How easy is it to recognize whether or not a character in front of you is buffed if you have not entered combat and are just standing there.
Situation:
My GM is good but has a slight bias towards the monsters sometime. We are currently working for a Rakshasa which I hate but is too powerfull for us to destroy. when the time is right I intend to buff before entering the room with him then attack while talking. However I dont want my GM to have any excuse for the GM to know the attack is coming.
I want to have my counter argument prepared before hand.
In this scenario the Rakshasa can of course read minds but I alone have a ring of mind shielding which protects me from his sensing of my thoughts. I think I am wearing sufficient magic weapons and armor to confuse the first few rounds of detect magic and am otherwise covered up by clothing and hood so that spells like aspect of the raptor are not obvious to an observer. In this situation is there anything in rules which would make the fact that I have several magical buffs on my obvious?
I would say this depends on the DM. For example, when I run the game I give physical descriptions of what the buffs are doing. Shield of Faith gives a shimmering reflection each time an enemy swings and misses which indicates that your gods are providing you protection. Bulls Strength swells the targets muscles, Bears Endurance clears up their complexion, and so on. Some buffs don't get visual bonuses in my game, such as Fox's Cunning or Owl's Wisdom, both being mental buffs.
If you DM is anything like that, and playing a Rakshasha to their mental capabilities, then they will notice something is up right away. If you DM does not do visual buffs (or never has before) then your argument is that, for consistency sake, the buffs cannot be detected with the naked eye.
|
How easy is it to recognize whether or not a character in front of you is buffed if you have not entered combat and are just standing there.
Situation:
My GM is good but has a slight bias towards the monsters sometime. We are currently working for a Rakshasa which I hate but is too powerfull for us to destroy. when the time is right I intend to buff before entering the room with him then attack while talking. However I dont want my GM to have any excuse for the GM to know the attack is coming.
I want to have my counter argument prepared before hand.
In this scenario the Rakshasa can of course read minds but I alone have a ring of mind shielding which protects me from his sensing of my thoughts. I think I am wearing sufficient magic weapons and armor to confuse the first few rounds of detect magic and am otherwise covered up by clothing and hood so that spells like aspect of the raptor are not obvious to an observer. In this situation is there anything in rules which would make the fact that I have several magical buffs on me obvious?
well this is a crappy answer to your question, but the gm can do anything he wants. sorry to say that, but technically no the npc should not know you're buffed. a dispell magic AOE will shut your buffs down and the gm dosent need to "justify" that action, its a pretty generic strategy. trying to "out play" your gm is hard, very hard.
with that said, you should talk to your GM about the way the game is going. if he is a good GM, and you dont act in an aggressive way, he should be able to work past his "npc's are my babies" mentality that some develop.
as far as rulings go, no the rakshasa should not know you're buffed, but make sure you dont get scryed while you buff.
I intend to separate from the rest of the group for a moment just before entering his lair, "hey guys go ahead I gotta tie my boots" kind of thing. I have to keep it a secret from the players and the rakshasa because they may get their minds read.
also I intend to establish a few things before the attack such as between now and then every time I report I will keep a respectfull 30 or 40 feet behind the group.
lastly before going In i intend to not tell the DM but right what I am doing down on a piece of paper that I will leave folded but on the table so that when the battle starts i can say, (this is what i did 2 mins before the battle started)
If it were my game, I would allow a Knowledge (arcana) check: DC20+spell level to identify a spell that's already already cast/in place. That's what it's for right?
Ultradan
I would say is he used Detect Magic or Arcane Sight, he would be able to tell that you have magic surrounding you.
well this is a crappy answer to your question, but the gm can do anything he wants. sorry to say that, but technically no the npc should not know you're buffed. a dispell magic AOE will shut your buffs down and the gm dosent need to "justify" that action, its a pretty generic strategy. trying to "out play" your gm is hard, very hard.
