The way i would look at it is this
Whats in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook is common knowledge (( and yes since magic items are listed in it... would consider there use to be common knowledge now)).
What in the Bestiary is NOT common knowledge (( required skill checks to find out info... exeption for the monster ran into on regualer bases or common animal the PC grow up with))
What in the Pathfinder ""Other"" books is NOT common knowledge (( DM gets to say what is or is not common knowledge and what they will or will not allow in the game )).
Is this a perfect solution, no, but it does make game play a lot faster.
-----------------
A good house rule is player do not open up any book while the game is going on, unless it is to perform an action they are currently doing at this moment (( combat, traveling, Casting THE spell there using on there spell list )).
Would the wizard know about druid spells... yes. Would i let the wizard open up the Core rulebook.. and look up Druid spells during a game... NO. Not unless he ask for the druid spell by name and he succeded on a SpellCraft check for the specific info.
(( now were did i drop those 2 two penneys))
|
Lots of focus on Spellcraft here, but we use Knowledge Arcana/Religion for knowing about spells that nobody can cast. Semantics, really, but we treat spellcraft as knowing about the methods of casting and effects of spells, while Knowledge is concerned with the practices and general powers of their respective foci.
Thus, knowing a Druic can reincarnate someone, a Cleric can raise the dead, and a Wizard can contact another plane are all Knowledge checks. Actually seeing a Cleric start casting and shouting "Take cover guys, he's calling holy fire from the sky!" is a Spellcraft check.
Agreed. WOTC has actually created a precedent for this kind of check. If you reference some of the later splat books for 3.5, several of the classes have associated knowledge checks that can be used to determine what knowledge a PC has of that particular class. Why not apply this logic to core classes, especially if the PCs have never encountered a member of that class?
Also, how do you go about "hiring" a druid? Is there a druid temp agency? Or some kind of grow-your-own-druids-are-us, druid emporium? Honestly, as a DM I'd be less inclined to worry about the PCs knowing about druids and more curious as to why they think they can just hire one, willy-nilly.
To me it should be through Knowledge Arcana, and not spellcraft. And as for 'it being common knowledge' if you have ranks in a knowledge skill its not common knowledge. A DC 15 knowledge check is something 75% of normal people wouldnt know. DC 20 and almost no normal person would know it. DC 25 and only a few exceptional people know it. A wizard with max ranks in a Knowledge in a skill is a scholar in that area. This means he has done extensive study on the subject, including reading many many books on it. These would include more then just arcane magic. He SHOULD be able to figure out stuff like this, its the whole point of taking the skill.
I'd be using spellcraft to determine if a PC knows the general info about reincarnate, and it wouldn't matter if the skill user were arcane, divine, or investing in a cross-class skill. In fact, for all spell-based questions, I pretty much use spellcraft rather than know (arcana). I reserve that for non-spell magic effects, items, magical creatures, and general magic theory.
As far as setting a DC, if an observer can identify a spell from its somatic and verbal components with a check of 15+spell level, I'm going to reduce the DC to about 10+spell level to know some vague detail about the spell and the sort of person who could cast it. I'd reveal more detail, like general expense and any time limits, if the DC were beat by 5, 10, 15, etc.
Lots of focus on Spellcraft here, but we use Knowledge Arcana/Religion for knowing about spells that nobody can cast. Semantics, really, but we treat spellcraft as knowing about the methods of casting and effects of spells, while Knowledge is concerned with the practices and general powers of their respective foci.
Thus, knowing a Druic can reincarnate someone, a Cleric can raise the dead, and a Wizard can contact another plane are all Knowledge checks. Actually seeing a Cleric start casting and shouting "Take cover guys, he's calling holy fire from the sky!" is a Spellcraft check.
Agreed. WOTC has actually created a precedent for this kind of check. If you reference some of the later splat books for 3.5, several of the classes have associated knowledge checks that can be used to determine what knowledge a PC has of that particular class. Why not apply this logic to core classes, especially if the PCs have never encountered a member of that class?
