Compiled 3.5 Revisions

Technik4 · Jul 9, 2003

This means that even the untrained may get the second snippet of important information on trolls (DC 15: they regenerate all wounds beyond fire and acid!), but only the trained will remember the third bit of information (DC 20 if you stand and fight them hand-to-hand, they'll grab you in both hands and rip you apart, so it's better to use hit-and-run tactics against them).

Im not sure I agree with this, I mean Im not trying to tell you how to run your game, just a friendly dispute about interpretation. See I think the fire and acid thing is only common if trolls are common. Personally Ive never fought a troll in 3e, but of course while *I* knew the vulnerabilities (being a well-read MM user) I wouldnt use them against trolls unless I was trained in the knowledge appropriate (we used Knowledge (Monsters)).

It seems if someone described a troll to me, however, I could imagine that their obvious offensive would be their over-long arms, almost gorilla-like and their sharp claws. Nothing about a physical description, drawing or artist's rendition, or seeing one in the distance suggests they are difficult to kill except with acid and fire. I guess what I'm getting at is the untrained knowledge checks should not be considered to be free "gather information" checks about the monsters, but rather a character's extrapolation of abilities based on what he knows about it.

Of course, it won't probably ever be a big deal (in a 4-person party, most low-level monsters' vulnerabilities are fairly well-known), but I think itd be funny if a long-time player who knew the vulnerabilities had to wait for the newbie to roll the dice, me to tell the newbie, and the newbie to tell him that you kill trolls with fire and acid

Technik

Cascade · Jul 9, 2003

Since they reduced the Cloak of displacement, did they also change the animated shield function or is it still always on?

Thanx in Advance

smetzger · Jul 9, 2003

Pielorinho said:
I agree, it's a little bit weird as a roll. What person with the smallest amount of interest in monster stories doesn't know three different vulnerabilities of a vampire? And yet how many fantasy geeks know that a particular kind of small spotted lizard can send out a serious electrical jolt?

Yeah, this problem comes from them dropping Frequency. Just establish your own freq, could even be based off of 1e and 2e if you want a guideline.

Looks like Slaad have been dropped from the Summon Monster list. I presume this was because they did not release the stats for Slaad in the SRD.

Conaill · Jul 9, 2003

Didn't see this one in your compilation yet, so...

The Light Lance has been dropped (can be replaced with a Small Lance if needed, I assume). The Lance (formerly Heavy Lance) is now a 2-handed weapon with reach.

AFAIK, that means it will no longer be possible to do the classical "lance and shield" mounted knight without resorting to things like Monkey Grip. I asked for clarification on that last point on some of the various Q&A threads (one-handed Lance use might be an additional benefit of the Mounted Combat feat, for example), but nobody has bothered to answer yet...

Pielorinho · Jul 9, 2003

Technik4 said:
Im not sure I agree with this, I mean Im not trying to tell you how to run your game, just a friendly dispute about interpretation. See I think the fire and acid thing is only common if trolls are common. Personally Ive never fought a troll in 3e, but of course while *I* knew the vulnerabilities (being a well-read MM user) I wouldnt use them against trolls unless I was trained in the knowledge appropriate (we used Knowledge (Monsters)).

It's a matter of interpretation. First, I don't think it's important how *common* the monster is; I think it's important how *famous* it is. Some rare creatures such as red dragons will have better-known abilities than other more common creatures.

Second, I brought up vampires because nothing about their appearance suggests that holy symbols, sunlight, or stakes would be especially effective against them; however, any geek (in the Western world) with any interest in monsters knows that these things work vs. vampires.

Third, I actually handle it differently in my world anyway. Rather than try to tell people that they don't know the abilities listed in the MM, I ask people to use a little bit of discretion -- and then I tell them that the MM contains legends, not facts. Creatures in my world might differ significantly from their descriptions in the MM: ghosts might be corporeal, dragons might have no breath weapon, trolls may be great shaggy creatures who regenerate everything except slashing weapon damage. Hopefully people are kept enough off their guard that they don't get complacent

.