I'm in the "Some are visible, some aren't, and it's up to your DM" camp. However, Dispel Magic no longer has an AoE version, and Greater Dispel Magic's AoE only affects a single spell per target (just as the 3.5 version did), or one spell/4 caster levels on a single target.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You need to talk to your dm about his interpretation of ongoing magical effects. Some dms insist on visible effects (a glow or shimer etc). You need to find out ahead of time. And also, I dont know about you're dm, but if you tried to pull the piece of paper thing at my table I would amusedly tear it up and ask you what do you do. The players dont have the right to keep secrets from the dm, if you dont tell the dm what you are doing, in my mind you didnt do it. Now if you think your dm would unfairly use this knowledge it is a completely separate problem, but the dm should still know about it.
The problem with writing it down on a piece of paper, is that there is so many things that can affect the rakshasas knowledge of your buffs, that if you dont tell your DM about the buffs, he might not be able to play it the way he wants. If it was my i think i would tear up the paper and move on from there.
If your DM is using OOC knowledge to help the rakshasa, then it is a problem, but as a player you shouldnt try to cheat your DM like that, you should instead talk to him, and only him, so the other players minds cant be read. A good DM should then allow you to act how you wanted, without tipping off the monster, even if it is a suicidal quest.
The thing is, you as a player cant know if the rakshasa has an invisible servant watching you before you enter, have a servant always skimming the magical capabilities of people entering (detect magic), people scrying you, and probably a whole lot of other stuff. You have to remember that the rakshasa is clever, very clever, and its certainly not impossible for it to have precautions like that.
The Rakshasa may have PC class levels so it will be hard to determine when you can take him. He may also be leveling up as the PC's are.
Before you jump him try to find out what the limits of his powers are, assuming the GM does not just give him "stats needed to beat the PC's at the moment", which is a long way of saying "autowin for the monster".
fair enough.
I play a character that thinks tactically and it becomes annoying to have all of my tactics basically ignored simply because the GM decided things HAVE to go a certain way.
then the GM wonders why people dont Role Play.
Im griping now because the GM is otherwise OK but it just bothers me and I want to find a fair way around it. outside of that the GM is fine.
The Rakshasa may have PC class levels so it will be hard to determine when you can take him. He may also be leveling up as the PC's are.
the rakshasa is a straight from the book CR10 part of an adventure path campaign. we are a level 7 group with below par treasure. we fought him by accident (stumbled upon his lair full of cohorts and were defeated) instead of PW the group the Rakshasa spared our lives in exchange for making us agree to do some work for him.
thus we have a general idea of the Rakshasas power level and my character (protected by the ring of mind shielding) is intent on killing the creature after we have gained more experience and possibly better weapons in combat.
Part of the problem is the campaign itself. encounters are either way above or below par for the group and so the GM buffs some and nerfs others.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the paper idea. I'm a really big fan of eliminating subconscious metagaming, and establishing a very firm "This is what I do, no take backs-- feel free to take a few steps back and establish what my course of action changes" is part of that.
People who are saying they would rip it up... that's pretty rude, I guess.
fair enough.
I play a character that thinks tactically and it becomes annoying to have all of my tactics basically ignored simply because the GM decided things HAVE to go a certain way.
then the GM wonders why people dont Role Play.
Im griping now because the GM is otherwise OK but it just bothers me and I want to find a fair way around it. outside of that the GM is fine.
The Rakshasa may have PC class levels so it will be hard to determine when you can take him. He may also be leveling up as the PC's are.the rakshasa is a straight from the book CR10 part of an adventure path campaign. we are a level 7 group with below par treasure. we fought him by accident (stumbled upon his lair full of cohorts and were defeated) instead of PW the group the Rakshasa spared our lives in exchange for making us agree to do some work for him.
thus we have a general idea of the Rakshasas power level and my character (protected by the ring of mind shielding) is intent on killing the creature after we have gained more experience and possibly better weapons in combat.
Part of the problem is the campaign itself. encounters are either way above or below par for the group and so the GM buffs some and nerfs others.
1. How does he nerf your tactics?
2.Your characters don't know what CR's are. As a GM I would allow knowledge checks to get a general idea of how tough a monster is though, and its weaknesses.
