Epic D&D 3.5: The Eye of Profane Truth [full]

[Wrahn]

I am sorry, I thought I was responding to the events in game here in the OOC thread where they belong. I replied in the wrong window.

As far as the Lore ability goes, I want to clarify what I am say and why I think the ruling that I don't know anything but generalities eviscerates the Lore (and bardic knowledge) abilties. (and why that is a bad thing)

Since Lore references the bardic knowledge ability, let my put up the relevant part here.

A bard may make a special bardic knowledge check with a bonus equal to his bard level + his Intelligence modifier to see whether he knows some relevant information about local notable people, legendary items, or noteworthy places.

My view of that is that asking to roll on lore for someplace suitable for us to use as a base is well within the scope of lore. Since it allows for questions about noteworthy places, it implies a great storehouse of knowledge about such things. If he does not have a general knowledge to draw on about places in general (The general question of "Can I think of anyplace that was once an outpost of the Roman Enpire that still exists today?"), it likewise make no sense that he would have the knowledge to draw on specific knowledge (Such as "Do I know anything about London?") and thus Lore would be non-functional in regards to location. It is also implied that it would hold true to any knowledge given the reasoning for him not knowing about location.

I am not saying that it is not within the scope of the campaign for Lorgrane not to know such things considering he is mere hours old, but that particular ruling would seriously hamper his ability to act as the information guy in the group.

I hardly think that asking about an appropriate location is the same thing as "Roll to know the plot." I hardly see how knowing something that could be researched at a library in under a day is going to demystify the game.

I realize you don't have the entire world fleshed out (which is why I made the suggestion of the location) but we need information to act of our own volition, denying us that will only slow down the plot and make Lorgrane testy.

 

[Rkhet]

The difference between information that you are 'born with' and information that you get from someone else is that the second one is possibly wrong.

All sources of external information could be false. Anyone you speak to is possibly lying, or simply misinformed. I prefer a lot of paranoia in my games. Lore seems to be a rather cheap way out of this.

Also, the scope of this ability seems rather arbitrary. As defined being able to make a 30+ Lore check lets you know extremely obscure information about everything you come across. Interpreted loosely, that's worth at least a Salient Divine Ability. Hell, listen to that healer guy. "There is no such thing as omniscience" - even for the Perfect.

If necessary, you could say that I am nerfing this just as I am nerfing Timestop to five rounds maximum - not really necessary because it is gamebreaking, but necessary because of personal preference.

 

[Wrahn]

I am not trying to argue with you about this, don't read that as my intent, but I need some kind of clarification on what you think Lore (and bardic knowledge, though that isn't a terribly pressing concern at the moment) is used for.

Lore and Bardic Knowledge are limited in scope as the information recieved is completely up to the game master. For instance: "What do I know about the Demon Lord Kerfazzus?" "He was summoned by the lich queen Alriare in 481 to serve as her personal consort and master of her undead legion. He is horrifically ugly and is said to walk on three legs." KSlanes or KS: History would likely tender much more useful information.

I guess I am confused as how you think this ability equates to omniscience and how the ability should be used.

 

[Voidrazor]

Okay, I picked the spell to maximized and marked spells used.

 

[Rkhet]

SRD text for definition of Bardic Knowledge:

A bard may make a special bardic knowledge check with a bonus equal to his bard level + his Intelligence modifier to see whether he knows some relevant information about local notable people, legendary items, or noteworthy places.


SRD text for DC 30 Bardic Knowledge:

Extremely obscure, known by very few, possibly forgotten by most who once knew it, possibly known only by those who don’t understand the significance of the knowledge.

"Notable", "Legendary", and "Noteworthy", are loosely defined. In an Epic campaign, though, it includes everything that will be relevant to you.

Having significant and extremely obscure knowledge of everything you come across is pretty close to omniscience.

Only cure for this is, of course, rule 0, which is what I am implementing.

I plan to make this a passive ability: you don't request Lore checks, but sometimes you get bits and pieces that are possibly useful.

 

[Isida Kep'Tukari]

Rkhet, I have interest in being an alternate, if you're in need. Spiker fighter, straight up, if that would be acceptable.

 

[Wrahn]

SRD text for definition of Bardic Knowledge:

A bard may make a special bardic knowledge check with a bonus equal to his bard level + his Intelligence modifier to see whether he knows some relevant information about local notable people, legendary items, or noteworthy places.


SRD text for DC 30 Bardic Knowledge:

Extremely obscure, known by very few, possibly forgotten by most who once knew it, possibly known only by those who don’t understand the significance of the knowledge.

"Notable", "Legendary", and "Noteworthy", are loosely defined. In an Epic campaign, though, it includes everything that will be relevant to you.

Having significant and extremely obscure knowledge of everything you come across is pretty close to omniscience.

Only cure for this is, of course, rule 0, which is what I am implementing.

I plan to make this a passive ability: you don't request Lore checks, but sometimes you get bits and pieces that are possibly useful.

I would disagree on the interpretation that a lore roll will give obscure and relevant information about everything we meet. The DC is set if there is relevant information to be had. For example, "King Fordle has a great love of any vintage from the Kelrupt region." is both obscure and could be relevant (if we need to bribe him or make a gift for him), but hardly what I would call omniscience.

Lore is not appropriate for everything, a good example of that is the healer. There is no reference for a healer servant of the Perfect, there is no reason Lore would give me anything.

I think you are taking the ability too literally, if I happen to roll Lore about some subject and there is no information available, then it doesn't matter what is rolled, there is no information there.

But hey, we obviously have a different view on what the ability does. I would consider Lore powerful but no where near game breaking. Let me end my side of this discussion with these two thoughts: Lack of information is currently stopping the group from doing anything, current topics of conversations include consulting/kidnapping sages to learn more. Shouldn't an epic loremaster know at least as much as a sage? And second, access to general information will speed the game along.

Currently I would ask you to look at Mind Rape (from the BoVD) and where it says I know everthing the target does, whether you are willing for that to happen.

 

[Rkhet]

The group is currently paralyzed, methinks, because you are all being too timid. So what if you don't know everything? Go forth and investigate. You are more powerful than most people will ever be. Go do stuff. It won't kill you.

Frankly, I don't think a stronghold will do you much good, anyway. You can carry everything you need. Anyone dangerous and determined enough to hunt you down won't be stopped by castle walls, either.

Just because there is information available about a subject doesn't mean you should automatically know it. Even for an Epic character. "Always have knowledge of x if knowledge of x is available to others" still sounds like an SDA. The best a non-godly ability could do is provide information some of the time.

Nevertheless, I think our views of what Lore should and should not do are converging. Lore is not too powerful an ability if there is DM discretion about what information is released and what is not.

Shouldn't an epic loremaster know at least as much as a sage?

Yes and no. You know plenty of things that your run-of-the-mill sage won't ever know. But the sage will still have information you want.

Feel free to go and kidnap a sage. You won't even need to use magic - a few hundred gold pieces will induce most underpaid sages to spill the beans on almost any subject you can think of.

houserule time:
Mind Rape will be ran like hypnosis. For 1 minute/level after casting, the caster can question the subject about anything, and he/she will answer to the best of his/her abilities. You can also alter memories, change opinions, induce madness, etc.

The subject is usually truthful, but may be confused as their conscious mind shuts down. The particularly strong-willed may dance around the answer, or even get a second save if you ask a question that they really, really don't want to answer.

The subject of this spell stands doing completely nothing for the duration, and is considered helpless.

 

[Rkhet]

Isida: good to have you.

 

[Shayuri]

Hee. I'd go do stuff, but we're not supposed to split the party.