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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8058357" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I dispute your interpretation of the skills section here. What it says is:[excerpt] An Intelligence check comes into play when you need to draw on logic, education, memory, or deductive reasoning. The Arcana, History, Investigation, Nature, and Religion Skills reflect aptitude in certain kinds of Intelligence Checks.[/excerpt]And then the various skills under Intelligence go on to list subjects they can be applied to Intelligence checks to recall lore about. No mention of determining what your character knows or doesn’t know, just attempts to draw on memory. So, for instance, a player might declare an action like, “I draw on my past experiences studying at the House of Knowledge to try and remember reading anything about trolls and if they have any vulnerabilities.” And if the DM determines that this action has a chance of success, chance of failure, and consequences, they might call for an Intelligence check (perhaps with Nature proficiency?) to resolve that uncertainty. And that would be smart play on the part of the player. Simply attacking the troll with fire without taking such an action first would be a riskier play, since there is no guarantee that trolls are vulnerable to fire, but nothing in the rules forbids such an action.Yes, that’s the point. It’s the only time metagaming is addressed in the rules at all, and it’s a different sort of metagaming than what you are referring to. Ergo, your assertion that your preferred method of play is the RAW method is not correct.</blockquote>

Verification