Hello everybody,
im struggling with a method how/if my players realize the effectiveness of their weapons/spells.
Let's say:
Evil enemy with DR 10/slashing, vulnerable to fire and immun to cold, acid.
Player "1", Paladin, swings a holy greatsword +1 and smites, without knowing if the enemy is evil or not.
a) It's a slashing weapon -> she beats the DR -> but did she realize?
b) It's holy -> she makes extra damage -> but did she realize and can she tell others?
c) Her smite is functional -> she didn't know her enemy is evil, did she "feel" it right over her successful smite?
Player "2", Ranger, is firing with an +1 flaming bow.
a) Piercing weapon does not penetrate the damage reduction -> realize?
b) Fire rules -> realize?
and so on...
I've always ruled it in this way:
DR - if they attack with an inappropriate weapon-type -> "your weapon seems not to be very effective"
Vulnerabilities -> "The plant seems to be horrified by fire! Good choice!"
Immunities -> feedback if 0 damage was made
Smite -> no information if effective or not
Weapon Bonus and triggering the mentioned situations -> problematic
Specially the last part: Let's say Player "1" roles her 2d6+2d6 without knowing if her enemy is evil or not.
She roles 10+2 for 12 or 2+10 for 12 or 6+6 for 12. Ingame it would result in the exact same damage outgame she knows "Enemy is evil" (or not). And she saves on her detect evil (more important: the "action" to detect evil).
Short: Let you test your players propriate damage types and their effectivness through their weapons?
It makes the knowledge skills to identify monsters weakness obsolet.
Smite: It's clear that monsters/enemys know if they are subject of a "smite" (cause there are several abilities that can decline the smite). But does the player who smites know it?
The existence of the Warding magical armor enchantment implies that you do know if you've been the target of smite, challenge, or judgment.
This is where knowledge checks come in.
If you have the appropriate skill you can make a check to identify these particular defenses or vulnerabilities. It is pretty much what they are there for and why certain types of creatures are part of the skills.
As for DR if you didn't make the check, we play it as "the attack didn't seem as effective", and that is even part and parcel to the ability explanation. But beyond that, we don't really get into the numbers, just if it worked. Reason being the randomness of the die. DR 5 fire, might as well be immunity against a d6 fire damage. So the attack either works (they roll a 6) or it doesn't, and that is all that is said. How are the characters supposed to know if the extra damage is effective or not (besides meta gaming by watching the roll)?
DR and resistance/immunity it should be immediately apparent that the attack was less effective than you expected, especially DR and a melee attack. That doesn't mean you need to give the exact numbers, but you should tell your players something appropriate.
"The wound almost completely healed as fast as you cut the creatures flesh" for DR10/slashing
"the creature seems to ignore the flames" immunity or resistance that completely stops the damage.
Smite is a little less clear, but IMO you should be aware whether your smite is effective, I believe that you should feel the glory of your deity powering your blows and shielding you from harm, so you should be aware if it is ineffective.
Simply put, anyone who uses weapons knows when their weapons are effective or not. It's true in the real world and should remain true in Pathfinder (and there are no rules telling us otherwise).
If you use the right weapon to bypass DR, you probably don't even know there WAS any DR (because you bypassed it). As somebody already said, that's what Knowledge checks are for. But if you don't bypass DR, you surely know that your weapon didn't slash/bash/penetrate as well as you expected it to - which does not meant that you automatically know why (is it DR, is it an immunity, is it a magical ward, is it something else) because, again, that's what knowledge checks are for.
I assume that paladins know when their Smite Evil triggers. If they try to smite something that isn't evil, their weapon will do a normal amount of damage and when they smite something that is evil, their weapon does much more damage. But it's not just a bigger cut; it's magical/divine energy flowing into to the evil enemy and there probably is some visual and/or magical cue that the paladin can see and/or feel when it happens.
Succeeding on a Saving Throw
A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed.
Now, that quote applies to spells, not to Smite Evil, but I think it sets a valid precedent and it's reasonable to apply the same logic.