Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6158050" data-attributes="member: 6681948">First, I'm assuming 10 waves is not a winnable situation for the PC's.  My first bias would be to put a time limit on the wave of enemies.  The runes begin to glow (Round 1), glow brighter (rounds 2 - 4), mounds of earth rise up (Round 5), gradually forming into vaguely humanoid shapes (Rounds 6 - 8), pull themselves loose from the floor/walls (Round 9) and move to the attack (Round 10).  Then the trap shuts off until the next wave is to be released.  If the players are hurting, and have no idea how to get past the door, then they should back off.  The system shuts down (why waste its resources?), and either the existing elementals chase the PC's, or perhaps they return to the stone (again, to maintain materials).  If they show no sign of retreating, there's no harm suggesting to a character that they are reminded of an ol mentor, a History check recollection, or some other suggestion of retreating and regrouping rather than grinding their blood and bones against the rocks.I agree with those noting knowledge is passive.  The runes ARE arcane, and a wizard should not need to carefully consider whether these runes might, or might not, be arcane to get a roll.  Anyone who speaks Dwarven should be able to see that these are no Dwarven runes he recognizes.  Did you have to stop and carefully consider whether Knowledge: Arcana or Spellcraft would open the door, or did you *know* which was appropriate?  The PLAYER should not be demonstrating knowledge that these may be arcane, the PC should be - he gets a Knowledge skill roll.Finally, let's not forget a Lock can be opened with Open Locks - or, at least, the attempt should stand a chance of revealing this is no ordinary lock.  Dispel Magic might shut the mechanism (and/or trap) down long enough for the heroes to get past (but now it's back when they want to leave), and Rogues can disarm magical traps.  Spellcraft can ID a spell (like Wizard Lock) that is already in place, or an unusual effect with a very high roll.  There's not just "one, true way" to address the challenge.Doesn't have to be that obvious - it could even be giving that high INT check the nudge "what makes you so sure the Dwarves built this?"Like most of the other posters, I disagree.  Knowledge is "what you know".  There is no ability to "consider again" (like the real life racking of one's brain to recall), and there is similarly no need to focus on it.  If I ask you the name of the Queen of England, or the first President of the US (pick based on your nationality), do you stop and carefully consider, or do you know the answer?I would give a character a re-roll with a bonus if he had the opportunity to consult a generic research source.  I'd also consider the possibility that, with this research source, it's a matter of time, as the answer is in there (but "he has to roll to pick up the significance" is a valid approach as well).Or you can dig in your heels, require the players to demonstrate their in-character knowledge before permitting a roll to use that knowledge (which, IME, will eventually result in every issue being greeted with each player listing each of his skills in turn to see if one of them holds an answer), grind them against the elementals and then wonder why they arent happy with your game.</blockquote>

Verification