Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 7183552" data-attributes="member: 2011">My players do not necessarily think that. It was an example.Experienced veteran adventurers, or experienced veteran players?In our game on Saturday, the enemy leader was about 80 feet away from my PC (the closest) in a semi-dismal cavern. He cast a spell and got away. In our game, any distance over 30 feet requires a perception check to see if you can observe well enough any spell casting. If you do, you get an Arcana check to see if you know exactly what spell is cast. If you don't, you can often see that a foe is casting, but cannot make out the exact words/gestures. My PC missed the perception check by a lot, so the DM vaguely described the situation as the foe cast a spell and then walked into the wall.Based on the spells that the foe had cast earlier, I as a player knew that the foe had cast a Meld Into Stone spell. But my PC did not know that. So on my turn, my PC rushed over there saying &quot;He went through a secret door&quot;. The point of the story is that players play based on the information that a DM gives them. If a DM just hands out 100% accurate resistance mechanics info every single time as opposed to possible having a knowledge check or a perception check, or possibly even a totally different set of information that leads players to a totally erroneous conclusion, then the players will play the game with the same accurate correct tactics as opposed to sometimes doing something else.If you always know that the foe is resistant to normal weapons every single time that you first hit a foe with that feature, where is the mystery?You seem to be under the impression that it is one or the other.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 7183552, member: 2011"] My players do not necessarily think that. It was an example. Experienced veteran adventurers, or experienced veteran players? In our game on Saturday, the enemy leader was about 80 feet away from my PC (the closest) in a semi-dismal cavern. He cast a spell and got away. In our game, any distance over 30 feet requires a perception check to see if you can observe well enough any spell casting. If you do, you get an Arcana check to see if you know exactly what spell is cast. If you don't, you can often see that a foe is casting, but cannot make out the exact words/gestures. My PC missed the perception check by a lot, so the DM vaguely described the situation as the foe cast a spell and then walked into the wall. Based on the spells that the foe had cast earlier, I as a player knew that the foe had cast a Meld Into Stone spell. But my PC did not know that. So on my turn, my PC rushed over there saying "He went through a secret door". The point of the story is that players play based on the information that a DM gives them. If a DM just hands out 100% accurate resistance mechanics info every single time as opposed to possible having a knowledge check or a perception check, or possibly even a totally different set of information that leads players to a totally erroneous conclusion, then the players will play the game with the same accurate correct tactics as opposed to sometimes doing something else. If you always know that the foe is resistant to normal weapons every single time that you first hit a foe with that feature, where is the mystery? You seem to be under the impression that it is one or the other. [/QUOTE]

Verification