Rogues and Magically Locked Doors [Archive] - Wizards Community

Rogues and Magically Locked Doors [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Maldrin
04-07-08, 10:51 AM Rogues can find and disable magic traps. This is accepted and clearly stated in the rules. But a scenario that took place recently in a game my wife is running prompted this question: can a rogue bypass a magically locked door?

Here was the scenario: the characters were locked in a large cell with a magically held door. Retaining his tools, my rogue attempted to find a way to open the door with no luck. We were eventually saved by the group's knight who took a guard hostage and forced him to open the door with a set of keys, we saved the damsel-in-distress(tm) and made our escape.

Now, she didn't state what spell was holding the door, but it would be a custom spell. It allows the door to be opened and closed by the keys, but magically holds the door otherwise, so it's not a standard spell. My rogue is still a fairly low level, so the question is more theoretical than practical at this point, but I think it's still valid.

So how say you? Would a rogue of sufficiently high level/skill be able to bypass magically locked or held portals/doors/windows/etc. in a similar manner to magical traps?
Kursk
04-07-08, 11:06 AM Rogues can find and disable magic traps. This is accepted and clearly stated in the rules. But a scenario that took place recently in a game my wife is running prompted this question: can a rogue bypass a magically locked door?

Here was the scenario: the characters were locked in a large cell with a magically held door. Retaining his tools, my rogue attempted to find a way to open the door with no luck. We were eventually saved by the group's knight who took a guard hostage and forced him to open the door with a set of keys, we saved the damsel-in-distress(tm) and made our escape.

Now, she didn't state what spell was holding the door, but it would be a custom spell. It allows the door to be opened and closed by the keys, but magically holds the door otherwise, so it's not a standard spell. My rogue is still a fairly low level, so the question is more theoretical than practical at this point, but I think it's still valid.

So how say you? Would a rogue of sufficiently high level/skill be able to bypass magically locked or held portals/doors/windows/etc. in a similar manner to magical traps?

No, not by the RAW.
Jay_Ibero_911
04-07-08, 03:25 PM Well Arcane Lock is a standard magical lock spell, and it explicitly can't be opened by anything but breaking, dispel magic, or knock. It'd be safe to assume that this could be applied to any other magical lock effect that didn't specifically allow for the open lock skill to be used. Depending on exactly how the spell works, it might be reasonable to allow a disable device check, since it functions on many magical devices.
Maldrin
04-07-08, 04:57 PM We discussed it a bit more today. One thought was that it would fit the image of the rogue to allow it in a similar manner to bypassing magical traps. Since Arcane Lock and Hold Portal both state specific increases to the DC for breaking, those could be applied to the open lock check.

Another thought would be to make it a feat. Perhaps require a certain open lock skill. Or even have it as a class feature choice for the higher levels.

I'm still interested to hear other peoples' thoughts about whether or not it should be allowed and why/not.
ragoftag
04-07-08, 08:24 PM Intriguing! I might be interested in a feat that would allow a Rogue to treat a door as a lock...
Maldrin
04-08-08, 09:55 AM Intriguing! I might be interested in a feat that would allow a Rogue to treat a door as a lock...

Working on the theory that a door would typically have some sort of lock or other mechanism, why would that be so outlandish? And since rogues can already bypass magical traps, why not add something that would let them manipulate magical locks?
1 ton ghost
04-08-08, 12:30 PM Some good points you've ppl made. Nj thread btw.

This is something I think should've been covered a while ago. I mean, the expert treasure finder, trap buster, general sneaky bastard in general kinda' has counter-security and "door protocol" under his/her sphere of influence.
In a more simplified arguement as mentioned prior, if they, AND ONLY THEY per Trap Finding can bust traps, specifically magical traps, it stands to reason that magical doors kinda' fall in that vein. I mean, a mage could feasibly Dispel a glyph or danger area for d4 rnds, but per RAW, only a mage can bust an Arcane Lock, etc, right?