If the GM is changing other encounters he may change the Rakshasa. As a GM I am more willing to edit a boss character than I am some lackey.
Are you playing
I would not rip the paper up then how would it be recycled properly just put it in the recycling bin. Ripping it up is wasteful.
fair enough.
I play a character that thinks tactically and it becomes annoying to have all of my tactics basically ignored simply because the GM decided things HAVE to go a certain way.
then the GM wonders why people dont Role Play.
You need to have a real sit down with the DM. I don't play with a random pick-up group, and each player in my game I have known for years. As their DM, I would hope that they would have the confidence to come to me and say, "This is bothering me about the way you ran that situation / game / campaign, etc." I value what my players think about the game because being a DM means making sure that all persons at that table are happy, not just me.
Side note, I hope you have Silent Spell in there, else that Rahksasha is going to notice you casting the minute you start things off. Silent Spell and Slight of Hand would be the best options for casting without the enemy seeing anything.
I like the paper idea. I'm a really big fan of eliminating subconscious metagaming, and establishing a very firm "This is what I do, no take backs-- feel free to take a few steps back and establish what my course of action changes" is part of that.
People who are saying they would rip it up... that's pretty rude, I guess.
I believe the nature of that rip it up response is because the OP mentioned writting it, then holding onto it until he acted. As a DM I would want that note the minute it was written so I could be aware of it as a DM, and not as an NPC. If someone held a note like that in my game I would do the same, rip it up and toss it out, but if they handed it to me after they wrote it I would find a way to make it work (within reason).
The best thing I ever read in an RPG rule book was in the 4e DMG, and that was to say Yes way more than you say No.
The paper thing isn't a good idea. The nature of the game is to tell the GM what you are doing. In certain circumstances you might have an agreement where you pass a note to the GM so that other players/characters don't know something, but that's different from trying to hide something from the GM until the last minute and spring it on them, which breaks the previously established conventions and is in its own way rude.
Would I tear up the paper myself? No, I would ask the player what their character was doing during the two minutes when they announced they were going away from the party. If they told me at that point they were going to write it down and show it to me later, I would disallow that. If they had somehow written it down already and then later tried to spring it, I would disallow it. From a mechanical standpoint instead of the social one, writing down a sequence of actions without running it by the GM runs the risk of putting something against the rules or disallowed (e.g., items on list: 1. cast Time Stop; 2. cast other spells not allowed while Time Stop is going on; etc.) at which point when you produce the paper you're left with a series of actions which isn't plausible and the game comes to a halt as you try to salvage your plan.
All in all, just not a good idea.
Talk with the GM; tell them your plan and tell them why you think it should work. If they refuse to listen and insist on increasingly-obscure ways to foil your idea, find a new GM. To me, the invisible servant thing someone mentioned is clever, but seems unlikely. Me, if I was controlling the Rakshahsa, I would just read minds and, as soon as I found I could not read yours, assuming you did not hand over the ring on command, have you stripped of gear and clothing, piece by piece until the item causing this block was removed. No need for convoluted machinations when there's a built-in ability to keep tabs on slaves.
Some GM's metagame, some don't. A GM also has to account for what every NPC is doing. If you gave me the note I would decide, based on the NPC, would they have been spying on you using their availible resources. If he would not spy on you then you would get the drop on him, but otherwise he might pretend to be unprepared and lay the smacketh down. In short it is not a good idea to keep secrets from the GM, and there is not much you can do to change things besides talk to him. He might have it planned so that you get a chance to take the bad guy down anyway.
|
I like the paper idea. I'm a really big fan of eliminating subconscious metagaming, and establishing a very firm "This is what I do, no take backs-- feel free to take a few steps back and establish what my course of action changes" is part of that.
People who are saying they would rip it up... that's pretty rude, I guess.
I believe the nature of that rip it up response is because the OP mentioned writting it, then holding onto it until he acted. As a DM I would want that note the minute it was written so I could be aware of it as a DM, and not as an NPC. If someone held a note like that in my game I would do the same, rip it up and toss it out, but if they handed it to me after they wrote it I would find a way to make it work (within reason).