Daniel

Lela · Jul 10, 2003

Conaill said:
Didn't see this one in your compilation yet, so...

The Light Lance has been dropped (can be replaced with a Small Lance if needed, I assume). The Lance (formerly Heavy Lance) is now a 2-handed weapon with reach.

AFAIK, that means it will no longer be possible to do the classical "lance and shield" mounted knight without resorting to things like Monkey Grip.

Why couldn't a medium creature use a smaller lance?

Or did I miss an change somewhere?

Pielorinho said:
Third, I actually handle it differently in my world anyway. Rather than try to tell people that they don't know the abilities listed in the MM, I ask people to use a little bit of discretion -- and then I tell them that the MM contains legends, not facts. Creatures in my world might differ significantly from their descriptions in the MM: ghosts might be corporeal, dragons might have no breath weapon, trolls may be great shaggy creatures who regenerate everything except slashing weapon damage. Hopefully people are kept enough off their guard that they don't get complacent .

Daniel

Nice. YOINK.

Technik4 · Jul 10, 2003

...any geek (in the Western world) with any interest in monsters knows that these things work vs. vampires.

I mostly agree with what you said, just thought this was funny. How many western world geeks do you think would be adventurers? I was always bugged by the "we're geeks and we know what will kill vampires, so of course any self-respecting adventurer would!" theory. If I was a vampire I would spend at least a good hundred years spreading lies about vampire vulnerabilities. Sure, its not gonna fool the seasoned vets, but it will at least throw some of the population off the trail.

Good point about commonality vs fame though.

Technik

kallisti_dk · Jul 10, 2003

Remember, that even though there are many tales of the great monsters of legend, eg. vampires, dragons etc., these tales may be wildly inaccurate and misleading. So while there may a lot of info freely available about big HD monsters, it might not might be useful.

Consider this:
- The more HD a monster has, the more dangerous it is.
- The more dangerous a monster is, the farther away from civilization it is AND the fewer people have survived encounters with it.
- Therefore, studies of big HD monster are rare and dangerous.
- Therefore, the more HD a monster has, the less useful information will be available.

Conclusion:
While there might be a lot of free info about "popular" and big monsters, most of it will be hearsay and legend. Useful information is hard to come by, and remember, the Knowledge skill explicitly says _useful_ information. So it seems to me that the "HD determines DC" mechanic is justified.

I might still use the +2/-2 circumstance modifier mechanic, though, for particularly obscure or common monsters.

Steverooo · Jul 10, 2003

Hrrrm! I wonder if... Nah! I bet the poor Ranger, with favored enemy (something that falls under Knowledge (Arcana), like Dragons) doesn't get a bonus, either!

"Yeah, I'm trained to fight Dragons, even get +10 on every hit, but I caint never tell what they breathe!"

Pielorinho · Jul 10, 2003

kallisti_dk said:
Consider this:
- The more HD a monster has, the more dangerous it is.
- The more dangerous a monster is, the farther away from civilization it is AND the fewer people have survived encounters with it.
- Therefore, studies of big HD monster are rare and dangerous.
- Therefore, the more HD a monster has, the less useful information will be available.

Possibly; on the other hand, the bards are likelier to sing about the exploits of the group that escaped from the Illithid's Underdark city than about the group that cleaned out the nest of shocker lizards in the swamp. It's the big creatures that'll enter legend more often. Similarly, folks fighting grimlocks are less likely to hunt down a knowledgeable sage to ask questions than are folks battling white dragons: the less dangerous a creature, the less call there will be for information about it.

As I said, though, I'm fine having MM material be inaccurate. I just know that as a player, I don't enjoy pretending not to know how to fight (for example) trolls and having to spend a couple of rounds fighting them stupidly until I think I can genuinely conclude my character would have figured out what would be an efective fighting style. I'd much rather my DM change the creature's stats so that I as a player can enjoy alongside my character the fun of figuring out the new, mysterious creature's strengths and weaknesses.

Daniel