I guess I was/should be of the opinion that those magical security measures on a door should be made elligible for a scoundrel type to breach.
Simplest solution is just upping the DC vs. Open Lock or a small provision, not a whole new skill, etc.
elonin
04-08-08, 07:45 PM I'd probibly just add some difficulty to the open locks dc
ragoftag
04-08-08, 09:43 PM Maldrin
Working on the theory that a door would typically have some sort of lock or other mechanism, why would that be so outlandish? And since rogues can already bypass magical traps, why not add something that would let them manipulate magical locks?Short of rewriting the actual skill, most people content themselves with a feat, as "A feat is a special feature that gives your character anew capability or improves one he or she already has." (PHB 3.0, p77) That said, a good GM could see his way free to allowing this as a function of the skill WotC failed to consider. An actively held door would come down to an opposed roll in my game, more tension that way.
Maldrin
04-09-08, 09:43 AM My wife and I have house-ruled a lot of things, and this is one of them. We have agreed that when we each GM, we are allowing the open lock skill to be used against magically held portals and to increase the DC by whatever the spell increases the break DC by. I just figured I would post it here and see what opinions others have. Sometimes I find better ideas here than what I come up with.
key
04-09-08, 10:15 AM Good catch. I'll now have the same house rule.
gixanthrax
04-09-08, 11:01 AM Why not simply go the way as with disable device?

base Open Lock DC determined by the quality of the lock + Spell level = New OL DC.

Of course this would mean that i have to wait till Lvl 10 until i can open the most complex and magically best prtected locks/doors with a DC of 49 ( 40 for realllyyyyy good lock and 9 for 9th lvl spells)

On the other side, i have created doors for my players who were only to be opened by a password or a special action to be taken. It would have spoiled their and my fun if the rogue simply had said, mhm, I take 20 on open Lock/ door...
war_thog
04-09-08, 06:29 PM you should probably raise the DC higher than the str check.
A door's break DC maxes out at what 28? for a beasty steel door, while DC 40 is the best lock. Increasingbreak DC by 5 is heaps for str, but not for open lock as it is much easier to get bonuses to skill checks than abilities. I'd consider doubling the bonuses. After all, you arent meant to be able to open the thing at all as per RAW.

Alternatively you could treat the spell as a magical trap and force the players to disable it before they can open the lock.
Maldrin
04-10-08, 09:34 AM you should probably raise the DC higher than the str check.
A door's break DC maxes out at what 28? for a beasty steel door, while DC 40 is the best lock. Increasingbreak DC by 5 is heaps for str, but not for open lock as it is much easier to get bonuses to skill checks than abilities. I'd consider doubling the bonuses. After all, you arent meant to be able to open the thing at all as per RAW.

Alternatively you could treat the spell as a magical trap and force the players to disable it before they can open the lock.

You make a good point about the DC increases. Also, I hadn't considered making two checks: one to bypass the spell and another to actually open the door. That may be a good way to do it.

And just for the record, I realize that there is nothing in the rule as they are presented in the books regarding this, but I think that the ability to do this very much fits the image of the rogue-ish characters. I think the spirit of the archetypes that the characters are based on can benefit from house-ruling like this. (That's just my opinion, you're free to disagree. :) )
Dheran
04-11-08, 06:56 PM I favor making this an extension of the skill use, but with significant boost to the DC. The 2nd level spell Invisibility adds a flat +20 to the difficulty if you're using the Spot skill to counter it. I figure the 2nd level spell Arcane Lock should add +20 to the DC for Open Lock to counter.

It is, after all, not in the standard rules for this to be possible at all. Also it's easier to increase skill modifiers than many other things in D&D. So a steep boost to the DC makes it possible, but *really* tough. (I also add +10 to the DC for Hold Portal, a 1st level spell.)
wizarddog
04-12-08, 04:26 PM I think allowing a rogue to bypass an Arcane Lock door (which clearly states can be open only by Knock or dispel magic) nerfs the spell. This is a 2nd level spell here. Plus, arcane lock doesn't necessarily have to have a lock on the door to work so adding a +20 DC to a door that had no lock to begin with doesn't do anything except to a low level rogue. And Allowing a Rogue to use disable device is also forces you to look at whether he/she just use a take 20 on it since their is no threat of triggering a trap.

Rogues already have a skill to get past Arcane lock. It's call Use Magic Item. They buy ranks in that to use a a Knock wand or scroll for such locks. :P
elonin
04-12-08, 08:47 PM It's a second level spell. Adding a signifignt number to the dc is enough.
blade265
04-12-08, 10:41 PM In a more simplified arguement as mentioned prior, if they, AND ONLY THEY per Trap Finding can bust traps, specifically magical traps, it stands to reason that magical doors kinda' fall in that vein.
Wrong, The Artificer from EbCS can find and disable magical traps as well as the Scout from Complete Adventurer.
war_thog
04-14-08, 12:58 AM I get the impression he was looking at PHB only classes in which case hes right.

