[Monk Ability] "I found a trap! Um... Somebody throw a rock."
Dee
Member Posts: 10,447
Current Behavior
The Monk has the ability to Find Traps, but no ability to disarm them once detected. A party with a monk still requires a thief in order to proceed.
Desired Behavior
The Monk has the ability to Find Traps. Now, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense if the monk could disarm traps and open locks and all of that good stuff that thieves are famous for (because that's what thieves are famous for), but with an ability like this, a monk needs to be able to gain some kind of benefit other than "Oh well, looks like we can't go that way."
I have two proposals.
The first proposal is that the monk, when he detects a trap, temporarily disarms it--in other words, he finds a way around the trap that allows the party to proceed unharmed. After a few rounds, the trap re-arms itself, so that the monk will have to "Find" it again on the way back. The trap is not disarmed, but it is bypassed--which, I think, is the purpose of the ability in the first place.
The second proposal is that the monk be given a passive ability whereby any trap he detects will be unable to activate as a result of the monk's actions. In other words, the monk finds the trap, he is able to cross it. The rest of the party is SOL, however, unless they have a thief. So basically, the monk gets to benefit as though he had disarmed the trap, but only for himself.
A third idea I just had applies the first idea to all trapfinders, including Thieves. In other words, when you find the trap, it is safe to cross it for the next few rounds; after those rounds, the "red square" disappears and you have to find it again. So a thief still takes the advantage by being able to permanently disable the trap, but the monk is able to benefit from his ability as well.
The Monk has the ability to Find Traps, but no ability to disarm them once detected. A party with a monk still requires a thief in order to proceed.
Desired Behavior
The Monk has the ability to Find Traps. Now, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense if the monk could disarm traps and open locks and all of that good stuff that thieves are famous for (because that's what thieves are famous for), but with an ability like this, a monk needs to be able to gain some kind of benefit other than "Oh well, looks like we can't go that way."
I have two proposals.
The first proposal is that the monk, when he detects a trap, temporarily disarms it--in other words, he finds a way around the trap that allows the party to proceed unharmed. After a few rounds, the trap re-arms itself, so that the monk will have to "Find" it again on the way back. The trap is not disarmed, but it is bypassed--which, I think, is the purpose of the ability in the first place.
The second proposal is that the monk be given a passive ability whereby any trap he detects will be unable to activate as a result of the monk's actions. In other words, the monk finds the trap, he is able to cross it. The rest of the party is SOL, however, unless they have a thief. So basically, the monk gets to benefit as though he had disarmed the trap, but only for himself.
A third idea I just had applies the first idea to all trapfinders, including Thieves. In other words, when you find the trap, it is safe to cross it for the next few rounds; after those rounds, the "red square" disappears and you have to find it again. So a thief still takes the advantage by being able to permanently disable the trap, but the monk is able to benefit from his ability as well.
11
Comments
Yes, yes they should. In fact, if I'm remembering the spell's effects correctly, the Find Traps spell should keep your party safe from traps for the entire duration of the spell.
To clarify:
It makes no sense to be able to find a trap if there's no way to get past it without a thief, and if you have a thief, your thief should already be able to find it. So currently the ability is either useless or irrelevant. These proposals would make it neither.
Therefore I'd support the second idea.
However because it would only effect the monk, it's only really effective for solo gamers.
P.S Soloing sucks x
And the same argument could be said for a thief, but making it a monk-exclusive ability would be more flavorful, and would give the monk an early-game ability to make it useful.
At the final boss of vanilla icewind dale, I had the feeling there may be traps your thief can't disarm, so a similar situation.
The ability for Monks to spot traps is probably due to their nature as being used as a scout. Players can use the 'search for traps' script on them and have an extra person, that is normally out ahead of the party anyways, looking for traps.
In BG, a thief doesn't need this because traps only affect the party anyway. But for a monk, the ability to find traps is useless when most of the traps are unavoidable (usually because they stretch across the entire room/hallway).
The other possibility would be just to take away the ability entirely. But as it is, it does next to nothing.
How about this:
In BG give Monks an ability called "Trap Evasion" in their skill pool that they assign points to. If their Trap Evasion skill is equal to or higher than the required skill level to disarm the trap, they will not trigger the trap. If the avoid is successful, dialogue will be displayed "CHARNAAME advoided a trap".
But that's for another thread. My point is that Find Traps, by itself, is a useless ability.