The best thing I ever read in an RPG rule book was in the 4e DMG, and that was to say Yes way more than you say No.
I agree with this. There's no way for the player to be sure that there isn't some kind of strange divination in play, or some kind of "Detect X" effect on a doorway or what-have-you. If the player hides something that prevents such an interaction, then there's a problem.
I don't care how much magic you've used to protect against divinations, there are effects that can trigger that aren't divination but still trigger on those conditions (such as Smite Evil triggering against a PC who should have turned evil for an act that they've hidden from the DM, regardless of whether that PC has alignment detection resistance).
If your DM metagames, that's a wholly different issue that can be helped by talking to the DM about it and possible having them write down what specific NPCs do and don't know.
If you are worried that your GM is going to metagame, than use notes. Write down what buffs, items, actions, intents, etc. that the NPC would not have any way of knowing before hand on a note. Make sure he sees you write the note and then put the note off to the side. When the situation comes up merely hand him the note and go from there.
I like the paper idea. I'm a really big fan of eliminating subconscious metagaming, and establishing a very firm "This is what I do, no take backs-- feel free to take a few steps back and establish what my course of action changes" is part of that.
People who are saying they would rip it up... that's pretty rude, I guess.
Its not rude, it is rule 0 at it's most appropriate. The dm has the right to know what the players are doing, because there are things going on the players are unaware of many times. Particularly big bad guys. Maybe there is a dispel trap on the door the players dont know about, or a few unseen eyes floating around. That matters.
Now if a player wants to right on a piece of paper what they are doing, thats fine, but keeping things a secret from the dm, in my book means tehy never happened in the first place.
I had players who used the 'note trick' and because they had their own ideas of how dragon breath worked, it almost led to a TPK.
Clumped, they'd readied actions to move when a dragon breathed, not realizing IMC dragons don't 'huff & puff', but just unleash (as per beholder example in 3.x rules, the breath occurs first, as you waited to see breath.)
What if you have all those buffs and then visit the Rakshasa when he has a harem of Erinyes visiting him?
"Umm, you seem a bit extra glowy today, Ral. Let me look a bit closer."
"It's nothing. Excuse me, I gotta pee."
"Guards!"
Plus, Rakshasa's are brilliant, so he's likely prepared for betrayal. A set of buffs on one PC just isn't enough to count on. You have to do some Augury/Commune/etc. beforehand (though, unfortunately, this may trigger DM metagaming, but as mentioned above, that's its own issue.)
If your DM feels the Rakshasa is key to his plot, you may just have to wait it out. (Sadly...)
Well the note trick is for metagaming DM's who consistently use their knowledge of the players and their actions to alter what the NPCs do and talking to them has not helped. I would not advise it for normal play.
Well the note trick is for metagaming DM's who consistently use their knowledge of the players and their actions to alter what the NPCs do and talking to them has not helped. I would not advise it for normal play.
In above case see 'finding a new dm'.
Do you honestly think even if your deception worked that this would do anything but make the problem worse? If a dm is already overly attached to npcs and metagames to hurt the party, imagine what he will do after the vile player 'tricks' his way into killing said treasured npc. It will be a horror show.
Well the note trick is for metagaming DM's who consistently use their knowledge of the players and their actions to alter what the NPCs do and talking to them has not helped. I would not advise it for normal play.In above case see 'finding a new dm'.
Do you honestly think even if your deception worked that this would do anything but make the problem worse? If a dm is already overly attached to npcs and metagames to hurt the party, imagine what he will do after the vile player 'tricks' his way into killing said treasured npc. It will be a horror show.
Yeah that is the basic idea. After which well, see 'finding a new dm'.
|
|
As to the original question... it depends on the DM and often on the players. Some DMs might force spells to look alike, others (like myself) allow the players to choose any reasonable appearance (including not visible in the case of buffs, though that's boring). If a player doesn't declare a theme, I assume invisible for buffs and the easiest appearance to imagine for the rest.