RE: disable device vs arcane lock spell...... well be inventive with side effects. If the rogue ****s it up in such a way that he would have triggered a trap were it a real trap, hit him with something. ****ing with magic should have consequences, just because they arent written in doesnt stop them from happening :)
Hit him with the effect of a backfired scroll or something, I dont know, its all good :)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Maldrin 04-07-08, 10:51 AM	Rogues can find and disable magic traps. This is accepted and clearly stated in the rules. But a scenario that took place recently in a game my wife is running prompted this question: can a rogue bypass a magically locked door? Here was the scenario: the characters were locked in a large cell with a magically held door. Retaining his tools, my rogue attempted to find a way to open the door with no luck. We were eventually saved by the group's knight who took a guard hostage and forced him to open the door with a set of keys, we saved the damsel-in-distress(tm) and made our escape. Now, she didn't state what spell was holding the door, but it would be a custom spell. It allows the door to be opened and closed by the keys, but magically holds the door otherwise, so it's not a standard spell. My rogue is still a fairly low level, so the question is more theoretical than practical at this point, but I think it's still valid. So how say you? Would a rogue of sufficiently high level/skill be able to bypass magically locked or held portals/doors/windows/etc. in a similar manner to magical traps?
Kursk 04-07-08, 11:06 AM	Rogues can find and disable magic traps. This is accepted and clearly stated in the rules. But a scenario that took place recently in a game my wife is running prompted this question: can a rogue bypass a magically locked door? Here was the scenario: the characters were locked in a large cell with a magically held door. Retaining his tools, my rogue attempted to find a way to open the door with no luck. We were eventually saved by the group's knight who took a guard hostage and forced him to open the door with a set of keys, we saved the damsel-in-distress(tm) and made our escape. Now, she didn't state what spell was holding the door, but it would be a custom spell. It allows the door to be opened and closed by the keys, but magically holds the door otherwise, so it's not a standard spell. My rogue is still a fairly low level, so the question is more theoretical than practical at this point, but I think it's still valid. So how say you? Would a rogue of sufficiently high level/skill be able to bypass magically locked or held portals/doors/windows/etc. in a similar manner to magical traps? No, not by the RAW.
Jay_Ibero_911 04-07-08, 03:25 PM	Well Arcane Lock is a standard magical lock spell, and it explicitly can't be opened by anything but breaking, dispel magic, or knock. It'd be safe to assume that this could be applied to any other magical lock effect that didn't specifically allow for the open lock skill to be used. Depending on exactly how the spell works, it might be reasonable to allow a disable device check, since it functions on many magical devices.
Maldrin 04-07-08, 04:57 PM	We discussed it a bit more today. One thought was that it would fit the image of the rogue to allow it in a similar manner to bypassing magical traps. Since Arcane Lock and Hold Portal both state specific increases to the DC for breaking, those could be applied to the open lock check. Another thought would be to make it a feat. Perhaps require a certain open lock skill. Or even have it as a class feature choice for the higher levels. I'm still interested to hear other peoples' thoughts about whether or not it should be allowed and why/not.
ragoftag 04-07-08, 08:24 PM	Intriguing! I might be interested in a feat that would allow a Rogue to treat a door as a lock...
Maldrin 04-08-08, 09:55 AM	Intriguing! I might be interested in a feat that would allow a Rogue to treat a door as a lock... Working on the theory that a door would typically have some sort of lock or other mechanism, why would that be so outlandish? And since rogues can already bypass magical traps, why not add something that would let them manipulate magical locks?
1 ton ghost 04-08-08, 12:30 PM	Some good points you've ppl made. Nj thread btw. This is something I think should've been covered a while ago. I mean, the expert treasure finder, trap buster, general sneaky bastard in general kinda' has counter-security and "door protocol" under his/her sphere of influence. In a more simplified arguement as mentioned prior, if they, AND ONLY THEY per Trap Finding can bust traps, specifically magical traps, it stands to reason that magical doors kinda' fall in that vein. I mean, a mage could feasibly Dispel a glyph or danger area for d4 rnds, but per RAW, only a mage can bust an Arcane Lock, etc, right? I guess I was/should be of the opinion that those magical security measures on a door should be made elligible for a scoundrel type to breach. Simplest solution is just upping the DC vs. Open Lock or a small provision, not a whole new skill, etc.
elonin 04-08-08, 07:45 PM	I'd probibly just add some difficulty to the open locks dc
