In a recent game players were attack by a Glaberzu. It promptly tore them up and they ran.
Given three days down time, they were not able to find any information on the creature. They do not have Knowledge (Planes). Gather Information checks were not high enough to gain any information either.
DM maintains that it is cheesy that a player memorize Banishment as there is no way that player could know to banish it.
Player maintains that is illogical since the player (Cleric 12) can summon demons through the use of Summon Monster I - VI and can identify the spell used to summon the Glaberzu and can even summon a Glaberzu of his own with a scroll of Summon Monster IX.
Player further maintains that he does not need to know it is a Glaberzu, or a demon for that matter. Just that it can be summoned, and therefore that it can be Banished and that if he can summon it, he should clearly be able to know that it can be summoned.
Where do any and all RAW/RAI with regards to creature/spell knowledge (not just the knowledge skills but knowledge in general) and the ability to use spells fall into play in all of this?
Skills: Diplomacy (gather information), Knowledge(arcana), Spellcraft.
Checks: Int check.
If all the above fail, it's well within a GM's right to say "you just don't know".
I maintain that it's cheesy for the GM not to have a knowledgeable NPC inform the party that there is a demon loose, trashing the city. If the GM didn't want the PCs to know it was a Glaberzu, why tell them?
Cases like these are GM discretion and it sounds like it could have been handled better.
That said, players should at least give a front of keeping player and character knowledge separate. Most don't.
Side note: Level 12 and NOBODY has ranks in Knowledge(Planes)? Shame, shame, shame.
The DC to know it's a glabrezu is probably only a 15. To know it's a demon is probably only 10, and to know it's an evil outsider might be a 5. Sheesh, just one rank and an INT of 12 (or just 2 ranks) would have given the cleric all he needed to know to use Banishment without any metagaming.
It doesn't matter what the cleric CAN summon, but what he HAS summoned. If he has never summoned a glabrezu, how would he know what they look like? Oh, yeah, Knowledge(Planes) would do it... The fact that he could use a scroll he doesn't have and has not used to summon something he's never seen really won't help him identify a monster he recently encountered.
Today I saw a guy outside my house but I don't know his name. Tomorrow I might buy a computer, download Facebook, and look up John Smith, and if I do that, then I would know that the guy's name is John Smith. So, therefore, today, I should already know that he is John Smith, right?
It makes no sense.
I want to know, how do the players know that it was a glabrezu in the first place?
1) Bad GMing: "You enter the room and a huge glabrezu attacks you, roll initiative! Oh, yeah, if you're wondering, a glabrezu is a demon." If this happened, then the GM needs to learn to keep his mouth shut about details the PCs cannot know (especially with NO KNOWLEDGE SKILL). He should have said "You enter the room and a huge 4-armed monster attacks you, its eyes shining with a mixture or intelligence and cruelty. Roll initiative!"
2) Bad Players: "Oh, a 4-armed intelligent cruel monster? I know this one, it's a glabrezu. We need to banish it." Any player who knows the game well enough to recognize a glabrezu from the short description must have been playing this game for a while, so he should know the difference between Player knowledge and Character knowledge, and should know which is right and which is wrong.
Hopefully (but maybe not based on the OP), the GM and players can agree on what is good roleplaying and what is metagaming. There is no RAW/RAI on this - it's generally known and frequently advised that players should act on their character's knowledge, not their own, and what this player is doing is clearly metagaming.
Finally, if the players insist on metagaming, fine, let the glabrezu metagame too. During those three days it found an orc and bullied it into working for him, with the promise of a huge reward, thousands of gold, if that orc would do one simple task when the glabrezu tells him to. When the metagaming players arrive, they walk into the room and hear an orc clearly speak out "I wish that the approaching heroes forget any and all Banishment spells they prepared for this day!" - after the PCs are dead, that lucky orc servitor gets his pick of one of their magic items - let it not be said that this glabrezu fails to honor his demonic contracts with his mortal servitors.
Heck, that isn't even metagaming so much, sine the glabrezu has an INT of 16 AND a WIS of 16 too - he's intelligent enough to know exactly which spells can send his kind back home, and wise enough to expect a party that retreats will come back better prepared. And it's CLEARLY within his ability to know his own weaknesses without even needing knowledge checks, and being Banished is definitely a weakness he would know about. I'd say go for it.
They might not know that it's specifically a glabrezu, but they could much more easily know that it's some sort of demon or devil. I wouldn't consider it metagaming unless specific defenses were made against tactics they haven't seen. Memorizing banishment is fine in my opinion.
Through player attrition, the normal mage/cleric characters are no longer available. It did not start out that way.