For an example of an odd-ball: You could have a druid that always summons creatures that look emaciated, whose barkskin looks like chitin, whose cure spells emit purple-blue light with tentacles the seem to settle into and seal wounds, etc. and all be perfectly fine. The only thing that matters is that the appearance matches the effect and that the effect is not changed.
These theme changes allow the casters to flavor themselves and keeps the game interesting.
well this is a crappy answer to your question, but the gm can do anything he wants. sorry to say that, but technically no the npc should not know you're buffed. a dispell magic AOE will shut your buffs down
No it won't go read dispel magic again.
and the gm dosent need to "justify" that action, its a pretty generic strategy. trying to "out play" your gm is hard, very hard.
And I don't need to play at his table, he absolutely needs to have a justifiable plan for the creature. If a dragon is noted for wading into melee and always attacking with claw and tooth it's going to look very odd if suddenly it is only using spells and breath weapons while staying out of range.
with that said, you should talk to your GM about the way the game is going. if he is a good GM, and you dont act in an aggressive way, he should be able to work past his "npc's are my babies" mentality that some develop.
as far as rulings go, no the rakshasa should not know you're buffed, but make sure you dont get scryed while you buff.
Arcane sight is something to watch out for as well.
the campaign is the seven spears (part 3 of the serpent skull)
the campaign is a bit of a sand box with 7 zones and each zone has a boss to be defeated to capture the zone. the rakshasa is simply the boss of one zone.
he modified the encounter so as not to result in a TPK. which is fine.
My character was charmed in the encounter and took offense to that and has secretly vowed revenge.
I accept the trying to "trick" the DM part is maybe the wrong way to do it but I still question weather buffs on a bunch of magic wearing PC can be observed out of combat.
the honest truth is that most intelligent monsters in the game particularly outsiders and dragons of any kind are, on paper, so powerful and intelligent that they are almost impossible to truely defeat at CR.
All i ask is that if an NPC has the ability to do all of these things to outsmart the party I would rather the DM ACTUALLY spent the resources or time to have various tricks and invisible servants or scrying or what ever than one who says nope anything you do wont work because I have determined that the bad guy retroactively took all the precautions to outsmart you because I dont want you fighting him without all his buffs and abilities already in place.
dont get me wrong I like this DM in all other ways but in this particular situation its out smart the DM or find all of your choices useless.
Note: I tried to talk to this DM before about a ruling in which a chimera was able to charge, pounce, make 3 attacks then A FIVE FOOT STEP, and make more attacks and the DMs ruling was basically "I think it should work that way" thats fine... it was his rulling... doesnt make a player feel like he is getting a fair shake and thus (and for many other reasons) i feel as if i have to out smart the DM not just the monster.
All i ask is that if an NPC has the ability to do all of these things to outsmart the party I would rather the DM ACTUALLY spent the resources or time to have various tricks and invisible servants or scrying or what ever than one who says nope anything you do wont work because I have determined that the bad guy retroactively took all the precautions to outsmart you because I dont want you fighting him without all his buffs and abilities already in place.
We actually have a rule in place in my group called the 'Take back' rule or 'Playing My Intelligence' rule. If your Int is 16, you get to ask if you can play your intelligence after an event has occurred in order to go back in time to ready a plan for something you missed that was blisteringly obvious. In example, I recently used this in my Saturday game. The group was all masquerading as an efreeti lord's entourage with my bard as the efreeti lord and I realized that I needed an actual persona so that people wouldn't be suspicious of the eight-foot instead of 12-foot tall efreeti. I used the rule, used the Lore Master ability to take a 20 on knowledge: planes for a 41, and was impersonating an efreeti who met those perameters. No questions were asked.
If your Int is 20 or above, we use an in-combat variant that allows you to take your turn back and do it over again after you've used it. This lets you retroactively cast spells like mage armor, arcane sight, prepare spells you need right now that you forgot to prepare, or to change your action after it's been effective, etc. You can do this once per turn equal to your Int - 10 divided by 2. So if you have a 20, once. A 30, twice. A, god forbid, 40, three times. It helps represent your character's innate absolute brilliance that you, the player, have no hope of ever emulating. In example, if anyone's a Doctor Who fan, there's an example of this kind of take-backsies game between two people in Let's Kill Hitler where they are obviously using our houserule to counter eachother's plans at a rapid fire pace.