Also, how do you go about "hiring" a druid? Is there a druid temp agency? Or some kind of grow-your-own-druids-are-us, druid emporium? Honestly, as a DM I'd be less inclined to worry about the PCs knowing about druids and more curious as to why they think they can just hire one, willy-nilly.
There are rules in the books for hireing people to cast spells for you. As for why they are getting a Druid vs Cleric argument, sometimes druids are more common. It depends on the campaign world and where you are in it. My last character to die was reincarnated (very happy, rolled bugbear) because we could find a fey druid but not a cleric.
|
|
There are rules in the books for hireing people to cast spells for you. As for why they are getting a Druid vs Cleric argument, sometimes druids are more common. It depends on the campaign world and where you are in it. My last character to die was reincarnated (very happy, rolled bugbear) because we could find a fey druid but not a cleric.
Exactly, just because the PCs are aware of druid spells what makes them think they will be able to find someone to cast it? If druids are so common that just anybody can go and find one, then the original argument is invalid.
I only meant to point out that the OP seemed more worried about the PCs' ability to obtain knowledge than what they would actually 'do' with this knowledge. If there is a drive-thru reincarnation shack on every street corner, then PC knowledge is largely irrelevant because eventually they will run into one.
There are rules in the books for hireing people to cast spells for you. As for why they are getting a Druid vs Cleric argument, sometimes druids are more common. It depends on the campaign world and where you are in it. My last character to die was reincarnated (very happy, rolled bugbear) because we could find a fey druid but not a cleric.Exactly, just because the PCs are aware of druid spells what makes them think they will be able to find someone to cast it? If druids are so common that just anybody can go and find one, then the original argument is invalid.
I only meant to point out that the OP seemed more worried about the PCs' ability to obtain knowledge than what they would actually 'do' with this knowledge. If there is a drive-thru reincarnation shack on every street corner, then PC knowledge is largely irrelevant because eventually they will run into one.
My thoughts are if you have a high enough knowledge to recognize the existance of said spell, then I would cetainly allow at least a side quest to travel to a druid [I cant think of the word for where druids gather at the moment, totally drawing a blank] and find a druid who may or may not be interested in providing this service (they may want something other then a simple monetary exchange). Clerics are usually easier to find since they generally reside in well advertised churches. Wizards too if there is a mage's guild nearby. Bards, druids, and the less common casters usually require a little effort to find in my mind, but I would still make it possible.
My thoughts are if you have a high enough knowledge to recognize the existance of said spell, then I would cetainly allow at least a side quest to travel to a druid [I cant think of the word for where druids gather at the moment, totally drawing a blank] and find a druid who may or may not be interested in providing this service (they may want something other then a simple monetary exchange). Clerics are usually easier to find since they generally reside in well advertised churches. Wizards too if there is a mage's guild nearby. Bards, druids, and the less common casters usually require a little effort to find in my mind, but I would still make it possible.
There are rules in the books for hireing people to cast spells for you. As for why they are getting a Druid vs Cleric argument, sometimes druids are more common. It depends on the campaign world and where you are in it. My last character to die was reincarnated (very happy, rolled bugbear) because we could find a fey druid but not a cleric.Exactly, just because the PCs are aware of druid spells what makes them think they will be able to find someone to cast it? If druids are so common that just anybody can go and find one, then the original argument is invalid.
I only meant to point out that the OP seemed more worried about the PCs' ability to obtain knowledge than what they would actually 'do' with this knowledge. If there is a drive-thru reincarnation shack on every street corner, then PC knowledge is largely irrelevant because eventually they will run into one.
Would it be.. a grove ? ^^
If a character in my games has enough ranks in Spellcraft to equal the level of the spell in question, I just rule that the character knows of the spell, period, unless it's of a different type of magic (Divine when the character casts Arcane spells and vice versa). In the case of the latter, the ranks needed is equal to the spell level +1.
If a character in my games has enough ranks in Spellcraft to equal the level of the spell in question, I just rule that the character knows of the spell, period, unless it's of a different type of magic (Divine when the character casts Arcane spells and vice versa). In the case of the latter, the ranks needed is equal to the spell level +1.
what if a non-spellcaster has spellcraft?