The player knew what it was right off the bat. The description and mini used are iconic to the player. The player did not act on it as a Glaberzu at all. The player never maintained that the character knew any mechanic of the creature other than it being an Outsider. The player didn't maintain that at the time of battle, but after trying to look into it for 3 days.
There are 13 types of creatures. Based on simple visual descriptions that I think most of us would assume characters understand, it is clearly not an Animal, Dragon, Fey, Humanoid, Ooze, Plant or Vermin. Undead is ruled out because of Knowledge (Religion). Magical Beast can't be ruled out, but as it is based on animals (per Bestairy I) it is unlikely. Most Constructs are mindless and this thing talked and taunted, making it unlikely that it is a Construct. That leaves Aberration, Monstrous Humanoid, and Outsider.
So the player does not feel it is a leap to surmise that it is an Outsider. Not that it is a demon. Not that it is evil. Not that it has any special abilities or weaknesses. And absolutely not that it is a Glaberzu specifically. It could be either of the other two types of creatures. The cleric, and rest of the party for that matter, all have abilities to deal with those two types of creatures.
The PC has a wisdom of 20. While not intelligence, the PC is not stupid.
Wisdom describes a character’s willpower, common sense,
awareness, and intuition.
The Cleric was created at level 12 so there is no game history to base what it may or may not have done in the past.
------
DM Blake, based on your logic a wizard would not know what a fireball does until he casts that spell. How could he ever counter it if he didn't previously cast it?
If you can cast a spell, you can identify the spell when cast. Clearly you have the ability to know what the spell does before you use it.
Did you know that that guy outside your house was a humanoid? That is the question, not if you knew he was a guy, a human, or even a mammal. It ESPECIALLY is not, "what is his name".
------
Finally, this is not meant to be a GM or Player bashing thread. This is a difference of opinion between two long time friends on how to reach a logical conclusion of a part of the game. Please keep that in mind with all responses.
I shoukd point out that the clerics assertion that he knows all that information is incorrect. All he has sone is apply the player knowledge. With no knowledge planes he has no means to connect the glabrezu to a. Reature he can in theory summon.
One thing is without knowledge arcana he probly knows nothing of his higher level spells.
Dm blake where are you getting your knowledge dc from? Its dc 20 just to identify what plane the outsider is from. I've also found most.of the people I've played with stick demons in the rare catagory for dc.
Wait, Morjorat, you're saying that a Cleric can use Spellcraft to identify a spell on his list so that he may counter it, but doesn't know the spell exists or what it can do?
And then you are saying that he can't possibly know that he can use that spell via a scroll?
So at level 1 a cleric doesn't know that one day he will be able to use the heal scroll?
Would you say that a level 1 fighter could never know about leadership until he has the ability to gain the feat? Does the fighter that never wore a chain shirt not know how to or what it is?
The spell is on the cleric's list. It is a continuation of a long line of spells of which the cleric can already cast? A list which includes the ability to summon demons! There is no theory about it. If the cleric finds a scroll of it, he understands it, can summon the creature and knows how to control it.
We are not talking about Wizards that need to learn a spell. Or sorcerers that can only pick a few spells. We are talking about clerics that gain instant access to the spell as soon as they reach the appropriate level.
Would a level 1 cleric not know what Cure Moderate Wounds does? He can use a wand of it without question.
And we are back to the very important point: No one wants to know it is a Glaberzu, or even a demon. Just that there is a respectfully sufficient chance that banishment might work for the player to justify the PC taking the spell.
No one wants to identify the plane it is from. No special tactics or immunities. Nothing at all about the exact creature.
I am not saying the player is unable to understand that summon spells exist, nor that he cannot recognize a summon spell when it is being cast.
I can know that zoos exist, and can recognize one when I'm driving past. That does not mean that I have instinctive knowledge of every animal in that zoo. If someone shows me a picture of an okapi and I have never seen one, I am going to be clueless that it's an okapi, even if one lives in the nearby zoo that I've never been to.
Likewise, the cleric knows about summon spells, but does not have instinctive knowledge of the exact appearance and description of every possible creature on every summon spell - especially creatures he has never summoned, and double especially creatures he is personally incapable of summoning.
Being able to buy a scroll to summon something he's never seen before is equivalent to me buying a ticket to get into that zoo. Until I actually do it, I still cannot adequately describe and recognize all that okapi from its picture until AFTER I buy the ticket and visit the zoo. So, when the cleric actually does buy a scroll and does summon a glabrezu, then he can fairly know what a glabrezu looks like.
