How do you run gaze attacks in your campaign?

[airwalkrr]

Given the following:

Each character within range of a gaze attack must attempt a saving throw (which can be a Fortitude or Will save) each round at the beginning of his turn.

An opponent can avert his eyes from the creature’s face, looking at the creature’s body, watching its shadow, or tracking the creature in a reflective surface. Each round, the opponent has a 50% chance of not having to make a saving throw. The creature with the gaze attack gains concealment relative to the opponent. An opponent can shut his eyes, turn his back on the creature, or wear a blindfold. In these cases, the opponent does not need to make a saving throw. The creature with the gaze attack gains total concealment relative to the opponent.

So the player characters are walking through a dungeon and a medusa (or umber hulk, nymph, etc.) turns round the next corner. How do you run gaze attacks in your campaign? I see a few methods to handle this; I'll describe them briefly.

First is the simple method. Force the character entering range of the gaze to make a saving throw unless the player of the character specifies at the beginning of his turn which method he wishes to use to avert his eyes. Of course this assumes knowledge on the part of the player of how gaze attacks works so it might be troubling to some, especially considering that this information is located in the Dungeon Master's Guide and the Monster Manual, not the Player's Handbook and might be considered privileged information. Nevertheless, it is straightforward.

Second is the slightly less simple, but fair warning method. At the beginning of an encounter with a creature with a gaze attack, give the character a chance to make a Knowledge check to know about the creature's gaze attack (assuming the character is trained in the appropriate skill). If the check succeeds, simply warn the player about the effect of the gaze. If the check fails, run it as the first method. This gives the character some reasonable chance to be warned of the danger without delving into specifics of rules and disrupting the suspension of disbelief.

Third is what I would call the overly fair or "kindly DM" method. Any time a character enters the area of a creature's gaze attack, ask the player of the character what method, if any they will be using to avert their gaze, even if the character would have no knowledge of said gaze attack. Given that some looks can literally kill, I can understand a DM who might want to use this method.

I myself tend to vacillate somewhere between the first and second method. My campaigns take place in Eberron, and in Eberron, some creatures, such as medusas, are so legendary that any character, even one lacking training in the right Knowledge skill, might know of their power with a simple DC 10 Intelligence check. In such cases, I often use the second method. But other creatures are a bit more bizarre and unheard of except in dusty old tomes. In these cases, the roll of the Knowledge check is generally the responsibility of the player to make and I use the first method. (Yep, I'm a mean DM.)

So how do you run it? If you vote in the poll, just pick the option that most closely resembles how you run it.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Experienced players will eventually learn to keep making knowledge checks and be wary, but inexperienced ones would benefit a bit from the third method.

Basically what I'd do is let the player know there's a gaze effect on this monster the first time, and that subsequent monsters will require the appropriate knowledge check to ascertain what abilities they have.

There's an extra bit to option 1 though. After the character rolls the save, let the player know it was a gaze attack and that (s)he has options concerning such things.

Overall I'm mostly in the Option 2 camp.

 

[Dandu]

A character with ranks in the appropriate knowledge would know, say, not to look at Medusa.

 

[Tovec]

I've never felt it necessary, be they new or old players of the game, to warn my PCs about a monster before encountering it. That is, unless they openly seek out information on the monster. If they're wandering around a labyrinth with countless stone statues then they may earn a knowledge check to figure out what kinds of creatures can turn people to stone. I'm not going to suggest it unless they're being idiots about something obvious - those burn marks probably mean a fire-spitter, for example.

It isn't my job to be charitable with my PCs about gaze attacks anymore than if they were fighting a dragon how to counter that dragons abilities or how to defeat vampires, or liches, or trolls or orcs. If they inquire about a knowledge check or something prompts them for one then great. If not then when they run into the Nymph (I used this creature recently) and are unaware of their gaze attack then they'll end up blind and so be it.

 

[frankthedm]

Encountered within the gaze's active range, Characters in all likelihood will have met the creature's gaze by the time they recognize it enough to roll their knowledge checks. If the players want to walk around giving everything they might encounter 20% concealment {averting eyes} because they find clues that a gaze attacking creature might be in the area, that is their prerogative.

In 3e there is no rule to determine which way your character is facing. You get to keep an eye on all directions at any given time. You get your spot check regardless of the direction your foe comes at you from. Now that is a Good Thing most of the time. But when the gaze attacks show up, the default of keeping an eye on all directions at any given time IS a Bad Thing. Because the defender is given such a huge benefit of the doubt looking for incoming threats, the onus is now on the potential victim to take a penalty to reduce or avoid the need to save vs. the gaze.

 

[RangerRick]

I guess I'm (#1) mostly but to be honest I haven't used gaze attack mobs as wandering monsters or anything either so generally the party has some idea that hey, there is probably a Medusa or Basilisk or something in here long before they ever encounter it. Like they're specifically here to kill that thing as a boss or at least they see the statues and I'm pretty graphic about it and everyone gets the idea pretty quick.

If your asking about player knowledge versus character knowledge then sorry I'm not much help because I haven't used weird obscure gaze creatures so I figure everyone knows that looking at a Medusa will turn you to stone and I haven't had any players who didn't so it hasn't come up. I would probably try to keep everyone honest for character knowledge but I'd also feel like a jerk dropping some crazy monster no one in the party had ever heard of into the dungeon if it could kill them or turn them to stone with one look now charming or something like that is different, its less extreme and they can learn the hard way lol.

 

[was]

prob #2..i'd give them a knowledge check

 

[Vegepygmy]

I said #2, as I always call for Knowledge (whatever) checks when PCs encounter creatures and impart relevant information if they succeed.

But I follow #3, as well, if the PCs would be capable of perceiving the gaze attack in some way. If, for example, the gaze attack manifests as a blazing red light that shines from the creature's eyes and blinds its victims, I'd surely ask the player how his character is reacting to the eye-scorching glare washing over him.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

It all depends on the experience level of my players.

I have 2 experienced powergamers. If they came across this sort of scenario, I'd expect them to make in game checks to justify their character's awareness and responses, and I wouldn't prompt them to do so, it'd be on them or Tough Luck. It's how they'd expect me to DM.

I have 1 semi-experienced player, I might nudge him with a vague suggestion if he wasn't catching on right away.

And then there are newer players. It's expected that everyone, myself as the DM and the more experienced players would help the newer players out. One of my powergamers is great at helping new people, and he'd lean over and whisper a suggestion of "Hide your eyes" or something at the start of such an encounter.

We work it all out. The primary goal is that everyone has fun. For my experienced players, dying or serious problems by their own foolishness or lack of preparedness is fun for them. From most others, not so much.

 

[airwalkrr]

Some interesting responses. Not entirely what I expected either. But I see a lot of reasonable answers. I am curious to see how many DMs run things like this because it is one of those rules that is easy to forget and misinterpret, even without deciding whether to warn players in advance.