So a player casts grease within sight of all enemies. Enemies fall. During the same combat player casts grease again in narrow passageway (bottleneck), within sight of all enemies.
Does enemy (normal intelligence) need to roll skill check to know going through bottleneck is a bad idea?
Well, at the very least I'd roll a perception check for them (if the spell weren't so noticable I'd suggest a spellcraft check). They may not notice things in the heat of battle. If the enemies are a cohesive unit with any sort of tactics communication it'd only take one to stop them. The PCs probably win either way here, since enemies are falling or stopping or moving slowly, so the wizard is still controlling the battlefield.
No. Unless their int is a 6, they should be able to put 1 and 1 together.
No. Unless their int is a 6, they should be able to put 1 and 1 together.
The player is still not convinced. Anyone care to elaborate?
Ask your player if BBEG casts grease right in front of him and he notices, would he be cool with you stating, "You don't know walking on the greasy floor would be a bad idea."
He wouldn't know know it was grease unless told him. Which will be his argument.
Well, even if the opponents do not know anything about magic, I would imagine that if they heard him mumbling the phrase he used right before he made them fall on their bums would be a tip off. No matter what spell he was using, I would first assume it was grease again. Particularly since a bottleneck is such a great place for grease. (which would be an interesting tendency I would love to see exploited, but that is another matter entirely)
Also, grabbing butter, the material component, seems like a tip off as well. There is no reason for a man to grab butter on the battlefield that does not involve magic or cannibalism. Assuming that the enemies were not very, very tasty, then I will go with magic.
Also, grabbing butter, the material component, seems like a tip off as well. There is no reason for a man to grab butter on the battlefield that does not involve magic or cannibalism. Assuming that the enemies were not very, very tasty, then I will go with magic.
Grabbing butter. Lol. Now that would have required a perception check! If it was more than 20-30ft away.
No whats that?
edit: Just read this: http://www.tuckerskobolds.com/.
Awesome.
Grease actually makes grease on the floor. You need no spell knowledge at all to know walking on a floor covered in slippery oil is bad.
I totally do stuff like this when I GM. My parties hate having to deal with the fact that their battlefield control tactics are outmaneuvered, or, even worse, matched. The whinging is just as bad as when I decided that using status conditions like sickened and dazzled on them was going to be fun. However, it's brought my group to a new level of combat where everything is hard, confusing, brain wracking, and totally awesome.
I totally use the whole "I use the same tactics and books you do" argument a lot. They gave in after I used the exact same Cavalier build one of them used in a previous game to wreck them on an open field. But yeah, enemies are people too, and a lot of times they have a higher intelligence score than half the party...
However, it's brought my group to a new level of combat where everything is hard, confusing, brain wracking, and totally awesome.
I really enjoyed reading this after coming home from a night of heavy drinking. That's awesome.