A wizard who has never seen a Fireball would NOT know what it does or what it looks like. He may have heard of fireballs, he may GUESS that it's a ball of fire that explodes and burns. How big, how bright, how fast does it move, how hot is it, how much damage does it do, is it very smoky, is it yellow, is it orange, does it roar or sizzle or is it mostly silent, etc., are all questions he almost certainly will not be able to answer until he casts one or at least sees one. And I hope the first ball of fire he sees is not a Flaming Sphere or else he might just incorrectly assume that that is a Fireball, until he learns otherwise.
On the other hand, if he had ranks in Knowledge(Arcana), he could attempt that check and if successful, the game mechanic would indicate that he does, in fact, know all this stuff about a fireball without ever seeing one - I guess he must have studied that, or at least read about it, in school somewhere, which is why he has the knowledge (made the check).
This cleric could do the same thing, roll against the appropriate Knowledge skill (planes) and if he makes the check, he knows what that monster is. Without the successful check, he doesn't.
Ask your neighbor how many types of animals there are in the world. Unless he's a biologist with working knowledge of taxonomy, I bet he cannot answer that question. I also bet that cleric (not the player, not the character sheet, not the numbers on a character sheet, but the actual - imaginary - living, breathing cleric dwelling in the actual - imaginary - world of Golarion) doesn't know that there are exactly 13 types of creatures.
That's metagame knowledge and you and I both know it is.
Finally, knowing things like what a fireball looks like, how many types of creatures there are, whether this monster is a glabrezu or not, are all covered by, you guessed it, Knowledge skills.
This cleric doesn't have any. At least, not the necessary one for this check.
Bummer.
All the player's arguments that he has so much knowledge, that he knows exactly how many types of creatures there are, that he can rule out certain types, etc., are all shot down in flames by the fact that the cleric in question doesn't have the knowledge skills to make these assertions.
I say again, this player is using out-of-character knowledge to solve an in-character problem. Period. And then he's using munchkinish rationalization to justify it.
If it were my glabrezu, it would have its wish-making orc solve the whole problem, and it would be far less metagaming for it to do so.
@komoda there are three skills at play here. Knowledge planes arcana spellcraft.
Part of the problem is the game has a bit of a disconnect between spellcraft and arcana.
First , the different summoning spells do wildly different things. Nothing in the spell description says you know what the monsters do.
Knowledge arcana exists to tell you the fine details of a spell full stop. If you disagree with this convince your dm to Change it.
At the end of the day your cleric with 0 knowledge arcana knows nothing about it. You can make a spellcraft check to identify a summoning spell great... anything beyond the name is knowledge arcana and identifying the creature is knowledge planes.
You can bypass a lot of these issues hire a sage.
You don't need to know it is an okapi, that is my point. I had no idea what an okapi was either. But upon seeing one (Bing images) it took me less than half of one second to know it is in fact an animal as Pathfinder is concerned. That is my point. The character had 3 days.
Not experiencing something personally is not the same thing as not understanding it.
You don't need Knowledge (engineering) to know a stone door from a wooden one. You don't need Knowledge (history) to know the difference between what a war is vs. a city. You don't need Knowledge (nature) to know the difference between a forest and a desert.
When martial and magical spells and abilities are predicated upon creature type, one would have to agree that it can't be harder than a DC 10 to understand the MOST BASIC forms of creature types.
A character does not need knowledge skills to make easy checks. It should be a DC 10 for all of the following: (Could or Can't be creature in question)
Aberration: Bizarre Anatomy (Could Be)
Animal: nonhuman, can't talk (Can't Be - It talked)
Construct: Animated (Could Be)
Dragon: Reptile (Can't Be - Not a reptile)
Fey: Human Shaped (Can't Be - not human shaped)
Humanoid: Two arms and legs (Can't Be - 4 arms)
Magical Beast: Animal like (Can't Be - not animal like at all)
Monstrous Humanoid: Similar to humanoids (Could Be)
Ooze: Amorphous (Can't Be - not amorphous)
Outsider: Anything from another plane (Could Be)
Plant: Vegetable creatures (Can't Be - not plant like)
Undead: Once Living (Could Be)
Vermin: Insect or worm like (Can't Be - no comparison)
The character had 3 days to work on figuring out how to fight the creature. He can easily take 10 on each of those knowledge checks, in a town, over 3 days to figure the above. I think most people would agree with that? None of that was figured out during the time of combat.
So that leaves 5 types.
Undead is ruled out due to Knowledge (Religion) that the Cleric has plenty of. Taking 10 puts it way over just about any DC.
Down to 4 types.
Party has adamantine weapons to destroy constructs.
