Ways to assess an encounter early

[Nichwee]

In real life, I don't know if the guy passing me on the street is a physicist, a serial killer, a hot dog vendor, or a Navy Seal. Clothing and physique give a little bit away, but for the most part, I have no idea who any given person is, or what they are capable of.

The concept of PCs knowing the difference between a goblin cutter, a goblin hexer, a goblin blackblade, a goblin archer, and a goblin sharpshooter is illogical. At best, one should know that one has a bow and another has a rod.

This fails to account for the fact that most people aren't trained in combat/adventuring.
I am a fencer (Epee specialty). From that alone (I'm nothing special as a fencer) I can identify the different sword types, the different combat techniques that go with them, etc. The way a fencer stands tells you a lot about their skill level, the cut of their gear says if they are wearing borrowed gear or not (so gives some compatence info) or if the gear is tailored they are an avid fencer (so expect the top draw of manuevers).
I have also learned a bit of judo and karate, so again I notice the way someone holds themselves, shifts their weight as they move.

Now if I was a trained fighter (like a soldier, or a true avid fencer/martial artist) I would expect this ability to even more honed. So I admit that knowing too much can seem OTT, but if you have studied goblin fighting techniques, then spotting the different types of combatant - and guessing a fair few of the moves they may have is that that tricky I would think.

Just think how quickly most people can sum up a problem at work after a few years - now assuem "work" is fighting/dealing with gribblies.

FOr info: Our DM allows a MKnowledge check to get vague destriptions of powers (Likes AoE, uses Cold damage and can dazes/slow) and it work pretty well.

 

[GreyICE]

Also if a monster creates a zone around itself, it tends to come with some sort of warning. Is it really realistic that a monster who comes with a zone of freezing cold so bitter it causes damage is something the PCs would not be able to notice? Have you ever walked into a walk-in freezer? You certainly notice that beforehand, and yet a freezer is not cold enough to cause HP damage. The zone would have to be even more cold than that.

How would the PCs not notice something like this? Why would they have to walk into the zone to notice "hey, it's suddenly hella cold around that monster, maaayyybbeee it hurts in there."

You don't have to tell the PCs everything the monster can do, but you should most certainly tell them about basic information like zones, likely traits, etc.

As for the house rule that you tell people defenses, this has existed since AD&D, and basically boils down to "I hate asking 'does it hit' all the time, so give me your PCs defenses and I'll give you the monsters AC and we'll all be happy." I don't personally use it often, but sometimes its just easier, especially in a big involved combat.

 

[Li Shenron]

I agree with that strongly - identifying an elder red dragon should be much easier than identifying an obscure 1st-level critter. There's a similar problem with detecting magic - per RAW the more powerful the magic, the harder it is to detect! In general I find the level-based DC system of 4e to be badly designed for my purposes.

I think it makes sense for spells on the ground that the higher the level of the spell, the less people in the world can cast it. Therefore you have a much higher chance of having seen someone casting Magic Missile than Meteor Storm.

But I am totally with you on monsters. CR has nothing to do with how many exist and how common they are to see for real or in books. It's a totally setting-dependent thing.

 

[S'mon]

I think it makes sense for spells on the ground that the higher the level of the spell, the less people in the world can cast it. Therefore you have a much higher chance of having seen someone casting Magic Missile than Meteor Storm.

Yes, my complaint is that per RAW the DC of detecting a magical emanation goes up as the power of that emanation goes up. A floodlight is harder to detect than a candle.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In real life, I don't know if the guy passing me on the street is a physicist, a serial killer, a hot dog vendor, or a Navy Seal. Clothing and physique give a little bit away, but for the most part, I have no idea who any given person is, or what they are capable of.

Sure, those are people. You also might not be able to tell the species of a given butterfly or a given 15' long reptile with a mouth full of sharp teeth - but you'll likely guess which one is more dangerous. More people can likely identify a notorious Great White Shark than can tell a pelagic from an anadromous eel, but the Shark is probably a 'higher level monster.'

The 4E designers introduced this bizarre concept that misinformation shouldn't be handed out

Yeah, 4e edged away from some of the 'gotchyas' of classic D&D styles. Nothing stops a DM from making knowledge check behind the screen and giving out false information on bad rolls, though, regardless of edition. Nothing stops players from not even bothering to take knowledge skills or ask what they know, and just read the damn books, either.

So with regard to the OP's original question, a party of 5 first level PCs should be walking out into a nasty world where they have very little in the way of experience.

And that also gets into the question of 'what is a first level PC.' A 1st level wizard has learned to twist reality to his will, he might have picked up some other knowledge in the process... A 1st level fighter, even in 1e, was a 'veteran,' which bespoke some experience, if no experience points...

..one exception to not handing out too much information is minions. Very few things in the game are as annoying as a player dropping a Daily or an Encounter power on minions when the player didn't know that they were minions

Nod.

Ultimately, it's a game, and if it's going to stand up to repeated play, it can't depend too heavily on player ignorance (nor penalize it too heavily) or player knowledge. Keeping the mechanics 'above board' helps with playability and keeps the game from degenerating into 'gotchyas' and paranoia. Such mechanics are usually things the characters would infer from what's going on around them, that the 'slow' effect the medusa dropped on them is turning them to stone, or that the Hexer doesn't need to maintain his Vexing Cloud with an action, but can use an action to move it. OTOH, there are lots of story elements the DM can include that will give the desired air of mystery, how the medusae came to be in the temple or who the Hexer serves....

