Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6204597" data-attributes="member: 22779">But, in this case, he's not actually holding anything back.  The player is looking for the information and will not receive it until such time as the player character detects magic.  The DM, in this case, is under no obligation to tell the player that the sword is magical until such time as the player steps up and casts detect magic.  However, once the player does cast Detect Magic, the DM is obligated by the rules to tell the player that, yes, the sword is magical.  A DM who lies to the player in this case is considered a bad DM by pretty much everyone.  But, again, we go back to spells.  There are any number of mind reading spells in D&D.  If the PC's cast on on the clue holder in Act 1, shouldn't they gain the information?  Isn't the DM now obligated by the rules to give this information to the players?This gets back to my problem with how you guys balance casters.  Because I have a very strong feeling that the answer to the above question is, "Well, does it make casters too good?"  Since we're manipulating the game world and cherry picking rules interpretations, then the answer should almost always be no.  If the spell is used in Act 3, then fine, no problems.  But, if it's used earlier, that would upset game balance and it must be prevented.How?  Unless the DM forces the player somehow to cast Detect Magic, in what way is the DM preconceiving a sequence of events?  Maybe they never cast it and throw away the magic sword unknowingly.  Maybe they cast it later on, but it would have been really useful in that fight with a were-rat.  There's any number of sequences that can play out here.  No, it isn't.  Not according to those in this thread.  Skills are vetoed and DC's set impossibly high to prevent skill abuse.  Spell uses are either vetoed or seriously curtailed to prevent spell abuse.  The players won't get the information because the game has been stacked to prevent them from learning who killed the duke too early.True.  But, the DM's are obligated by the rules.  Oh, wait, in some people's games, they aren't are they?  The DM is the final arbiter of all rules, so, no there is no obligation in those games.</blockquote>

Verification