Regular weapons (melee heavy) and damage/mind control spells to affect Aberrations and Monstrous Humanoids.
The only type that this creature could possibly be that the party didn't have ready to go, was the ability to handle extra-planar creatures effectively.
How is using all of this to justify memorizing a spell meta-gaming? I would counter that saying the character CAN'T take it because the player knows what it is, is meta-gaming stupid. It is like the Lawful Good = Lawful Stupid actions of new, young players.
The cleric still has a lot of spells to handle a lot of other types of creatures. It is not like he changed everything out to only affect extra-planar creatures. He changed 2 spells.
------
Mojorat - My point is not that the summon spell tells you WHAT the creature can do, or even to identify the creature, just that there are creatures that can be summoned and therefore creatures that can be banished. That's it.
I could just summon a succubus and ask it what a "very big, two small clawed armed , two large pincher armed, stands like a man" creature is. I think it would know. Would THAT be META-GAMING? Or do I not know what a succubus is, even though I can summon a few a day?
------
If you still feel it is only META-GAMING and no logic could possibly be used to figure it out, then what? The party has to try SOMETHING. Combat does not work. It can take out our strongest fighter (it did it, not meta-gaming) in 1 round. If there is no way to KNOW for sure IN GAME that we can use Banishment and the GM and some people here agree that the player knowledge OUT OF GAME makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the cleric to ever figure it out, what are we supposed to try? If the player did NOT know anything, would they NOT be allowed to guess either? Or would they be rewarded for figuring it out? Is the party ONLY allowed to use swords because a player out of game knows what it is?
@komoda there are three skills at play here. Knowledge planes arcana spellcraft.
Part of the problem is the game has a bit of a disconnect between spellcraft and arcana.
First , the different summoning spells do wildly different things. Nothing in the spell description says you know what the monsters do.
Knowledge arcana exists to tell you the fine details of a spell full stop. If you disagree with this convince your dm to Change it.
At the end of the day your cleric with 0 knowledge arcana knows nothing about it. You can make a spellcraft check to identify a summoning spell great... anything beyond the name is knowledge arcana and identifying the creature is knowledge planes.
You can bypass a lot of these issues hire a sage.
We tried. Not available. Gather info was too low.
All that stuff about 13 creature types and narrowing it down IS metagaming. Players know that creatures in Pathfinder are categorized into 13 creature types. Characters have no knowledge of this stuff - UNLESS THEY HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE SKILLS.
This cleric doesn't.
The player who build this cleric decided not to put even ONE rank in certain skills, and now he wants to pretend that his character knows things from these skills. He doesn't. I would agree with most of what you said if the character making these reasonable assumptions had EVEN ONE RANK in the knowledge skills - at least then the player could justify how his character seems to know so much about the world he lives in.
This cleric doesn't.
I envision this cleric as more of an "all out of bubblegum" type of cleric, not a bookwormy knowledgeable nerd cleric. If I'm wrong, then why doesn't he have ANY ranks in this important basic cleric class skill?
So, he's built to be a jock with a mace and a holy symbol and now he wants to be a sage too, but he didn't invest in being a sage. Too bad.
So, now we get to the 3 days of downtime. What to do, what to do?
Apparently, this player spent some energy on trying to use IN GAME sources to figure it out. Knowledge(local) to find a sage or gather information, etc. No luck.
Then this player abandoned IN GAME sources and just said "Well, it's a glabrezu so I'll prepare Banishment".
That's where he crossed the line from roleplaying to metagaming.
But you know what? I'm a pretty fair GM. I let players get away with a whole lot. If this player had said "Well, we don't know what it is, so let's prepare a broad spectrum of everything we can try. I might even prepare a Banishment just in case that turns out to be a demon or something." Bonus points if he said it in character to the other PCs after a long day of research.
Even better, if he said "That thing was really weird and had evil eyes. Didn't look like it was from around here, that's for sure. Could have been some kind of outsider but there's no way to be sure. Oh, wait, I know, I'll summon some kind of intelligent outsider, say, maybe a Succubus, and describe it to her to see if she knows what it is".
Heck, I would have probably given him RP EXP for coming up with that and for not metagaming a solution.
In short, if the player demonstrated an effort to use resources available to his character, in game, and if the resources were appropriate (summoning a dire bat to ask it what the creature is would obviously not work), then at least I would recognize and reward his effort to roleplay rather than metagame.
If that's what happened, then maybe the GM is just being a jerk, but I assumed from the OP that the GM is standing his ground because it looked and smelled like metagaming to him, too.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Where do any and all RAW/RAI with regards to creature/spell knowledge (not just the knowledge skills but knowledge in general) and the ability to use spells fall into play in all of this?
