Detecting Undead

[the_mighty_agrippa]

So, we nearly had a TPK last Sunday because the DM basically refuses to tell you if something is undead. We have an undead killing priest in the party with maxed out ranks in relevant knowledge skills and from a sun-worshipping church that specializes in killing undead. We get attacked by a group of undead girallons.

PCs "Are they undead?"
DM "You can't tell."
PCs "Waitaminute - old dude here is the undead killing master hunter killer."
DM "How can you guys tell? They look like apes. They charge and initiate grapple."
*fail* fail* *fail*

One full round of attacks later, we have three dead characters because the fighters were engaged on the other side with an advanced fiendish black pudding.

These aren't vampires or liches; they are undead apes. Am I in the wrong here? I don't think so.

[/end rant]

 

[Piratecat]

I don't think so either. From what you say, that was a bad call on the part of the DM.

 

[newgrace]

I could see how a basic character would not have the knowledge to recognize the ape with peeling flesh as undead, but anybody with knowledge Religion should have no issue making the knowledge check to see the creatures "type". Your undead hunter should of been "hey, look at those undead apes charging us".

And I am assuming they were zombies. Skeleton undead would be even funnier, but id stand by what I said (maybe they are really thin apes). And sure, they could of been another type of undead, but it starts getting scary past the skeleton or zombie...and even then, your cleric with a knowledge check should of easily known undead. Or he could of just tried a turn attempt and see what happens.

 

[Tessarael]

When I DM, I intend most significant threats to have both warning signs and be recognizable. Undead are distinct from non-undead, because undead represent an above average threat - players need some guide to their intution as to how to treat an encounter (e.g. apes we can take them, or undead let's run away). Undead in particular are an archetype that has distinguishing characteristics: rotting flesh, bones, injuries, rotting or musty smell, etc ... The character should be able to make a Spot check and/or Knowledge (Religion) check. An undead which is disguised might require a high Spot check, but otherwise it should be quite easy.

 

[the_mighty_agrippa]

My point was that we knew there were undead around, the PC had undead killing skills and turning undead was a vital game mechanic. Denying the PC a class ability would be like having a ranger with favored enemy: giant and having the PCs fight humans with giantism.

 

[mvincent]

PCs "Are they undead?"
..
DM "How can you guys tell?

The DM was probably unaware that this is covered by Knowledge: Religion. The DC to identify them as undead would normally have been 10 + their HD (and does not require an action).

If you explained this rule to him, he likely would have gone along with it.

 

[Slaved]

While mvincent is correct that there is a knowledge check of DC 10 + hit die that is more to identify a specific creature along with its powers and vulnerabilities. It is, in my opinion, a bad rule though as creatures hit dice do not make it more or less common in general nor is it a good indicator in this case since zombies have double the hit die of a normal creature. Challenge rating is a slightly better representation sometimes but I think it would still come down to whether the dm feels that the creature is common, uncommon, rare, or special in some way and what an appropriate DC would be.

If you went by the normal rule then regular girallon zombies would have 14 hit dice and so make a DC 24 check, by challenge rating it would be DC 14.

I would say that without special precautions most undead would be a knowledge 10 check to recognize that they are undead, as opposed to a golem or such, possibly with a synergy bonus from heal. Disguise/hide/bluff could be used in specific circumstances to increase the difficulty.

 

[mvincent]

While mvincent is correct that there is a knowledge check of DC 10 + hit die that is more to identify a specific creature along with its powers and vulnerabilities.

Based on examples I have seen, the base knowledge check should identify it's name, type, and the traits of said type. The undead hunting player should almost certainly already know the general undead traits anyways, and a name is just name, so the base knowledge roll seems particularly suitable for determining type.

It is, in my opinion, a bad rule

It was just a general (simplified) rule. WotC has since been updating such knowledge checks to not rely on the creature's HD. Check out this thread.

 

[Mistwell]

The question is whether the DM privately rolled the player's knowledge check to see if they could ID the creatures as undead. That is information we do not have. The players may well have failed their check, and therefore the DMs answer was accurate.

 

[mvincent]

The question is whether the DM privately rolled the player's knowledge check

It seems extremely likely that neither the DM nor the players considered the Knowledge: Religion check at that particular moment.