Do Diviners make sense as PCs?

[Owen K.C. Stephens]

I'm currently playing a diviner/cleric of knowledge god multiclass (working toward mystiuc theurge), using the cloistered cleric and specialist wizard variant rules from Unearthed Arcana. So far the character certainly doesn't seem to have as much game mechanical impact on the game as the ranger, warblade or warlock.

While it can be nice as a player to be able to lean on divinations, a DM who keeps you from interacting with the main hidden bad guy in a way that makes you suspecious can short circuit most low-level divinations. And the high-level divinations are so useful non-specialist wizards are going to have them too.

In fact, it can be a useful tool for the DM. If the plot revolves around the creepy alchemist being mistrusted by the town, but he's actually innocent, having a PC be able to tell he's innocent can speed things along. If the townsfolk have no reason to trust the PCs they can go right on being suspecious, while the PCs must decide if they're going to settle down and investigate the mystery, or try to use detect spells on a town population in the low thousands. especially if the townsfolk are already suspecious, the second option rarely works well.

 

[Henry]

if your DMs allow these kinds of things, then you're playing the wrong game.

Irishfast, can we please not jump down people's throats with the "badwrongfun" comments?

As for the poster's problems with divinations, I often find that DM's may need to read carefully on what these divinations are supposed to allow, and what they DON'T allow, and this knowledge can help tailor your responses to the players' tactics. Quite simply, word WILL get out over time of the players' tactics, and counters will be utilized by enemies smart enough to use them. Nondectection spells, amulets that proof people against this sort of thing, Spells from third party sources (Anticipate Teleport from Spell Compendium is marvelous!) Misdirection and Forbiddance spells, all these things can make divination more difficult.

THEN...

...there is the DM Rat-bastardly things to do; those plots and themes which make Divination spells not only acceptable, but NECESSARY to have a chance of success. Imagine a murder mystery where you already know who did it, but you don't know HOW they did it. Because of laws of the land, there must be proof before taking them in, and spells "because of their inherent duplicitous nature" aren't evidence.

As someone mentioned, frame-ups are good, too. Piratecat had one of the most famous frame-ups in his games, when one undead Lich used ANOTHER powerful undead's name in some name-drops, and when the party traced him (legend Lores, etc.) they were getting truthful info -- about the WRONG GUY. In fact, the sneaky Lich WANTED the other Undead Guy dead anyway, as part of his plan, so it played out beautifully, and the party almost killed him and furthered the bad guy's plan.

Next, remember that divinations can be used to get the PCs back on track when they're off-track. You control the info they receive, so use that to your advantage. The spells note themselves as inherently vague, so they don't have to be "Who killed this guy?" "Phil who works in the corner store." In fact, the sources of info may not specifically know (the spells do not imply omnipotence) , they may only know enough to point you in the right direction.

I myself have always liked the idea of "Scry-teleport" being necessary to solve a problem -- let's say a doomsday prophecy can only be averted by performing one act at one locale, and another act at another locale far away EXACTLY ONE MINUTE later. The PCs have to either split up, meaning they're less likely to deal with interruptions, or they have to teleport from one to the other FAST. Only someone with teleport and scry could succeed, meaning that heroes of the PCs' caliber are the only ones who can do the job.

 

[KarinsDad]

Quite simply, word WILL get out over time of the players' tactics, and counters will be utilized by enemies smart enough to use them. Nondectection spells, amulets that proof people against this sort of thing, Spells from third party sources (Anticipate Teleport from Spell Compendium is marvelous!) Misdirection and Forbiddance spells, all these things can make divination more difficult.

I do not understand this concept outside of metagaming.


Typically, the PCs have a horrendous time finding out tactics of enemies. Sometimes it is because they do not know who their enemies are, or where to find them, or by the time they find out who they are, they are already fighting them, etc.

Unless the DM drops clues like gumdrops, all of the campaigns I have been in required that the PCs work hard in order to acquire significant knowledge like BBEG tactics.

Even then, I cannot recall a single session where significant BBEG tactics were actually discovered (the BBEG lives in a fortress with xyz defenses, etc.).

So, if the PCs often have an extremely difficult time discovering the tactics of the BBEG, how is it that the PC tactics so easily become common knowledge?

I suspect this is more the DM knows the PC tactics and arranges for a BBEG to have counters for them (i.e. the DM is lazy or "cheats") than the BBEG actually was designed to spend massive resources to investigate the PCs ahead of time (even before he knew they were after him) and figure out their tactics.

Logically, this just does not make sense. But, I see this type of thing written here and on other boards quite often that PC tactics become common knowledge, but I just do not understand the logic behind it.

Does every BBEG in your campaign world have massive spy networks or some such? Is the divination magic of the NPCs better than the PCs? If so, why do the PCs usually win?

Or is it just that DMs often automatically (consciously or subconsciously) react to PC tactics, even when the NPCs should have no clue as to what the PCs normally do?

 

[pallandrome]

I use Divination magic like I use insta kill spells and vorpal weapons. Cold war style. As long as the players don't disintegrate the baddies, or vorpal weapon them to death, the baddies will return the favor. If the characters use a lot of divinations, then they should assume that a powerful enemy is likely to be doing the same. to protect themselves.

You can actually get a fairly intricate game built up around this concept alone. Lawful enemies who are smart enough might engineer a situation to trick the characters into doing a crime. Chaotic enemies might be acting on pure instinct, to where nobody knows WHAT they are going to do next (imagine an Orc Barbarian killing someone while thinking of puppies). Maybe the local town guard objects to the use of divination magic, under the assumption that by acting on the divination, the characters actually CAUSED the crime to be commited!