Creatures are Knowledge (Blah) checks at DC 15 + CR.
If they don't have a lot of ranks in Knowledge Planes they can't even know the name of the monster or it's subtype.Spellcraft is used to notice spell effects, which would mean they knew it was a Summon Monster IX if they saw if cast and made the high 20's check.
It sounds like they opted to not use ranks in Spellcraft or Knowledge (X) and are depending on player knowledge to replace those ranks. In which case, the DM doesn't have to confirm that and can tell the players their PC's don't have that info.
Why does 1 point in the skill mean anything? Would you not allow someone to take 10 to climb a ships rigging unless they spent a point in climb?
DM-Blake, you even said it should be a DC 5 to ID that it is extra-planar. That is all the player wants. He made that hands down. Even if it was 10, that is no problem. Other characters have bonuses to Int and can make a take 10 a 12 or 13, with aid another, 15 or so. All of this by taking 10 within a library. I am not sure of the actual size of the town, but it is pretty big.
Player is not looking to KNOW it is a Glaberzu. Player is looking to be allowed to try banishment without being called cheesy. Of course the player knows what it is, and never denied it. Player did not "stack the deck" against it. Player did not look for any of the mechanical bonuses that one can get when trying to Banish a creature. Player is not looking for the use of the library to gain any of those benefits.
Player took no spells to defend against or attack with a different energy type. (He only has fire energy memorized). He changed no spell to bypass or ignore SR. He took no new spells to help overcome DR of any type. Player is not looking to purchase demon bane weapons. The encounter will be exactly the same except for banishment, a staple of wizards and clerics.
This encounter was the first night the character ever existed as it was made to fill a player void. As such there is no history as to what would be a 'normal' procedure for the character.
Player is ONLY looking for a way to justify memorizing banishment. Player agrees that all logic shows it could be any of 4 types. Player has ability to deal with 3 types and is looking for way to deal with type 4.
If they don't have a lot of ranks in Knowledge Planes they can't even know the name of the monster or it's subtype.
Would you say the exact same thing about a fire elemental which uses the exact same knowledge skill? Is there no way to deduce that it is a fire subtype without the use of Knowledge (planes)?
Shadoven, it is hard to tell. He never saw anyone cast the spell, or doesn't even know if it is a spell.
I feel that if the spell is on your list, you have knowledge of it. Especially a cleric that gains access to use the spell upon entry to that level, not be learning the spell. Most Especially in the case were the spell is an exact stronger level of the previous ones, which allows the cleric to currently summon 75 different extra-planar creatures.
Why does 1 point in the skill mean anything? Would you not allow someone to take 10 to climb a ships rigging unless they spent a point in climb?
By RAW you can not make knowledge rolls untrained
Why does 1 point in the skill mean anything? Would you not allow someone to take 10 to climb a ships rigging unless they spent a point in climb?By RAW you can not make knowledge rolls untrained
Unless the DC is 10 or less, or they have access to a library or other information source, in which case you can make Knowledge checks untrained.
It doesn't help much if you flub your Knowledge check. I would suggest that the party keep trying Diplomacy (gather information) to find that @!$% sage. Still, I'm flummoxed that nobody in the party took Knowledge (planes) and that nobody in the party has a decent Diplomacy check.
It just worked out that way due to player attrition. It didn't start that way. The game has been going on for very close to 2 years.
I think something is misunderstood. Clerics don't have 100% book knowledge of 50% of the spells in the game.
Without knowledge arcana when dealing with spells above his level he knows nothing.
|
All that stuff about 13 creature types and narrowing it down IS metagaming. Players know that creatures in Pathfinder are categorized into 13 creature types. Characters have no knowledge of this stuff - UNLESS THEY HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE SKILLS.
I would assume that "what creature types do Knowledge skills cover" could be a DC 10 or lower question, which a character could answer untrained. Even if you can't name all the categories, "outsider" would remain if not the only reasonable type, at least the most likely possibility to come to mind. And someone capable of casting summoning spells should at least know that outsiders exist even if they can't identify the properties or subtypes of outsiders.
Real-world analogy: can you name all the kingdoms of life? Maybe not. But I bet you know that animals, plants, and fungi are three different types of living things, and I bet that if you see a moving creature you're going to guess that it's likely an animal rather than a plant or a fungus, even without knowing that "animal" generally includes "multicellular heterotrophs without cell walls" or that canines and reptiles are common subtypes of animals.
I'm all for showing Knowledge skills some love, but you do not have to be trained in biology - or Knowledge (Nature) - to distinguish an animal from a plant.