A monk is not a thief, and has little in common with a bomb disposal unit. However they are supposed to have sharpened senses... allowing them to see things, such as trip wires, fake floor tiles, etc etc...
It's like asking a metal detector to suddenly be able to make a cup of tea and dispose of the bomb as well...
How in the blazes does that jump into, even disabling it for a short while? They can go round it, avoid it or send in a meat shield with lots of hp and protections to set it off first... Personally that would be Garrick, and I wouldn't probably give him any protections anyway... If he lives, I'll send him through the next trap... Plenty more NPCs to choose from that I don't like...
No. Don't like this idea. First and foremost because there are so many ways of disposing them without a thief anyway! Use a wand of summoning or charm a monster, if sending an NPC to its doom does not tickle your fancy... If your just after extra xp *roll eyes* kill more monsters!
Feedback on how I feel only
I suppose what I don't like is... If you find a trap you should be able to go through it... I found a bomb... Lets walk by it... Hell lets find that bomb again and walk by it when we go back... Out of character and human nature...
I find this to be pretty useful when I'm playing a thief kit that gets less points per level like an assassin or a bounty hunter.
Though if people really can't wrap their heads around the Monk having a disarm traps ability, then I'd suggest introducing a saving throw (that's dependent on how many points the find traps ability has) for the activation of the trap for the party when crossing over it. I wouldn't mind if they had a separate disarm traps spell. It seems a bit pointless to be able to detect them but not disarm them.
The other thing is that, for the traps that are "unavoidable", the way that they seem to be designed is things like tripwires and pressure-plates, all of which should be avoidable by a party that knows where they are. But there's currently no way to represent this in the game; you're left to either disarm the trap, set it off, or avoid it entirely (which is often impossible in the context of traps blocking the way forward through the plot).
Look, I'm not saying the monk should replace the thief. But something really ought to be done about this ability. The monk has no use for it if he can't actually do something about it, and "set it off but carefully" is, I'm afraid, not a sufficient "use".
Being that heavily opinionated, a wall of text alone won't do it for you.
The "uses" that have been described aren't good uses, either because they make no sense (It allows you to set the trap off at your convenience, but it offers you no way to get past the trap--so that means your character says, "There's a trap here, and we don't know what it does. So let's just set it off anyway...") or because they rely on having a thief handy who can disarm the trap for you (Which begs the question, what's the bloody point of the monk having the ability to find them in the first place?).
So to fix the problem, I proposed a few ideas, @bigdogchris proposed another one (which I actually like even more), and I've even suggested as a possibility that the ability be removed entirely. I'm not picky. I just would like to see the monk's abilities make sense. Right now, this one doesn't.
NPC1: Well, Monk, what do we have?
Monk: It seems to be some kind of trip-wire. It sets off a series of pendulums that shred to pieces anyone that stands there.
NPC1: Right--well, then, let's just step over it, shall we?
Monk: No, I'm afraid that's impossible.
NPC1: What do you mean, impossible? Just step over it.
Monk: No, you see... We don't have a "step over it" button in the controls. But don't worry, I have an idea. NPC2, trip the wire.
NPC2: What?? You just said it would shred me to pieces!
Monk: Well, yes, but I mean, not literally to pieces. Well, maybe literally to pieces. I have no idea what it will do, to be honest.
Thief: How about I just disarm the tripwire?
Monk: Listen, we agreed that I would handle the traps in this hallway, and that's what I intend to do! Now NPC2, if you'll just walk across the tripwire, we'll carry you back to the temple to be revived...
Doesn't quite follow, does it?
I think his main concern is just to start a discussion on whether the skill was fully implemented to be a useful state. Maybe the way it stands now is useful enough, but maybe there is wiggle room to improve it a little more without overpowering Monks.
I think giving Monks the ability to disarm the trap is overpowered, but I think giving Monks the ability to 'Evade Traps' is not. Disarming the trap so no one can be hurt by it, and being agile enough to evade it yourself, are drastically different powers.
While you might find your own arguments undeniably compelling, I'm simply reading what you actually write, and I will show you it: /Opinion. /Opinion. /Taking only one possible situation and outcome into consideration; conveniently one that fits your argument. /Presumption that a problem exists, and closing with an opinion. /Creating a single hypothetical situation to support your view. Blatant fallacy if there ever was one.
And with that I'm off. I think we both agree that we don't agree on this subject anyway.
The bug thread is for the facts. If you're worried about nit picking opinion/fact, bugger off to the Bug threads.
But then
That's so helpful.