OK... so a group of adventurers run across an enemy and have a chance to fight or run.
in most games it is assumed that every fight is balanced for the party so fighting is usually the obvious answer.
if the enemy is stronger than the party it is usually very obvious because the enemy is an obviously power opponent like a dragon, posses overwhelming numbers, or the GM simply presents the enemy in a way that makes it obvious that running is kind of the expected option.
but what happens when its not so obvious or when running and fighting are equally valid but totally not obvious.
examples
ex. 1) A group of level 7 characters come across 2 powerful outsiders, lets just say barbed devils. each one is a CR 11 which is way too powerful for 4 or 5 level 7s but to be honest barbed devils are medium sized and have no major outside evidence of their power until they actually start fighting at which point its too late.
ex. 2) A group of level 7 characters happen to sneak into the lair of the BBEG who in this case is an ogre with several class levels in barbarian and even a few sorcerer levels for nifty bonus spells. They have the chance to run but since they would normally wipe the floor with an ogre and thy have no reason to believe that the ogre is anything more than the normal run of the mill ogre except maybe with a nice axe and chain shirt until of course its too late.
ex. 3) The group of level 7s characters come across an imposing obvious magic user with an interesting staff and his friend a hulking half-barbarian with a large magic war axe and magically enchanted hide armor. the two are actually level 3 but judging from their outward appearance the players have no way to judge their level of power and chose to defer to the boastful barbarian and mysterious mage.
In these kind of cases what kind of non-metagaming ability do the PCs have to help them decide how to rate their relative power vs the enemy?
same way in real life? You don't? (in the case of humanoids)
And generally, should be making knowledge checks about other things to figure out how bad they are... I could be wrong, but I just can't think of a way without metagaming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There were rules in 3.5's Complete Warrior for this sort of thing.
Personally, I think it's needed in the game system, in order to create a simulationist environment.
If nothing else, I'd allow a Sense Motive check. Maybe DC 15 for three rough categories, weaker, about equal, stronger.
I was thinking of a kind of Dragon Ball Z like chi sense where people can just generally get an idea of relative power. Mages would get a bonus against sensing arcane power because they can sense the power of the other guys latent magical ability but they would get no bonus feeling the divine power available to a divine caster and would probably be quite poor at sizing up a melee opponent.
on the other hand a fighter would get a bonus to rating melee prowess just by subconsciously taking in how the opponent moves and carries themselves but would be not so good at judging what powers a skinny guy in a dress can wield when he twiddles his fingers or even a penalty trying to grasp how much of a connection a divine caster has with his or her god.
If I did something like that what kind of check would it be? Sense motive? Perception? spell craft? knowlage archana? intimidate?
bassed on wis? int? charisma?
ex. 1) A group of level 7 characters come across 2 powerful outsiders, lets just say barbed devils. each one is a CR 11 which is way too powerful for 4 or 5 level 7s but to be honest barbed devils are medium sized and have no major outside evidence of their power until they actually start fighting at which point its too late.
Spells like the Detect Evil line can give you some indication of certain creatures general strength.
ex. 2) A group of level 7 characters happen to sneak into the lair of the BBEG who in this case is an ogre with several class levels in barbarian and even a few sorcerer levels for nifty bonus spells. They have the chance to run but since they would normally wipe the floor with an ogre and thy have no reason to believe that the ogre is anything more than the normal run of the mill ogre except maybe with a nice axe and chain shirt until of course its too late.
Certain Knowledge checks might, and I emphatically stress might, give you some knowledge of an opponent. This is much more likely, IMHO, if this is augmented by something like a Ranger's Favored Enemy, Inquisitor's Monster Lore, Bardic Knowledge etc.
ex. 3) The group of level 7s characters come across an imposing obvious magic user with an interesting staff and his friend a hulking half-barbarian with a large magic war axe and magically enchanted hide armor. the two are actually level 3 but judging from their outward appearance the players have no way to judge their level of power and chose to defer to the boastful barbarian and mysterious mage.
A "Gut Instinct" Sense Motive check may, depending on your GM, give you a general idea of whether you are severely outclassed or completely unthreatened.
