No secrets can be kept due to Consult Oracle?

[hailstop]

That sounds like a DDI article to me.

 

[surfarcher]

No Doug, it's you who is missing the point.

Charmed, I'm sure.

Having to always take all info rituals into account is a chore, it is predictable, and in the end, it is a waste of brain cells, because if you're not going to let the PCs use their rituals, why have them in the first place.

It doesn't feel that way to me. I don't give any special advance attention to it... I did think the whole scrying thing through a couple years ago because scrying is important to how I see my shared fantasy world functioning. And it was immediately evident to me that warding against scrying would be important. That the absence of this simply rendered the comsmology internally inconsistent. Any number of fantasy worlds in novels, etc amply illustrate this too. Maybe if I was writing adventures to make publically available then I might have to do that. But I don't so I don't.

Who stops the PCs from using their rituals? I like when they use their rituals. That doesn't automatically mean they can break plot when their opponent would have covered his tracks. If it's likely the mastermind in my story would cover his tracks and he has access to strong rituals it would be unrealistic for him not to ward certain information against scrying.

And just because one or two key facts are warded doesn't render scrying ineffective.

Instead of handing out rituals that always work except when the DM hands out McGuffins to prevent them from working, how about handing out rituals that have unpredictable results already from the beginning?

Hey if you want to nerf or mod your game more power to you! You won't hear any complaints from me, in fact I'll follow how you approach it and the results with great interest. I'm interesting in such things.

The point isn't that there might be ways to handle it.

The point is that a DM shouldn't have to handle it at all. The problem should simply not be there.

No IMO the point is that there already is a solution. In RAW. And one that works just fine for me. I simply don't see a problem. If you fancy a different approach I won't talk down to you or be rude to you. I'll follow and politely ask questions, honestly hoping it works well and provides a good alternative to anyone interested.

But I do have to ask. Have you actually had a problem with this? Can we hear from someone who has? Because it's clear to me that it was never intended to be used this way and the core material itself is quite clear that it's not supposed to be used that way...

Rituals
While you’re disseminating information, think about how rituals might give some advantage to the PCs. Divination and scrying rituals can allow characters, especially epic-level characters, to bypass obstacles to information as easily as they can bypass physical obstacles at those levels. Design your adventures accordingly, paying careful attention to the ritual descriptions in the Player’s Handbook. Don’t give the characters less than they’re entitled to, but don’t let them short-circuit your whole adventure by using rituals, either. For instance, the Observe Creature ritual requires the caster to be extremely specific when describing the ritual’s intended target. If allowing the ritual to succeed would throw a monkey wrench into your plans for the adventure, you’d be within your rights to rule that the ritual failed to locate the intended target because the caster’s description wasn’t specific enough. Also, remember that highlevel villains have access to the same rituals that the characters do, including wards they can use to protect themselves from scrying attempts.

It's a pity they didn't make that one a bit more obvious and flesh it out some more.

If Consult Oracle already from the beginning is written to allow the DM to only hand out the clues he's ready to hand out, then the end results are exactly the same, except that the DM doesn't need to spend hours thinking about counter-measures, and can concentrate on the real plot!

IMVHO it is written that way (for example see DMG quote above). It's also written to be flexible and allow for deeper and more varied use than that. And hours of thought? I thought of five major factors in about 30 seconds. And there are others. For example an oracle's answers can be pretty damned obscure and difficult to interpret - as per the ancient oracles. So even when you ask the exact right question it can be hard to understand the answer until mach later in the plot. And asking the right question? That's a whole interesting subject in it's own right.

In fact elements of this remind me of how we handled wishes in red box/1e days. It was a great game figuring out how to sabotage wishes. It was fun enough that we used to make a game of it outside D&D.

Even though it can be like that it doesn't need to be. If your plot is susceptible to ruin by scrying simply pick a small handful of sensitive key facts and mark them as warded against scrying. Or rewrite your rituals if you like. The former seems less trouble to me and fits in with my world nicely.

I never spelled out to my guys that wards against scrying and other anti-scrying exist. I never needed to. You can factor it in very easily at the beginning of an adventure by having the PCs patron indicate that their help is needed specifically because the scrying of the seers involved is failing on certain key points.

Instead of making up new counter-rituals on the spot, why not simply write the original ritual in such a way no such counter-measures are needed in the first place?!

Who needs to make up new rituals (and items)? You can and IMVHO it adds flavour (like the time the party had to locate and destory the implement used in the evil anti-scrying ritual so that the true villain could be found... And discovered that the small shrivelled, prune-like implement was orgiinally the heart of an innocent.). But in the end you simply don't need to. Like I said before choose your key plot-breaking points that need to be discovered by other means and "mark" them as warded against scrying. The PCs can scry clues up leading directly to these and other facts and IMHO it enriches the game world.

You know what. If you don't like scrying in your game why not simply house-rule those rituals out?

Like I said. There are just so many ways to handle this "issue" from simple to convoluted. I just can't see it as a problem.

In the end it's just my 2cp worth and if anyone finds it useful great, but YMMV.

Cheers!

 

[surfarcher]

Yep.

It's funny though...I keep telling the players they should be wanting to use divinations, but they just don't do it. I'm thinking for the next adventure, they'll need info that they HAVE to use Consult Oracle or something.

BTW Ward the True Name is in Chromatic Dragons. But thanks for the heads up on that...it's exactly something that I was looking for. The BBEG definitely would start to focus on the characters if they started to poke around with that ritual.

*heh* Yeah maybe then they'll get the idea.

Sorry about the Metallic mess up... I have MD on the brain cos I am still waiting for my copy. I corrected that with an edit for posterity.

And that's what I mean - divine/scry just haven't been an issue even though I've thought them through. I think my players enjoy playing the game through and only fall back on such things when they are stuck.

 

[surfarcher]

Oh, and for you DMs who are trying to think of reasons why an application of CO doesn't deliver, consider this: The general rules for rituals don't spell out any special requirements for using them beyond mastery of the ritual, the time required, and the components needed. This is all well and good, but you may want to consider creating some additional restrictions. Based on historical analogy CO might only work when cast in certain places or at certain times. It might require some very specific components. It may be that other restrictions exist like only certain types of characters can contact specific oracular spirits. Additional fees might apply because oracles themselves might have agendas too. I know all of this is beyond what RAW states, but don't get too hung up on that. Its your game, make it work how you want it to work.

Um RAW states "let them use it, but don't let it break your story". It goes on to state that the bad guys have ways of countering it and that at epic level it needs to be considered in design.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Um RAW states "let them use it, but don't let it break your story". It goes on to state that the bad guys have ways of countering it and that at epic level it needs to be considered in design.

At the very least RAW is not particularly explicit about this kind of thing.

 

[surfarcher]

Maybe that's a matter of opinion? Dunno.

The DMG section "Rituals" on page 27 spells it out clearly, IMO (I quoted it in full halfway through post #42 on this thread). But it only devotes 162 words to it... It could certainly be both more in depth and mroe prominent.

Nevertheless I think it is clear about how high level scrying and divination should be treated by the DM, showing rule intent and RAW.

As always this is nothing more than my own 0.02gp and YMMV wildly.