General Discussion Thread IX

[Rystil Arden]

Don't worry, Velmont, there's always been at least a Spellcraft check to identify potions. The proposal of DH's (and it's definitely a reasonable one), is to allow Craft Alchemy to give a synergy with that check, and/or to allow a Craft Alchemy check to replace it.

 

[Bront]

Isn't liquid tasting of almonds a bad example?

 

[orsal]

Don't worry, Velmont, there's always been at least a Spellcraft check to identify potions. The proposal of DH's (and it's definitely a reasonable one), is to allow Craft Alchemy to give a synergy with that check, and/or to allow a Craft Alchemy check to replace it.

I would gladly give a synergy bonus to the Spellcraft check for Craft(alchemy) ranks; however, the character in question cannot make spellcraft checks because it is a trained-only skill.

 

[DerHauptman]

Its no big deal I guess it was something we just sort of implemented as a common sense type ruling.

Orsal - my character is a Sorcerer so he can make spellcraft checks just not a DC 25. It just seems silly that is one picks up Sorcerer mid stream @ only 2 Skill points per level (with no INT bonus) the character would realistically have to wait more than 3 levels and put points into nothing but spellcraft checks to even be able to identify a 1st level scroll or potion. I just think the DC's are too high if we put it in that perspective.

For the record I have no problem with your rulings at all - its just a game. The point of my question was to see where we came up with it for our table. I thought we read it somewhere. Might have been a supplement or something no big deal.

This isn't proposal worthy - just a question for my own education.

Thanks all,

 

[orsal]

Orsal - my character is a Sorcerer so he can make spellcraft checks just not a DC 25.

I'm looking under sorceror, and I'm looking under spellcraft, and I can't find this rule. Please, where in the SRD does it say that sorcerors can make untrained spellcraft checks?

 

[DerHauptman]

Again perhaps it is a common sense thing we do when we play. I can cast spells but I can't identify one? All arcane casters should know enough about spells since they can cast them to identify the school of one if they make the check. Of course they can't make any check above 20 since they have no ranks but the DC 15's they might make.

But then again D&D and common sense don't mix with most people. I'm not much of one for strict RAW.

Again - I have no books with me here. I am in Spain at the air terminal on the way back to the states.

 

[SlagMortar]

In 3.0 it was a DC 25 alchemy check to identify a potion. It cost 1 gp per attempt. That's probably where you got the rule.

 

[DerHauptman]

Slag-

I would bet you are right! Least I am not crazy which was why I asked the question in the first place. You know how sometimes you know you've seen it but can't remember where?

Anyways, the bottom line is I'm not arguing for a change or a redo or anything just to make sure I actually heard or read it somewhere valid (even if it is old and out of date.)

No big deal Orsal. We are on the same side man.

Realistically though doesn't it seem silly that one can cast a spell but if ya don't put a rank in Spell craft you can't even figure out the simplest things about them.

Oh well - thats WOTC for ya.

 

[orsal]

Realistically though doesn't it seem silly that one can cast a spell but if ya don't put a rank in Spell craft you can't even figure out the simplest things about them.

Yeah, I'd agree with that. Contra RAW, I should think an untrained Spellcraft check should be possible to identify a spell that the character can actually cast. Identifying a magic item is another matter, however.

 

[Bront]

Again perhaps it is a common sense thing we do when we play. I can cast spells but I can't identify one? All arcane casters should know enough about spells since they can cast them to identify the school of one if they make the check. Of course they can't make any check above 20 since they have no ranks but the DC 15's they might make.

Probably your common sense thing, but in general, the untrained rules state that you can't pass more than a DC 10 check with a skill you can't use untrained. There are some problems with that (Mostly with skills like local knowledge), but for the most part it works.

Think of Baseball, and a Pitch identification skill. Some batters have it, and can identify the pitch as it's thrown at them by the spin on the ball. Some batters can't (Ted Williams couldn't). Those who can't simply haven't studdied it, or simply can't (No ranks in the skill).

Not an exact compairison, but I hope it makes some sense.