Would it be.. a grove ? ^^
It would indeed, I was totally blanking there... I hate it when it happens. Having New Years and a wedding in one long weekend messed up my mind.
Pathfinder doesn't have standard populations for villages that I can tell, but 3.5 did. And the probability of finding a high level druid in a small town was pretty high, like 25%
Not saying I like the default populations they had, but the probablity of a Druid was about the same as a Cleric.
My recollection may be off, but I don't hae access to the books right now at work.
If a character in my games has enough ranks in Spellcraft to equal the level of the spell in question, I just rule that the character knows of the spell, period, unless it's of a different type of magic (Divine when the character casts Arcane spells and vice versa). In the case of the latter, the ranks needed is equal to the spell level +1.what if a non-spellcaster has spellcraft?
Good question. They have to choose when they start taking ranks in it whether they focus more on arcane or divine.
Lots of focus on Spellcraft here, but we use Knowledge Arcana/Religion for knowing about spells that nobody can cast. Semantics, really, but we treat spellcraft as knowing about the methods of casting and effects of spells, while Knowledge is concerned with the practices and general powers of their respective foci.
Thus, knowing a Druic can reincarnate someone, a Cleric can raise the dead, and a Wizard can contact another plane are all Knowledge checks. Actually seeing a Cleric start casting and shouting "Take cover guys, he's calling holy fire from the sky!" is a Spellcraft check.
Mirror Mirror is correct.
Good question. They have to choose when they start taking ranks in it whether they focus more on arcane or divine.If a character in my games has enough ranks in Spellcraft to equal the level of the spell in question, I just rule that the character knows of the spell, period, unless it's of a different type of magic (Divine when the character casts Arcane spells and vice versa). In the case of the latter, the ranks needed is equal to the spell level +1.what if a non-spellcaster has spellcraft?
Indeed, a better option seems to be relying on knowledge arcana and knowledge religion.
Spellcraft a s a skill seems a bit redundant, shouldnt it just be a class feature ?
That is nothing knowledge arcana couldn't do if you scrap spellcraft.
It already has golem lore and such magic items do not seem a stretch.
They sometimes overlap, but they're not interchangeable IMO. Quite like comparing math to engineering.
One has a broad applicability(and all spellcasters can use it) the other is more focused.
As written they are not, but there is enough confusion between the two that you could implement spellcraft into knowledge arcana for the better part, spellcraft for wizards is a must have skill anyway. some might be class abilities and some might be knowledge arcana.
As written they are not, but there is enough confusion between the two that you could implement spellcraft into knowledge arcana for the better part, spellcraft for wizards is a must have skill anyway. some might be class abilities and some might be knowledge arcana.
Then you would be giving wizards a free skill point when other casters would be forced to take know(arcana) to be competent.
Pretty unfair, besides it's not all that confusing. Mirror Mirror is easily explaining the differences in a few lines.
It isn't that confusing, though the split doesnt make complete sense to me, spellcraft is an unnecesary skill imo, there shouldn't be a reason to learn spellcraft if you can't cast spells, broad magical lore like knowledge arcana is ok.
The spellcraft you need should be part of your class abilities.
there shouldn't be a reason to learn spellcraft if you can't cast spellsPerhaps you are interested in learning how to identify spells and magical effects.
For example: A rogue who specializes in magical traps.
For example: A mage-hunter fighter.For example: A barbarian who was apprenticed to his tribe's shaman, but was separated from the tribe before learning to use magic.
Etc ad nauseum.
there shouldn't be a reason to learn spellcraft if you can't cast spellsPerhaps you are interested in learning how to identify spells and magical effects.For example: A rogue who specializes in magical traps.
For example: A mage-hunter fighter.
For example: A barbarian who was apprenticed to his tribe's shaman, but was separated from the tribe before learning to use magic.Etc ad nauseum.
might be good not to rip it out off context though, what I proposed was to let knowledge arcana and in some cases maybe knowledge religion handle those situations. spellcraft checks for using detect magic and learning actual spells would for example be class abilities.