But you know what? I'm a pretty fair GM. I let players get away with a whole lot. If this player had said "Well, we don't know what it is, so let's prepare a broad spectrum of everything we can try. I might even prepare a Banishment just in case that turns out to be a demon or something." Bonus points if he said it in character to the other PCs after a long day of research.
Well, that sounds like exactly what the player is doing:
Player is ONLY looking for a way to justify memorizing banishment. Player agrees that all logic shows it could be any of 4 types. Player has ability to deal with 3 types and is looking for way to deal with type 4.
Player has decided character should prepare for a broad spectrum of things. Player knows OOC that it's an outsider, and believes his character should be aware of the possibility that it might be an outsider, or one of several other things. Again, it's not necessary that character know there are only 4 types of creature it could reasonably be, as long as he knows that "outsider" is on the short list.
Real-world analogy: can you name all the kingdoms of life? Maybe not. But I bet you know that animals, plants, and fungi are three different types of living things, and I bet that if you see a moving creature you're going to guess that it's likely an animal rather than a plant or a fungus, even without knowing that "animal" generally includes "multicellular heterotrophs without cell walls" or that canines and reptiles are common subtypes of animals.I'm all for showing Knowledge skills some love, but you do not have to be trained in biology - or Knowledge (Nature) - to distinguish an animal from a plant.
You have ranks in Knowledge (Nature) so you know a few things about the different kingdoms of life.
In fact, most people who have had any kind of modern education has a rank or two in most knowledge skills.
Someone who has no schooling whatsoever, (such as the average commoner in a medieval society) probably could not tell the difference between a plant and a fungus.
So, yeah, some knowledge checks can be made untrained, but just because you, an educated individual, think a check is easy doesn't mean someone with zero knowledge of a subject woulld find it easy.
Mojorat, the cleric in question can currently summon 75 extra-planar creatures with Summon Monster I-VI.
If Summon Monster IX is cast in front of him, he has a 75% percent chance of knowing what it is, on the fly. This is through the use of Spellcraft, not Knowledge (arcana).
There is no way that he can know nothing about it without Knowledge (arcana) when not in combat, but so much about it with Spellcraft while in combat.
The RAW, or at least your interpretation, has a huge disconnect when trying to figure out what a character may or may not know.
Knowing WHAT is being cast (Summon Monster IX) is not the same thing as knowing WHICH creature is being summoned.
Furthermore, when that other caster finishes summoning a glabrezu, or a nalfeshnee, or an astral deva, or whatever, now that that creature is standing in the world in front of your eyes, you don't use Spellcraft to figure out what it is, nor do you use Knowledge(Arcana).
You use Knowledge(Planes) to figure out what it is.
Your cleric would still be screwed. All he knows (assuming he makes that Spellcraft check) is that some guy cast a Summon Monster IX spell and this weird thing standing before him must be the critter the guy summoned. Period.
With zero ranks in Knowledge(Planes) he gets no chance to identify any of those things I listed, glabrezu or otherwise.
Yes, in my earlier post, I was way too generous with the DCs. Knowledge(Planes) DC 28 to recognize a glabrezu on sight. Probably -5 DC to identify subtype (demon) and another -5 DC to identify Type (outsider) but those bonuses are my assessment, not any RAW that I know of. That still leaves a DC of 18 which cannot be attempted with zero ranks.
Your cleric would still be screwed. All he knows (assuming he makes that Spellcraft check) is that some guy cast a Summon Monster IX spell and this weird thing standing before him must be the critter the guy summoned. Period.
That sir, is all that the player is looking for. If he has a clue it was summoned, he has a clue it can be Banished. That is it. I don't know why you keep insisting that he doesn't know it is a Glaberzu, he is still NOT trying to know that.
And with zero ranks, in a library, with days on end, he does get a chance. Just by taking 10 the party can get a 15 or so. So an 18 is not impossible at all.
One thing I thought of with this discussion is that it doesn't actually say you know anything about the cretures you summon.
This isn't intended as a rebuttal to the OP it just isn't something I had thought of since the common practice is to summon a creature and look up its stats.
Which is funny since by the rules you could have the summon monster ready to summon a small elemental but need to roll the knowledge check to identify one.
|
Mojorat, the cleric in question can currently summon 75 extra-planar creatures with Summon Monster I-VI.
If Summon Monster IX is cast in front of him, he has a 75% percent chance of knowing what it is, on the fly. This is through the use of Spellcraft, not Knowledge (arcana).
There is no way that he can know nothing about it without Knowledge (arcana) when not in combat, but so much about it with Spellcraft while in combat.