This houserule works.
the campaign is the seven spears (part 3 of the serpent skull)
the campaign is a bit of a sand box with 7 zones and each zone has a boss to be defeated to capture the zone. the rakshasa is simply the boss of one zone.
he modified the encounter so as not to result in a TPK. which is fine.
My character was charmed in the encounter and took offense to that and has secretly vowed revenge.I accept the trying to "trick" the DM part is maybe the wrong way to do it but I still question weather buffs on a bunch of magic wearing PC can be observed out of combat.
the honest truth is that most intelligent monsters in the game particularly outsiders and dragons of any kind are, on paper, so powerful and intelligent that they are almost impossible to truely defeat at CR.
All i ask is that if an NPC has the ability to do all of these things to outsmart the party I would rather the DM ACTUALLY spent the resources or time to have various tricks and invisible servants or scrying or what ever than one who says nope anything you do wont work because I have determined that the bad guy retroactively took all the precautions to outsmart you because I dont want you fighting him without all his buffs and abilities already in place.
dont get me wrong I like this DM in all other ways but in this particular situation its out smart the DM or find all of your choices useless.
Note: I tried to talk to this DM before about a ruling in which a chimera was able to charge, pounce, make 3 attacks then A FIVE FOOT STEP, and make more attacks and the DMs ruling was basically "I think it should work that way" thats fine... it was his rulling... doesnt make a player feel like he is getting a fair shake and thus (and for many other reasons) i feel as if i have to out smart the DM not just the monster.
Now with a major NPC I would give him more attention, but I have been a GM with a lot of time, and not so much time.
With regards to the chimera incident, is everyone allowed to do it? That would have been my next question. I don't like unannounced sudden house rules that don't affect everyone equally. It ruins immersion for me. If he makes up things as he goes you may be better off with another group, especially if he cheats (for the NPC's).
If I was in his group I would be a druid, and choose a tiger, if that was something everyone could do.
Arcane Sight will reveal multiple magic auras if you are buffed and if it is a really powerful rakshasa may be on, possibly with permanency.
Also a sense motive DC 15 or versus bluff gives you a hunch about creatures intentions and its resonable to make that check for coerced unwilling underling.
A ring of ming shielding will protect you fron mind reading, but that will be suspicious and will surely tip the rakshasa.
I redomend a scry and die tactic, you already know where it is so simply simply buff the hell out of the party summon a few creatures teleport, use the surprise round to disable us much as posible the rakshasa and beat the c**p out of it.
Humbly,
Yawar
Yeah that is the basic idea. After which well, see 'finding a new dm'.Well the note trick is for metagaming DM's who consistently use their knowledge of the players and their actions to alter what the NPCs do and talking to them has not helped. I would not advise it for normal play.In above case see 'finding a new dm'.
Do you honestly think even if your deception worked that this would do anything but make the problem worse? If a dm is already overly attached to npcs and metagames to hurt the party, imagine what he will do after the vile player 'tricks' his way into killing said treasured npc. It will be a horror show.
Have you thought about becoming that new DM? It is not for everyone, but it can be oh so satisfying at times. I know that for myself that seat is my favorite one in the house because I love seeing the players faces when that plot point clicks and they finally figure things out, or they get that great victory.
The DM you currently have sounds like they are using that chair for a power trip to get out the things that don't go right the rest of the day. That is a bad place to be for those kinds of people as the DM technically should have way more failures than he players do.
Just to note most mind reading abilities allow a save throw (detect thoughts specifically does) so the Rakasha is going to be use to a certain level of occasional failure with his detect thoughts ability (someone rolls a 20, or such) and simply not being able to detect your thoughts isn't going to be completely suspicious unless you use something that lets him know his attempt was blocked and not simply unsuccessful.
