This should at the very least be a concentration spell. I'd say probably 10 minutes per cast. 1 minute if you turn it into a 1st level spell instead of second.

I don't think this spell is meant to be used to find orthodox "traps"

It seems more useful in detecting the presence of unfavorable legal documents, ambushes, and scams.

In my opinion, this should work like Detect Magic.  Concentration for 10 minutes with the same basic wording.  Right now it is a crapshoot to use at low levels...do I want to waste a spell slot just in the minor chance there are traps in my line of sight; which may just be one room or a long hallway. 

This is in the same vein of spells as TrueStrike, but it is level 2.

does this spell target self?

lmao even without homebrew this is "screw you dm, thought you could be cool" the spell.

In the video game Baldur's Gate, the spell lasted 3 turns (gamespeak for 30 rounds) and actually showed you where the traps were every round. This spell is garbage.

Player: "I cast find traps"

DM: Gets up, walks over to the player, points at this spell on their character sheet "This, right there."

Funnily enough this spell is actually incredibly useful, just not for what most people would think. RAW, legal traps in a contract would count. This wouldn't tell you where they are exactly, but it would tell you the general nature of them. As long as the writer of the contract intended for it to be harmful to you, it works.

This spell is fascinating. I could talk about the implications of this spell for hours. The way I see it, the definition of a trap for this spell can be broken up into three clauses:

1. Anything that would inflict a sudden or unexpected effect

2. you consider harmful or undesirable

3. which was specifically intended as such by its creator.

There's tons of weird edge cases here; for example, since the effect only has to be sudden OR unexpected (not both), all weapons are traps. But it goes further: if your world has creator gods, all poisonous plants are traps.

Things get really interesting when we consider the implications of clause 3: how is the creator (provided they're not a god) supposed to know what you consider undesirable? If someone breeds a Very Spicy Pepper, that would certainly be something which inflicts a sudden effect some would consider undesirable. The sudden effect is intentional; the disagreement is over desirability. Is the Very Spicy Pepper a trap?

Last thing; somebody questioned a bit back whether an ambush is a trap, because it's unclear who the creator is. I would say an ambush is definitely a trap for the purpose of this spell, because it's an arrangement of components (ambushers) meant to create an unexpected effect. Compare the ambush to a hedge with poisonous thorns; the hedge is merely an arrangement of plants, but I think we would definitely consider that a trap created by the arranger, even if the arranger did not personally create the individual plants.

Anyway this spell is wild and it's a great way to waste time rules lawyering at your table

I use generous interpretation of this spell. You can give a lot of hints in the "you do learn the general nature of the danger posed by a trap you sense"

I think the sentence "Thus, the spell would sense an area affected by the alarm spell, a glyph of warding, or a mechanical pit trap", is using poor grammar. I think that the phrase "the spell would sense an area affected by" is not excessive to only the alarm spell. If we break down this part of the sentence we could get this interpretation.

The spell would sense an area affected by the alarm spell.

The spell would sense an area affected by a glyph of warding.

The spell would sense the area affected by a mechanical pit trap.

All three of these example would be either hidden or invisible to the player's character using this spell. However the spell would sense them if the area affected by the traps were in line of sight. So you can have a well hidden trap set up but the spell would still sense the trap if the character can see the area affected by the trap.

Either make this a cantrip, or beef up the spell. It shouldn't depend on line of sight, or if it does, then it should additionally reveal exactly how to disarm it. 

Frankly, I think adding an addendum that it also reveals, within the spell’s established limits, what direction, but not distance, the trap is from the caster.  This still would require checks to disable traps and find the mechanism since it only is referring to the warded area of a trap.  And making it a ritual so spamming it takes time but doesn’t pull from your precious spell slots.

this would make it infinitely more useful since now you know the general direction of the trap and its nature.  Investigation checks to find the mechanism then thieves tools to disable it.

outside niche instances like the temple of Tamoachan in TFTYP, where your line of sight is severely limited, this spell isn’t going to see use and considered relatively useless otherwise.

To my knowledge this spell lasts until incapacitated or unconscious, on top of no concentration makes this really good. I agree it should tell you the location of the trap because it basically already does. Alot of people not realizing that once you realize their are traps you can limit your line of sight to determine the exact location and scope of the trap alongside already knowing what it's effects are.

Still can't believe in the 2024 PHB you still can't "Find" a trap with the spell "Find" Trap.