The RAW, or at least your interpretation, has a huge disconnect when trying to figure out what a character may or may not know.
Actually, as a Cleric he could know absolutely NOTHING about magic and still get by just fine. No spellcraft, no Knowledge Arcana. Just some Knowledge Religion and his belief in the power of his god/goddess and he is good to go. Every day he prays for the ability to [insert objective here] and the deity responds by filling his spell list with the appropriate spells... now he wouldn't be able to identify anything, but it doesn't stop his usage of magic at all as his is all based on faith in his god. He really doesn't need to know anything. Just believe.
As for the category breakdown of creatures in Pathfinder, some of the limitations/checks you listed are not so set in stone... due to spells or supernatural abilities or what not, you could very well have a smart, 4 armed, armored, magic using claw wielding humanoid... just play [pardon the pun] devil's advocate here.
And by the same token would you need to make a Knowledge (nature) check after you used Call Lightning to identify that flash of light?
In theory, but providing one lives in an area where lightning happens naturally it probably falls under the dc 10 clause.
|
|
You have ranks in Knowledge (Nature) so you know a few things about the different kingdoms of life.
In fact, most people who have had any kind of modern education has a rank or two in most knowledge skills.
...So, yeah, some knowledge checks can be made untrained, but just because you, an educated individual, think a check is easy doesn't mean someone with zero knowledge of a subject would find it easy.
First, a DC 10 question that can be answered untrained, while "easy" for the trained person, isn't easy for the untrained person. It's about a 50-50 chance depending on how intelligent they are.
Second, how many skill ranks do you think the average person has? One or two for every subject taught in High School? Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, Linguistics, Literature, History? Plus another point for an elective, possibly Craft or Perform? Meaning that shop class qualifies you to make a living as a carpenter (Craft +4)? That means the average high school grad has 8 skill ranks and is an Expert, even before factoring in non-academic skills like intimidate, acrobatics, or swim. I don't think the average person is that skilled.
Third, assuming most people are trained also minimizes the difference between a person with an average education and an expert. Let's say a Biology professor has 3 ranks, class skill bonus, skill focus, and +2 int, for +11. A someone who took high school bio, with 1 rank and no other bonuses (not even class skill), gets +1. If the prof has a 55% chance to answer a "really tough" question, the high school grad will have a 10% chance. That's questions like "name three phyla within the kingdom Animalia." Now you're giving the average high school grad too much credit in assuming that they have a chance of answering those questions.
Someone who has no schooling whatsoever, (such as the average commoner in a medieval society) probably could not tell the difference between a plant and a fungus.
I'm not talking about telling the difference between a plant and a fungus, I'm talking about the difference between a plant and an animal. I'm pretty sure a medieval peasant would consider it easy to say that this is an animal and this is a plant. And they might even be able to say that this as a fungus (or "mushroom-like thing") even if they don't know the biological definition of a fungus.
The cleric in question does not need to know the classification system in any level of detail. All he needs to know is that there are natural creatures, undead (which he is an expert in), and other unnatural / magical creatures, that the unidentified creature is almost certainly in the last group, and that that group includes creatures that can be summoned and banished. That is well within the "animals and plants exist, and most animals move while most plants don't" level of knowledge.
Heck, I'd even try Banishment first with that info given that if it works it's an auto-win and if it doesn't work it's just one wasted spell.
Second, how many skill ranks do you think the average person has? One or two for every subject taught in High School? Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, Linguistics, Literature, History? Plus another point for an elective, possibly Craft or Perform? Meaning that shop class qualifies you to make a living as a carpenter (Craft +4)? That means the average high school grad has 8 skill ranks and is an Expert, even before factoring in non-academic skills like intimidate, acrobatics, or swim. I don't think the average person is that skilled.
Pathfider is based on a fantasy medieval society. The difference in the education level of the average person in a modern industrialized society and a medieval one is staggering. Comparatively, we have a ridiculous amount of skill points today. I'd say, at least 6 to 8 bonus skill points at 1st level.
Third, assuming most people are trained also minimizes the difference between a person with an average education and an expert. Let's say a Biology professor has 3 ranks, class skill bonus, skill focus, and +2 int, for +11. A someone who took high school bio, with 1 rank and no other bonuses (not even class skill), gets +1. If the prof has a 55% chance to answer a "really tough" question, the high school grad will have a 10% chance. That's questions like "name three phyla within the kingdom Animalia." Now you're giving the average high school grad too much credit in assuming that they have a chance of answering those questions.
If you couldn't name 3 phyla of animalia, you probably didn't pass high school bio. It was on the test, after all.