Just to note most mind reading abilities allow a save throw (detect thoughts specifically does) so the Rakasha is going to be use to a certain level of occasional failure with his detect thoughts ability (someone rolls a 20, or such) and simply not being able to detect your thoughts isn't going to be completely suspicious unless you use something that lets him know his attempt was blocked and not simply unsuccessful.
Some failure, sure, but constant failure no. After a few times of not being able to read the players mind I would think the Rakasha would have become frustrated and curious all in one and try to find out why he can't read this one persons mind. Would make for some interesting RP when that happens.
Just to note most mind reading abilities allow a save throw (detect thoughts specifically does) so the Rakasha is going to be use to a certain level of occasional failure with his detect thoughts ability (someone rolls a 20, or such) and simply not being able to detect your thoughts isn't going to be completely suspicious unless you use something that lets him know his attempt was blocked and not simply unsuccessful.Some failure, sure, but constant failure no. After a few times of not being able to read the players mind I would think the Rakasha would have become frustrated and curious all in one and try to find out why he can't read this one persons mind. Would make for some interesting RP when that happens.
Well it depends on the character too -- After all detect thoughts is a second level spell and the "average" Rakshasa should have a DC of 15 total -- in the text it is given a DC of 18 which honestly doesn't make any sense (detect thoughts being a second level spell and a charisma bonus of 17 only accounts for a total DC of 15). Even assuming this Rakshasa is a cut above the norm, and focused on this particular ability he's still only looking at around a DC19~21 with the 'honest DC' or 24~27 with the enhanced DC given in the text (ability focus the 'special monster' +4 to cha and possibly a headband of Cha).
My overall point is many times GMs 'forget' or 'don't bother' with giving the players the resistances they rightly have and deserve.
Now I'm not saying it's a given that the PC should pass the save throw -- only that it is a very real possibility to start with, and one that needs to be understood for it's implications for the Rakshasa's mind reading ability. He's got multiple targets and a lot going on.
To some extent these sorts of things aren't going to be abnormal for him in either direction.
How easy is it to recognize whether or not a character in front of you is buffed if you have not entered combat and are just standing there.
In this situation is there anything in rules which would make the fact that I have several magical buffs on my obvious?
From the Pathfinder PRD:
Knowledge (Arcana):
Identify a spell effect that is in place: D20 + spell level
That's how easy.
Also there are several other questions which must be considered in this situation that has nothing to do with the rules.
1. Is it a known Rakshasa? And are Rakshasa known in the campaign? Are these legendary creatures? Will by default that means there are legends about them, and most likely not good ones. Rakshasa are cannibals any good creature (including PC) should be wanting to get out of under its thumb. Many creatures would be regularly thinking about how to get away with murder on a regular basis. In fact a creature not thinking such thoughts would probably surprise the Rakshasa more than one thinking about it. It's hard to say, "you know you should fear and hate this creature because of the legends" without also allowing the legends to provide some knowledge about why you should fear and hate the creature.
2. He's had the ring of mind shielding for a while now from the sounds of it. If that's the case the Rakshasa is probably use to it by now -- he knows it's there and he isn't going to be able to read that particular mind. It just means he'll be wary when dealing with the individual... of course that goes without saying anyways.
3. What has the character/ other character's thoughts and relationship with the monster been before now? If it's obvious he's a monster then we need the backstory and history to actually know just how out of place this would be.
remember this rakshasa is simply a mid campaign boss that we ran into before we were supposed to.
in essence out mission is to clear out the various zones of the city and subjugate the denizens. we got to the Rakasha a few levels too early and instead of TPK the GM modified it so that the Rakasha enlisted us to clear out the city for him instead of our original employer.
The rakshasa is not exactly the "dragon" of the campaign. At this point all he knows about us is that we showed up with the intention of taking control of his zone. in fact when we went there my character was scouting what he thought was the city dump or something judging from the foul oders coming from his lair. I totally blew my stealth check however and the Rakshasa spotted me and charmed me (blew the will save too)
in other words the rest of the campaign does not hinge on him and by script he should be killed by us anyway.
my only complaint is that the GMs version of making it harder to defeat is to basically auto counter any tactics we may employ.