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This fails to account for the fact that most people aren't trained in combat/adventuring.
I am a fencer (Epee specialty). From that alone (I'm nothing special as a fencer) I can identify the different sword types, the different combat techniques that go with them, etc. The way a fencer stands tells you a lot about their skill level, the cut of their gear says if they are wearing borrowed gear or not (so gives some compatence info) or if the gear is tailored they are an avid fencer (so expect the top draw of manuevers).
I have also learned a bit of judo and karate, so again I notice the way someone holds themselves, shifts their weight as they move.

Now if I was a trained fighter (like a soldier, or a true avid fencer/martial artist) I would expect this ability to even more honed. So I admit that knowing too much can seem OTT, but if you have studied goblin fighting techniques, then spotting the different types of combatant - and guessing a fair few of the moves they may have is that that tricky I would think.

Just think how quickly most people can sum up a problem at work after a few years - now assuem "work" is fighting/dealing with gribblies.

FOr info: Our DM allows a MKnowledge check to get vague destriptions of powers (Likes AoE, uses Cold damage and can dazes/slow) and it work pretty well.

Not only this, but imagine your town has been dealing with the goblins from the Dark Woods for years, maybe centuries. You've probably built up a pretty good lore about what's what. "The goblins that carry the gnarled sticks spit fire, the ones with the black rods create blinding clouds of smoky stuff".

 

[KarinsDad]

This fails to account for the fact that most people aren't trained in combat/adventuring.
I am a fencer (Epee specialty). From that alone (I'm nothing special as a fencer) I can identify the different sword types, the different combat techniques that go with them, etc.

Except that even as a fencer, you probably know very little about every type of martial arts, every type of military weapon, etc.

If you see a sailor on a Navy ship, you have no clue whether that sailor is one of the best Navy Seals on the ship, or the worst cook.

Appearance and even stance might give you clues, but it shouldn't tell you that one individual throws out areas of cold, another areas of heat, and a third areas of darkness.

That's the issue.

There are many thousands of monsters in D&D and PCs with a lucky roll at the appropriate level know too much about a given one.

A lich?

PCs should know that it is undead, but the types of magical attacks it has could be anything.

4E went too far in the direction of turning PCs into encyclopedias.

 

[KarinsDad]

Ultimately, it's a game, and if it's going to stand up to repeated play, it can't depend too heavily on player ignorance (nor penalize it too heavily) or player knowledge. Keeping the mechanics 'above board' helps with playability and keeps the game from degenerating into 'gotchyas' and paranoia. Such mechanics are usually things the characters would infer from what's going on around them, that the 'slow' effect the medusa dropped on them is turning them to stone, or that the Hexer doesn't need to maintain his Vexing Cloud with an action, but can use an action to move it. OTOH, there are lots of story elements the DM can include that will give the desired air of mystery, how the medusae came to be in the temple or who the Hexer serves....

Yes, it is a game.

But, it is a game where some Medusa's are resistant to acid and poison, and others are resistant to poison only.

Why?

Because the designers designed them that way.

But, the PCs have the ability to tell the difference between one and the other. Granted, very few PCs have the abillity to actually use acid attacks, but a group of Medusa's attacking can result in PCs knowing that the one to the left is resistant to the PC's attack and the one to the right isn't. Even though both creatures are the same race and nearly identical in most other ways.

I prefer a bit of mystery where the players sometimes go "Oh shoot".

 

[KarinsDad]

Not only this, but imagine your town has been dealing with the goblins from the Dark Woods for years, maybe centuries. You've probably built up a pretty good lore about what's what. "The goblins that carry the gnarled sticks spit fire, the ones with the black rods create blinding clouds of smoky stuff".

This is a bit of an illogical statement with respect to what you were responding to. One cannot conclude A from B.

You are assigning background knowledge to the PCs that very likely, doesn't match the background of most PCs to support a game mechanic that gives players knowledge of every monster in the books, not just the specific example you illustrated.

I have no problem with PCs having specific knowledge that matches their backgrounds, but having the knowledge rules go way beyond that and turn PCs into encyclopedias.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

This is a bit of an illogical statement with respect to what you were responding to. One cannot conclude A from B.

You are assigning background knowledge to the PCs that very likely, doesn't match the background of most PCs to support a game mechanic that gives players knowledge of every monster in the books, not just the specific example you illustrated.

I have no problem with PCs having specific knowledge that matches their backgrounds, but having the knowledge rules go way beyond that and turn PCs into encyclopedias.

Except that even as a fencer, you probably know very little about every type of martial arts, every type of military weapon, etc.

If you see a sailor on a Navy ship, you have no clue whether that sailor is one of the best Navy Seals on the ship, or the worst cook.

Appearance and even stance might give you clues, but it shouldn't tell you that one individual throws out areas of cold, another areas of heat, and a third areas of darkness.

That's the issue.

There are many thousands of monsters in D&D and PCs with a lucky roll at the appropriate level know too much about a given one.

A lich?

PCs should know that it is undead, but the types of magical attacks it has could be anything.

4E went too far in the direction of turning PCs into encyclopedias.

WHOA there cowboy! No no no. First of all you don't know what subtle details might give away all sorts of things. Second of all and most importantly exactly what the lore is for any given monster is entirely up to the DM. The DEFAULT lore is outlined in PHB/RC, but a LOT of monsters have unique lore blocks and it is always up to the DM exactly what he tells and how he conveys that information in detail.

Stop trying to foist the DM job on the rules and then complaining the rules don't do a good job of it. If you want things exactly a certain way, you make it that way. The rules are there to give you good usable defaults and a framework, not solve all of your problems for you.