The only reliable way for PC's to truly know what you're getting into, is to... well... know what you're getting into. Gather Information, Research, Scrying, etc. If you walk into a situation blind, expect to get blindsided.
Usually by getting punched in the face.
The face to fist technique is probably one of the most commonly employed.
I know with certain NPCs I use rumor and stories to give people kind of cues that this might be something to be worried about. Of course those rumors and stories aren't always to be trusted, but that is what skills like diplomacy and knowledge local or whatever are for.
im actually just trying to figure out how to throw it into a standad game, sometime because i have players that want to challenge an NPC just because they dont like hearing what it has to say and other times because I like using the occasional situation where the correct action is for the players to run.
I also kind of want to know because when I am playing I dont mind running at all if the situation is too dangerous. the problem is that most GMs are not inclined to let you know your about to get beat down until your in the process of getting beat down. I would like to say "can I run a sense motive to estimate comparative strengths before choosing to talk crap or walk away?"
I would use knowledge checks as a GM to give players a hint as to the potential trouble they will have with certain creatures. There is no hard rule for it.
Generally they do not have to know, depending on the kind of game you play you can give them warnings or not. Last time I almost got my party killed becasue they refused to make a deal with a coven of Nighthags with a few class levels to boot, with a little luck, cutting them a wee bit of slack and good rolls they managed to survive, but honestly I was expecting a TPK. I just don't like to play a game where players can attack everything they want 'because the GM would not put them in that position'.
Almost ended the campaign but it made the fight memorable at least..
I like how "cast a spell" is the preferred method of dealing with any problems. and people wonder why players complain about the weakness of fighters. ^_^
Some time the players run into a situation through valid role play that the GM did not expect but cannot easily work around without flat out saing "dont fight him for 3 levels cuzz he will kick your arse" which i find a little annoying.
at other times the GM activly wants the players to use a little discression without ramming it down their throats or railroading them into it. the ability to check relative power without getting punched in the face would add more to the game.
and finally sometime you just want to check for stupid factor, A GM I was playing with wanted to railroad us away from something in a sandbox campaign and since we defeated his first attempt he sent an obviously overpowered enemy at us. He showed us the picture in the book and we knew that fighting this enemy was suicide there was no non-metagame way for us to say we "tactical retreat from a known superior enemy". to be honest even a knowledge planes to see how powerful it was would really only give us a description like "powerful evil outsider known to kick ass" which would be the same description for a CR5 bearded devil or a CR11 Barbed devil. one is an easy battle the other is a party wipe.
Had we been allowed to do a "relative power check" we could have been warned back without getting beat down in the process and having to spend hero points to survive.
by the way we survived because the summons only lasted 5 rounds then poof.
|
I'd think Knowledge checks for the first, then a Perception check for the next (if the orgre is a sorcerer, for example, he'd probably possess items he'd have no business possessing, like wands or activation-based items), and as for the third, well, that one is a tough one. In that case, they really can't. Sense Motive, maybe?
I mean, there's not much you can do besides try and find out manually (i.e. fight them) and if worst comes to worst, make sure to have a rogue in the party with access to a scroll of haste, or a wizard, or a fighter with boots of striding and springing...so as to run away very, very fast.
I kind of wish Detect Power Level existed...so i could make it into a monocle-like magic item and have someone crush it while screaming "oh Gods, it's over 9000!"...but, you know...a man can dream though. A man can dream.
|
As most have said with monsters knowledge checks should do the trick. But with humanoids it is difficult. Frankly, I like it that way.
One of the "problems" with 3.5 is the assumption that encounters will be balanced. I kind of liked the old school where you never knew. One of the greatest feelings in a campaign is being defeated or running from someone at low level only to return later after gaining experience to defeat him. But that is just me.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, Knowledge checks is handy though if said monster has class levels, advanced HD or templates not easily noticed this can fail short. I typically use a Sense Motive vs a DC=CR+10 opposed by a bluff if the foe is actively trying to maintain that they aren't as skilled as they appear. Otherwise its a matter of learn the hard way.