ragoftag 04-08-08, 09:43 PM	Maldrin Working on the theory that a door would typically have some sort of lock or other mechanism, why would that be so outlandish? And since rogues can already bypass magical traps, why not add something that would let them manipulate magical locks?Short of rewriting the actual skill, most people content themselves with a feat, as "A feat is a special feature that gives your character anew capability or improves one he or she already has." (PHB 3.0, p77) That said, a good GM could see his way free to allowing this as a function of the skill WotC failed to consider. An actively held door would come down to an opposed roll in my game, more tension that way.
Maldrin 04-09-08, 09:43 AM	My wife and I have house-ruled a lot of things, and this is one of them. We have agreed that when we each GM, we are allowing the open lock skill to be used against magically held portals and to increase the DC by whatever the spell increases the break DC by. I just figured I would post it here and see what opinions others have. Sometimes I find better ideas here than what I come up with.
key 04-09-08, 10:15 AM	Good catch. I'll now have the same house rule.
gixanthrax 04-09-08, 11:01 AM	Why not simply go the way as with disable device? base Open Lock DC determined by the quality of the lock + Spell level = New OL DC. Of course this would mean that i have to wait till Lvl 10 until i can open the most complex and magically best prtected locks/doors with a DC of 49 ( 40 for realllyyyyy good lock and 9 for 9th lvl spells) On the other side, i have created doors for my players who were only to be opened by a password or a special action to be taken. It would have spoiled their and my fun if the rogue simply had said, mhm, I take 20 on open Lock/ door...
war_thog 04-09-08, 06:29 PM	you should probably raise the DC higher than the str check. A door's break DC maxes out at what 28? for a beasty steel door, while DC 40 is the best lock. Increasingbreak DC by 5 is heaps for str, but not for open lock as it is much easier to get bonuses to skill checks than abilities. I'd consider doubling the bonuses. After all, you arent meant to be able to open the thing at all as per RAW. Alternatively you could treat the spell as a magical trap and force the players to disable it before they can open the lock.
Maldrin 04-10-08, 09:34 AM	you should probably raise the DC higher than the str check. A door's break DC maxes out at what 28? for a beasty steel door, while DC 40 is the best lock. Increasingbreak DC by 5 is heaps for str, but not for open lock as it is much easier to get bonuses to skill checks than abilities. I'd consider doubling the bonuses. After all, you arent meant to be able to open the thing at all as per RAW. Alternatively you could treat the spell as a magical trap and force the players to disable it before they can open the lock. You make a good point about the DC increases. Also, I hadn't considered making two checks: one to bypass the spell and another to actually open the door. That may be a good way to do it. And just for the record, I realize that there is nothing in the rule as they are presented in the books regarding this, but I think that the ability to do this very much fits the image of the rogue-ish characters. I think the spirit of the archetypes that the characters are based on can benefit from house-ruling like this. (That's just my opinion, you're free to disagree. :) )
Dheran 04-11-08, 06:56 PM	I favor making this an extension of the skill use, but with significant boost to the DC. The 2nd level spell Invisibility adds a flat +20 to the difficulty if you're using the Spot skill to counter it. I figure the 2nd level spell Arcane Lock should add +20 to the DC for Open Lock to counter. It is, after all, not in the standard rules for this to be possible at all. Also it's easier to increase skill modifiers than many other things in D&D. So a steep boost to the DC makes it possible, but really tough. (I also add +10 to the DC for Hold Portal, a 1st level spell.)
wizarddog 04-12-08, 04:26 PM	I think allowing a rogue to bypass an Arcane Lock door (which clearly states can be open only by Knock or dispel magic) nerfs the spell. This is a 2nd level spell here. Plus, arcane lock doesn't necessarily have to have a lock on the door to work so adding a +20 DC to a door that had no lock to begin with doesn't do anything except to a low level rogue. And Allowing a Rogue to use disable device is also forces you to look at whether he/she just use a take 20 on it since their is no threat of triggering a trap. Rogues already have a skill to get past Arcane lock. It's call Use Magic Item. They buy ranks in that to use a a Knock wand or scroll for such locks. :P
elonin 04-12-08, 08:47 PM	It's a second level spell. Adding a signifignt number to the dc is enough.
blade265 04-12-08, 10:41 PM	In a more simplified arguement as mentioned prior, if they, AND ONLY THEY per Trap Finding can bust traps, specifically magical traps, it stands to reason that magical doors kinda' fall in that vein. Wrong, The Artificer from EbCS can find and disable magical traps as well as the Scout from Complete Adventurer.
war_thog 04-14-08, 12:58 AM	I get the impression he was looking at PHB only classes in which case hes right. RE: disable device vs arcane lock spell...... well be inventive with side effects. If the rogue **s it up in such a way that he would have triggered a trap were it a real trap, hit him with something. **ing with magic should have consequences, just because they arent written in doesnt stop them from happening :) Hit him with the effect of a backfired scroll or something, I dont know, its all good :)