DETECT traps in an area.

detect, v. trans. To uncover, lay bare, expose, display (something covered up or hidden).

In C&C it works the same way the AD&D DMG says. So, if ones players are literate in English they WILL be expecting to see the traps IF they have bothered to read the spell.

[mmbutter]

My dictionary says "discover or identify the presence or existence of" - so either interpretation would apply with that definition.

[Arduin]

My dictionary says "discover or identify the presence or existence of" - so either interpretation would apply with that definition.

True. I'm using the OED. Lesser dictionary may vary from that authoritative reference on the English language.

[mmbutter]

Funny, my "lesser" dictionary also includes other definitions (one of which is a bit closer to yours, while others were further away in meaning). Wonder why the OED only has one definition?

Also, from the Oxford online:

VERB

[WITH OBJECT]
1 Discover or identify the presence or existence of:
cancer may soon be detected in its earliest stages

http://goo.gl/649Ln9