I prepared explosive runes this morning

[TheThan]

So long story short: yesterday our rogue found himself a scroll case. He saw that it was inscribed with runes so he read them. The scroll case was trapped with explosive runes and promptly blew up in his face.

The player had never seen the spell before and doesn’t read OOTS. So the more experienced players (me and the Dm) had to explain to him how the spell worked. Which lead to a discussion on what would happen if you try to tamper with the runes. Such as scratch them out or paint over them.

We came to the conclusion that the spell would probably detonate if it’s tampered with. I imagine that such a spell would be temperamental anyway since it'll go up in smoke when simply read. But I was curious what others thought about such a situation.

This is pathfinder, but I see no reason why this wouldn’t extend to other editions.

[Marnath]

Tell you what, print off a page of text and try to paint over it without inadvertently reading it. It's harder than you think.

[Moriato]

From the spell description:

Note: Magic traps such as explosive runes are hard to detect and disable. A rogue (only) can use the Search skill to find the runes and Disable Device to thwart them. The DC in each case is 25 + spell level, or 28 for explosive runes.

I'd say that trying to scratch them out or paint over them is probably exactly what a rogue would do to disable explosive runes, so it would require a DC 28 Disable Device check. Fail by 5 or more and it goes off, just like any other trap.

Edit: Didn't notice it was pathfinder. Don't know if they made any changes to disable device or not from 3.5, but I'm sure you can work it out from there.

[Sarco_Phage]

It's a spell, and the trigger specifically states that it must be read to trigger it. Dispel Magic/Erase can also force a detonation if they fail. Otherwise, it's not like a particularly volatile material.

As GM, you can rule that it does detonate if tampered with, but personally I'd rule that if the specific spell trigger isn't tripped, then the spell won't execute.

Curiously enough, a Rogue can disable the runes with a Disable Device check against DC 28. I'm wondering how. Probably scratches them off or something.

[NNescio]

Having Explosive Runes being tripped off by tampering may lead to them being used as offensive weapons.

[Necroticplague]

Having Explosive Runes being tripped off by tampering may lead to them being used as offensive weapons.

They already have, in a device called a boom box.

[lightningcat]

Tamapering with them as in trying to disable them? I would think that they would trigger if you failed your Disable Device check. Same as if you failed to erase or dispel them.

[Sarco_Phage]

Tamapering with them as in trying to disable them? I would think that they would trigger if you failed your Disable Device check. Same as if you failed to erase or dispel them.

I'm wondering how that failure takes place, though. Does the Rogue simply... fail to not read the runes?

[TheThan]

The Dm ad-libbed a will save to avoid accidentally reading the runes on the other two scroll cases the rogue found. Witch works for the time being. Anyway it’s kind of important because we do have a blind oracle in the party. So we could always give him something suspect if the Dm decides to make a habit of using the spell.

I’ve heard of explosive runes being used offensively primarily by casting it on something, sending it at them (say a ball or something) and dispelling it and intentionally failing the attempt, thusly making the runes explode. I totally call shenanigans on this though and I know the Dm won’t let that happen.

[Moriato]

I'm wondering how that failure takes place, though. Does the Rogue simply... fail to not read the runes?

Probably. I mean you can't look at the runes while you're doing it, and there's really only one way to know for sure if you did it right or not. "Ok, I think they're probably all scratched out now. *peek* *BOOM*" "Missed one"

[lightningcat]

Maybe that, or it might be that when you double check the work you didn't do a good enough job messing it up and read it then, or maybe you trigger the same self destruct trick that erase and dispel magic can trigger.
There are several different ways to explain it in game.

[NNescio]

On a related note, how does ER interact with Looking Glasses and scrying spells?

[Flickerdart]

This is why the Barbarian is the best trap-checker. "What is this reading you speak of? Can I kill it with my axe?"

[lightningcat]

To avoid shanagians, I think that they would be unseen (or at least unreadble) by scying. Otherwise you get them acting as offensive spells, but most likey used agaisnt the caster.

[TheThan]

We joked about explosive Braille, for the wizard that really is prepared for ANY eventuality.

[Volthawk]

This is why the Barbarian is the best trap-checker. "What is this reading you speak of? Can I kill it with my axe?"

Hell, they even have an ACF for trap duty. Trapkiller from Dugeonscape, which lets you disarm traps with attack rolls.

[Necroticplague]

Theirs a flaw that grants illiteracy and a skill bonus. Give it to a rogue, put the bonus in disable device. Done. Or an incarnate with thief's gloves and illiteracy trait.

[elonin]

Not being able to see would work here. Maybe use the hood that makes you blind but adds blind sight 30'. Certainly can't see to read there.

[John Campbell]

Note, Barbarians in Pathfinder aren't illiterate by default.

The one I'm currently playing is, because I took the flaw. (I have Ranger levels, so I would've needed the flaw anyway.) The party wizard made a couple of helms of comprehend languages, though, because we keep getting dumped into worlds where we don't speak any of the local languages, and those don't seem to make being able to read in the first place a requirement for their granting the ability to read incomprehensible writing. Incomprehensible is incomprehensible, whether it's because you don't know the language, or because you don't know how to read at all.

My illiterate barbarian tripped a sepia snake sigil in our last session.

Fortunately, my Reflex save is awesome. (I rolled a 4. I still made the save.)