Knowledge checks allow you to acquire some bits of knowledge about opponents based on CR. That's about all there is at the moment, barring Sense Motive hunches. If you come across a CR 15 wizard, the DC is probably around 25-30. What kind of information you might get is a bit iffy. RAW, you can identify creatures and their special powers or abilities; so you might gleam that they might cast 7th+ level spells; have poor Fortitude saves; etc. The only trouble is that it's very vague as to what sort of information to gleam. RAW, however, the information has to pertain to the creature's capabilities and be useful. Key word here is useful.
Knowledge checks allow you to acquire some bits of knowledge about opponents based on CR. That's about all there is at the moment, barring Sense Motive hunches. If you come across a CR 15 wizard, the DC is probably around 25-30. What kind of information you might get is a bit iffy. RAW, you can identify creatures and their special powers or abilities; so you might gleam that they might cast 7th+ level spells; have poor Fortitude saves; etc. The only trouble is that it's very vague as to what sort of information to gleam. RAW, however, the information has to pertain to the creature's capabilities and be useful. Key word here is useful.
That is all fine for creature types but not so much on classed creatures, the DC increasing the more legendary (higher level) characters become doesnt make sense I'd say it is more likely to know something about them.
A knowledge religion check might allow you to tell a fact or two about a certain priest though, it stands to reason that a seasoned cavalier knows of this famus general, but other than that.. I wouldn't treat it the same as a monster knowledge check.
Knowledge checks allow you to acquire some bits of knowledge about opponents based on CR. That's about all there is at the moment, barring Sense Motive hunches. If you come across a CR 15 wizard, the DC is probably around 25-30. What kind of information you might get is a bit iffy. RAW, you can identify creatures and their special powers or abilities; so you might gleam that they might cast 7th+ level spells; have poor Fortitude saves; etc. The only trouble is that it's very vague as to what sort of information to gleam. RAW, however, the information has to pertain to the creature's capabilities and be useful. Key word here is useful.
That is all fine for creature types but not so much on classed creatures, the DC increasing the more legendary (higher level) characters become doesnt make sense I'd say it is more likely to know something about them.
A knowledge religion check might allow you to tell a fact or two about a certain priest though, it stands to reason that a seasoned cavalier knows of this famus general, but other than that.. I wouldn't treat it the same as a monster knowledge check.
There is no difference between monsters and any other enemy you face. RAW, this is how it works. It has been pointed out that it seems odd that more legendary creatures are actually less well known many times before. The tarrasque for example is noted as something of such report as to rise up and destroy kingdoms before going back to sleep. One might think people would tell stories of old Godzilla and his reflective carapace and jumping abilities and such; but RAW you need a very high DC to identify his abilities and weaknesses.
Same with classed creatures. Humanoids have CRs as well. Knowledge (Local) is keyed to humanoids. If you want to know the abilities & weaknesses of the humanoid in question, it's a Knowledge (Local) check, DC 5, 10, or 15 + challenge rating as appropriate.
I'm not saying it's perfect, but I am saying it is what it is.
Knowledge checks allow you to acquire some bits of knowledge about opponents based on CR. That's about all there is at the moment, barring Sense Motive hunches. If you come across a CR 15 wizard, the DC is probably around 25-30. What kind of information you might get is a bit iffy. RAW, you can identify creatures and their special powers or abilities; so you might gleam that they might cast 7th+ level spells; have poor Fortitude saves; etc. The only trouble is that it's very vague as to what sort of information to gleam. RAW, however, the information has to pertain to the creature's capabilities and be useful. Key word here is useful.
That is all fine for creature types but not so much on classed creatures, the DC increasing the more legendary (higher level) characters become doesnt make sense I'd say it is more likely to know something about them.
A knowledge religion check might allow you to tell a fact or two about a certain priest though, it stands to reason that a seasoned cavalier knows of this famus general, but other than that.. I wouldn't treat it the same as a monster knowledge check.
There is no difference between monsters and any other enemy you face. RAW, this is how it works. It has been pointed out that it seems odd that more legendary creatures are actually less well known many times before. The tarrasque for example is noted as something of such report as to rise up and destroy kingdoms before going back to sleep. One might think people would tell stories of old Godzilla and his reflective carapace and jumping abilities and such; but RAW you need a very high DC to identify his abilities and weaknesses.