Whether not you still remember three phyla, that's where the 10% comes in.
The cleric in question does not need to know the classification system in any level of detail.All he needs to know is that there are natural creatures, undead (which he is an expert in), and other unnatural / magical creatures, that the unidentified creature is almost certainly in the last group, and that that group includes creatures that can be summoned and banished. That is well within the "animals and plants exist, and most animals move while most plants don't" level of knowledge.
Heck, I'd even try Banishment first with that info given that if it works it's an auto-win and if it doesn't work it's just one wasted spell.
I guarantee you the player in question never tried to banish an Aberration without a knowledge check. That would be a waste of an action, why waste an action when you can meta-game.
|
|
Actually, as a Cleric he could know absolutely NOTHING about magic and still get by just fine. No spellcraft, no Knowledge Arcana. Just some Knowledge Religion and his belief in the power of his god/goddess and he is good to go. Every day he prays for the ability to [insert objective here] and the deity responds by filling his spell list with the appropriate spells... now he wouldn't be able to identify anything, but it doesn't stop his usage of magic at all as his is all based on faith in his god. He really doesn't need to know anything. Just believe.
In theory, but the game still assumes the characters have basic knowledge of their own abilities. This prevents, for example, a first level cleric praying for the ability to smite their enemies with holy fire when there isn't anything remotely matching that description on the first-level spell list.
Pathfider is based on a fantasy medieval society. The difference in the education level of the average person in a modern industrialized society and a medieval one is staggering. Comparatively, we have a ridiculous amount of skill points today. I'd say, at least 6 to 8 bonus skill points at 1st level.
Formal education does not determine skill points. Wizards typically have more formal education than sorcerers, but both get 2+Int skill points. Rogues typically do not get a lot of formal education (they're listed as "self-taught" for purposes of starting age) but get 8+Int skill points. A bard who went to bardic college gets the same 6+Int skill points as the one who taught himself how to fiddle.
Historically most people didn't get as much formal education as we do today, but they weren't unskilled, they just learned different things, like how to shear sheep or mend clothes. And sure enough, untrained commoners would be able to make simple items like a wooden spoon (DC 5) or iron pot (DC 10) even though a modern person would find these tasks difficult.
The assumption is that the average person in PF is untrained in any given skill, but that doesn't mean that they're incompetent. DC 10 is "common competence" and the rule that you can make DC 10 checks untrained is intended to allow for common knowledge - basic questions like "what kinds of creatures exist in the world I live in"?
If you couldn't name 3 phyla of animalia, you probably didn't pass high school bio. It was on the test, after all.
Whether not you still remember three phyla, that's where the 10% comes in.
I think far fewer than 10% of people who passed high school bio can remember three phyla of animalia one year after taking the test. Especially given that less than 50% of Americans can name the three branches of their government, which is a much more basic question (one that ~100% of history/politics specialists could answer). "High school grads are untrained in most Knowledges" doesn't model reality perfectly, but it's closer than "High school grads are trained in most knowledges."
I guarantee you the player in question never tried to banish an Aberration without a knowledge check. That would be a waste of an action, why waste an action when you can meta-game.
Maybe he has and maybe he hasn't. Personally, my group doesn't run into enough outsiders to make it worth it to prepare (and thus waste) Banishment on a typical adventuring day. We'd only have it available if we thought that we were unusually likely to run into an outsider - and I think even without Knowledge (Planes) this creature is unusually likely to be an outsider.
Yes, the cleric should have put at least a rank or two in Knowledge (Planes) by level 12, and if the group had a lot of turnover I'd say it's extra-important for characters to double up on important skills that you might lose if the player who specializes in them dropped out. But I think everyone is being a little too harsh in terms of what constitutes general knowledge that an untrained person could access.
If this is causing problems at table, would the GM allow the cleric's player to retcon / retrain skill ranks? If the cleric was hastily put together this would be a good idea (you mention it's the character's first night and that he filled a departed-character void, which makes me think he was poorly planned).
hey Komoda,
I may be able to help you here.
Untrained
You cannot make an untrained Knowledge check with a DC higher than 10. If you have access to an extensive library that covers a specific skill, this limit is removed. The time to make checks using a library, however, increases to 1d4 hours. Particularly complete libraries might even grant a bonus on Knowledge checks in the fields that they cover.
So....If we go by your assumption and you can convince the dm that just knowing the monster is an outsider of some kind is a dc10 check, anyone can attempt the check, even if they are untrained.
And if he had 3 days to look at a library, the dc10 restriction is waived and you can attempt a check regardless.