Have you thought about becoming that new DM? It is not for everyone, but it can be oh so satisfying at times.
I actually GM a diffeent game, but my GM style is totally different
How easy is it to recognize whether or not a character in front of you is buffed if you have not entered combat and are just standing there.
In this situation is there anything in rules which would make the fact that I have several magical buffs on my obvious?
From the Pathfinder PRD:
That's how easy.Knowledge (Arcana):
Identify a spell effect that is in place: D20 + spell level
which kind of answers my question. if they ahve to cast a spell or DO something then thats different than just a passive "look at him he is glowing"
if we report to the guy 3 times and he never does such a thing but then on the 4th time when I plan to attack him and am buffed up he suddenly decides he is going to cast detection spells and suspect my treachery then I have a valid complaint.
I am in the some do have visual effects and some don't.
For example: stoneskin, barkskin and haste do have, bull's strenght and divine power on the hand do not have.
It's troubling that there isn't a clear rules answer to such a basic question.
It's troubling that there isn't a clear rules answer to such a basic question.
Not really. Dev's leave certain things open for debate so they can work however you want them to for your campaign. This is a creative game after all. If every little thing was spelled out for you than you'd be playing a video game.
when we face buffed enemies our characters never know the other is buffed unless it is something obvious like blur or mirror immage.
we never have any indication of strength or even armor buffs like stone skin except maybe when the buff wears off.
|
Maybe your character should start buffing as he goes to see the Rashaka, but not attacking.
Every time you go, cast a new buff, start with the long duration stuff, like protection from energy, mage armor, that kind of stuff. Have your PC clearly act paranoid and distrustful. "I'm protecting myself because I don't trust you" If the Rashaka dispels have your character leave in a huff "Clearly I need that sort of protecting if your going to be hostile towards me."
Eventually the Rashaka is going to get used to you being buffed, especially if every time you go you have more stuff on. Then one day, BOOM you attack. Rashaka is like "well shit"
That being said... the Rashaka might start buffing ahead too...
actually I am planning on doing just that.
I will find excuses to report to him from time to time and every time I go I will buff before entering. I will also wear gloves in order to make it difficult for him to figure out WHY he cant read my mind (at this point in time he simply believes i have a strong resistance)
he (and more importantly the GM) should be used to me buffing every time I go in and even a sense motive check will not show any hostile intent because I will not intend to attack him at all the first few times.
its not until he is used to my constant buffs that I will bother to attack him.
only problem is that I will never be able to do warn my friends because they may have their minds read.
Only thing I have to worry about is if he orders me not to buff and takes hostile action if I refuse.
also... if he charms me and asks can i hide my intentions behind the charm?
what I mean is... if he charms me and asks "do you have hostile intentions toward me" I would be totally telling the truth that NO i dont have any hostile intentions because he is my good buddy and I would never harm a friend" how I feel outside of the charm is a different issue right?
Just make sure protection from evil is one of your buffs.
Long duration don't have to worry about charms.or suggestions.
|
also... if he charms me and asks can i hide my intentions behind the charm?
what I mean is... if he charms me and asks "do you have hostile intentions toward me" I would be totally telling the truth that NO i dont have any hostile intentions because he is my good buddy and I would never harm a friend" how I feel outside of the charm is a different issue right?
Probably not, if he charms you and asks if you intend to do him harm you would more than likely tell him that yes you do.
Probably not, if he charms you and asks if you intend to do him harm you would more than likely tell him that yes you do.also... if he charms me and asks can i hide my intentions behind the charm?
what I mean is... if he charms me and asks "do you have hostile intentions toward me" I would be totally telling the truth that NO i dont have any hostile intentions because he is my good buddy and I would never harm a friend" how I feel outside of the charm is a different issue right?
Obviously not... If you are charmed then he is your closest bestest pal why ever would you do him harm?.... And of course you would lie if he asked you if you were going to attack him before.... I mean really that would just hurt his feelings and none of it really matters now anyway...right?