Same with classed creatures. Humanoids have CRs as well. Knowledge (Local) is keyed to humanoids. If you want to know the abilities & weaknesses of the humanoid in question, it's a Knowledge (Local) check, DC 5, 10, or 15 + challenge rating as appropriate.
I'm not saying it's perfect, but I am saying it is what it...
I never follow RAW where I consider it to be non-sensical or unbalanced, not a grand believer of the holiest of holy Rulebook trumping everything else, especially when it gets in the way of immersion and sustainable fun gameplay, but yes, I was well aware that my opinions do not always follow RAW.
...Knowledge checks allow you to acquire some bits of knowledge about opponents based on CR. That's about all there is at the moment, barring Sense Motive hunches. If you come across a CR 15 wizard, the DC is probably around 25-30. What kind of information you might get is a bit iffy. RAW, you can identify creatures and their special powers or abilities; so you might gleam that they might cast 7th+ level spells; have poor Fortitude saves; etc. The only trouble is that it's very vague as to what sort of information to gleam. RAW, however, the information has to pertain to the creature's capabilities and be useful. Key word here is useful.
That is all fine for creature types but not so much on classed creatures, the DC increasing the more legendary (higher level) characters become doesnt make sense I'd say it is more likely to know something about them.
A knowledge religion check might allow you to tell a fact or two about a certain priest though, it stands to reason that a seasoned cavalier knows of this famus general, but other than that.. I wouldn't treat it the same as a monster knowledge check.
There is no difference between monsters and any other enemy you face. RAW, this is how it works. It has been pointed out that it seems odd that more legendary creatures are actually less well known many times before. The tarrasque for example is noted as something of such report as to rise up and destroy kingdoms before going back to sleep. One might think people would tell stories of old Godzilla and his reflective carapace and jumping abilities and such; but RAW you need a very high DC to identify his abilities and weaknesses.
Same with classed creatures. Humanoids have CRs as well. Knowledge (Local) is keyed to humanoids. If you want to know the abilities & weaknesses of the humanoid in question, it's a Knowledge (Local) check, DC 5, 10, or 15 + challenge rating as appropriate.
I'm not saying it's perfect, but I am
I misunderstood you then. It seemed to me that you were saying that it doesn't work like that. You may wish to consider revising the Knowledge skill entirely, since higher CR monsters also are more likely to be epic beasts of legend. Especially since many of them are likely more noticeable than high level humanoids. Based solely on appearances, one would think that it would be easier to spot a Roc and know it was a Roc than it would be to tell you the vulnerabilities of a 20th level mage posing as an old man with a stick.
but what happens when its not so obvious or when running and fighting are equally valid but totally not obvious.
Always wear your scouter on your character's head slot
HIS POWER LEVEL IS OVER ONE MILLLOOONNNN!!!
"Oh...no...wait...I'm wrong. That's just his familiar. ...We should leave now."
I'll let you know when I figured out a proper system to use for knowledge skill, I do not think it should be tied to CR, in the case of a Unique creature it is ok to wing it depending wether there is a likely previous encounter being on record somewhere. Perhaps it should be an estimated value intrinisic to the creature much like AC and the like.
For now I use the system as is where it fits fairly and adjust it up or down a bit, possibly a small bonus depending on background and origines of the characters, quick and dirty without too much extra work/thought.
I'll let you know when I figured out a proper system to use for knowledge skill, I do not think it should be tied to CR, in the case of a Unique creature it is ok to wing it depending wether there is a likely previous encounter being on record somewhere. Perhaps it should be an estimated value intrinisic to the creature much like AC and the like.
For now I use the system as is where it fits fairly and adjust it up or down a bit, possibly a small bonus depending on background and origines of the characters, quick and dirty without too much extra work/thought.
Sounds kind of like the older editions and their rarity/frequency notes on stat blocks. It'd be a pretty big undertaking to go and add such notes to all the entries, but it could be done.