[Darth Stabber]

Explosive runes is a fun spell. The real trick is to put multiple castings on a single item, throw said item into a group of enemies, then cas dispel magic on the item and voluntarily fail the CL check. This detonates each instance of ER, meaning multiple reflex saves, and multiple instances of the damage (this is the aforementioned "boombox"). Boombox is one of the reasons that ER is considered one of the best damage spells, because it let's you stack multiple instances of the spell, from a different days allotment of spells and allows multiple damage spells to trigger on a single action, allowing a massive abuse of action economy at a relatively low level.

[Jeebers]

Explosive runes is a fun spell. The real trick is to put multiple castings on a single item, throw said item into a group of enemies, then cas dispel magic on the item and voluntarily fail the CL check.

Slight problem. While the rules do not mention it, there would be a limit as to which objects were large enough to have runes on them, and a limit as to how many copies one could have on a single object because of space restriction. Human beings can only write so small, y'know?

[Marnath]

Slight problem. While the rules do not mention it, there would be a limit as to which objects were large enough to have runes on them, and a limit as to how many copies one could have on a single object because of space restriction. Human beings can only write so small, y'know?

That's why the actual boombox has many sheets of paper in it, each with a rune. Set a glyph of warding on it that fires a CL 1 Dispel Ward when the target race/alignment/etc steps on it. Statistically, it fails to dispel 19 of the 20 runes in the box.

[cfalcon]

The oracle by the rules isn't blind, it's a clouded vision, and doesn't obscure reading.

Of course, your oracle could actually be blind for another reason.

[TurtleKing]

I'm curious how does a rogue know to disable the Explosive Runes trap without having read it?

Edit: Grammar.

[Safety Sword]

I'm curious how does a rogue know to disable the Explosive Runes trap without having read it?

Edit: Grammar.

Search check?

I know there's a trap. Doesn't mean I've set it off. Just like a mechanical trap would work, really. Except I'm a rogue, and I can do it for magical traps as a class feature.

[tyckspoon]

Search check?

I know there's a trap. Doesn't mean I've set it off. Just like a mechanical trap would work, really. Except I'm a rogue, and I can do it for magical traps as a class feature.

Basically. If you're going to find and disarm magical traps, you have to grant some level of magic to a Rogue's Search and Disable Device skills as well. At least Explosive Runes has a physical representation that you could theoretically disable; an Alarm spell and several other magical trap effects has no physical source and no practical way to get to the origin of the effect without setting it off, but a Rogue can still Search for it and Disable it. Just throw it on the pile of things that are more trouble than they're worth to think about, like HP.

[Xuc Xac]

For most of human history, recognizing that marks were actually written words and understanding what they said were very separate. Punctuation, line breaks, and even spaces between words are a relatively recent invention (that some languages still don't have). In order to "read" a text, you had to speak the individual sounds out loud to distinguish the words. Before the 10th century, being able to read silently was like being able to recite Pi to 500 places. Even after the 10th century, it was still seen as kind of weird and even when reading silently, people would still move their lips and tongues to vocalize to themselves.

In a pseudo-medieval D&D setting, it's entirely reasonable that even a highly literate wizard would be able to look at a page of writing and recognize that it's writing, but not know what it says until he makes a real effort to read it. Explosive runes don't make sense as "symbols that explode when a literate person looks at them". Either they explode when anyone looks at them (which is rather potent and a little absurd) or they explode when someone tries to understand what they say (by voicing the sounds they represent and triggering the spell).

A rogue can look at a bunch of writing and think "Hey, there's some writing here. Hmm. There doesn't seem to be any ink here, just a difference in color. I think this is a magic trap. Nobody read these words. I'm going to get my chisel and scrap them off."

[Marnath]

For most of human history, recognizing that marks were actually written words and understanding what they said were very separate. Punctuation, line breaks, and even spaces between words are a relatively recent invention (that some languages still don't have). In order to "read" a text, you had to speak the individual sounds out loud to distinguish the words. Before the 10th century, being able to read silently was like being able to recite Pi to 500 places. Even after the 10th century, it was still seen as kind of weird and even when reading silently, people would still move their lips and tongues to vocalize to themselves.

In a pseudo-medieval D&D setting, it's entirely reasonable that even a highly literate wizard would be able to look at a page of writing and recognize that it's writing, but not know what it says until he makes a real effort to read it. Explosive runes don't make sense as "symbols that explode when a literate person looks at them". Either they explode when anyone looks at them (which is rather potent and a little absurd) or they explode when someone tries to understand what they say (by voicing the sounds they represent and triggering the spell).

A rogue can look at a bunch of writing and think "Hey, there's some writing here. Hmm. There doesn't seem to be any ink here, just a difference in color. I think this is a magic trap. Nobody read these words. I'm going to get my chisel and scrap them off."

Everyone except barbarians who don't want to spend the skillpoints is literate in D&D. Even the lowest peasant. So reading the runes isn't a problem.

[MarkusWolfe]

Tell you what, print off a page of text and try to paint over it without inadvertently reading it. It's harder than you think.

Ask the barbarian to paint it. Problem solved.

[faceroll]

Curiously enough, a Rogue can disable the runes with a Disable Device check against DC 28.

The same way a rogue disables any other magical trap, or avoids a fireball while trapped inside a 5x5x5 box. He does something rogue-y.