Divinations ain't a curse, is what I'm saying. They's a blessing.

 

[Felix]

So, if the PCs often have an extremely difficult time discovering the tactics of the BBEG, how is it that the PC tactics so easily become common knowledge?

The BBEG won't concern himself with the tactics of the party until they become a big enough bother that he bends his mind towards destroying them. Until then I would imagine his lieutenants would be the ones dealing with the problems the PCs cause.

I always had a problem with this at the point where the PCs have caused enough trouble to become a signifigant threat to the BBEG's operation, and yet the BBEG does not turn his considerable power and influence to removing them - permanently. I feel like this happens around 10th to 13th level, when the PCs are really feeling their oats, but the BBEG still has some overwhelming guns he can bring to bear upon the PCs. And this includes sending feints against the PCs to test their defenses, includes long-term strategies like framing them or turning their patrons against them, and sending henchmen far more powerful than the PCs can resist.

I don't think it should be easy for the BBEG to figure out the PCs' tactics, but at some point in the campaign, it should be expected that the PCs have caused enough trouble that the bad guys will spend some resources going on the offensive and getting rid of the pesky PCs.

fine.

if your DMs allow these kinds of things, then you're playing the wrong game.

Is there something perhaps that we're missing that inspired this?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I always had a problem with this at the point where the PCs have caused enough trouble to become a signifigant threat to the BBEG's operation, and yet the BBEG does not turn his considerable power and influence to removing them - permanently.

97.If my weakest troops fail to eliminate a hero, I will send out my best troops instead of wasting time with progressively stronger ones as he gets closer and closer to my fortress.

Is there something perhaps that we're missing that inspired this?

I think it's that he posted something, and then there were no further responses to the thread for over 24 hours.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

I think it's that he posted something, and then there were no further responses to the thread for over 24 hours.

Odd.

 

[Hairfoot]

Typically, the PCs have a horrendous time finding out tactics of enemies. Sometimes it is because they do not know who their enemies are, or where to find them, or by the time they find out who they are, they are already fighting them, etc.

I find that this is often to do with party composition and player attitudes. Sometimes I'm dying to see the party use their rogues, rangers and diviners to scout a BBEG lair, but it doesn't cross their mind because any party manoeuvre must involve the tanks - which make stealth impossible - and the tank players, who lose interest if the scenario isn't fight-til-you-drop.

 

[shilsen]

Typically, the PCs have a horrendous time finding out tactics of enemies. Sometimes it is because they do not know who their enemies are, or where to find them, or by the time they find out who they are, they are already fighting them, etc.

Unless the DM drops clues like gumdrops, all of the campaigns I have been in required that the PCs work hard in order to acquire significant knowledge like BBEG tactics.

Even then, I cannot recall a single session where significant BBEG tactics were actually discovered (the BBEG lives in a fortress with xyz defenses, etc.).

Sounds like a problem with your DM(s). In my games, some BBEGs and not-so-BBEGs are very hard to discover information about. And others are comparatively easier. And there are usually many methods for finding information, and if they use them, the PCs find the battles easier.

Then again, I like to reward intelligent and strategic thinking.

So, if the PCs often have an extremely difficult time discovering the tactics of the BBEG, how is it that the PC tactics so easily become common knowledge?

Speaking for myself as a DM, they usually do not. Except for enemies who specifically have access to information about the PCs.

I suspect this is more the DM knows the PC tactics and arranges for a BBEG to have counters for them (i.e. the DM is lazy or "cheats") than the BBEG actually was designed to spend massive resources to investigate the PCs ahead of time (even before he knew they were after him) and figure out their tactics.

For some DMs, I'm sure you're right. Emphasis on "some."

Logically, this just does not make sense. But, I see this type of thing written here and on other boards quite often that PC tactics become common knowledge, but I just do not understand the logic behind it.

Does every BBEG in your campaign world have massive spy networks or some such?

Personally speaking again: No, not all of them, but some do.

Is the divination magic of the NPCs better than the PCs?

Not usually. Only if the NPC is a dedicated diviner (my PCs aren't) or has access to significantly greater resources.

If so, why do the PCs usually win?

IMC, because they're rarely fighting the enemies with really good info about them. Those enemies tend to be very hard to defeat.

Or is it just that DMs often automatically (consciously or subconsciously) react to PC tactics, even when the NPCs should have no clue as to what the PCs normally do?

Some DMs, yes. Some DMs, no. I personally often have NPCs do things that will screw them, but which make sense because they don't know what special abilities and spells the PCs have. And better informed NPCs don't make such errors.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm running a Rgr/Ftr/Div/SpellSword, based upon Indiana Jones in a 3.0 RttToEE campaign. Because its a big party, he's kind of the "role-player"...not in the sense of its a purely role playing PC, but in the sense of he can "fill the role" of almost any PC in the party. He's opened doors the "Legitimate Businessman" failed to. He's found things others can't- including other party members- via Locate Object. He's been a "scout." Despite being optimized for 2WF, he's currently carrying a 2 magical handed sword near the point.

True Strike does indeed rock.

About the only thing he hasn't been able to do is match the long-range projection of power from the single-class generalist mage- largely due to spell selections & the other PC (and/or player) not wanting to share spells. Where he's been casting things like Acid Arrow, my guy is content giving the true party warriors Bull Strength at the 3.0 duration of 1hr/lvl.

I'm so crying.