Players Handbook vs the Dungeon Master

[Luddite]

What would be the difference between the player that has the PHB completely memorized verus the player that looks up spell information at the table?

By not letting a player not look up a spell is sort of a penality to that palyer. If you don't want your players looking up spell info, don't give them the names of the spells cast. Give them the discription of the effects.

Personaly, I have no problem with players using any information out of the Players Handbook at any time. My goal as a DM is to make it hard for them to notice that there was an Anti-Magic Field. Spells just fail

Now, using the Monster Manual durring a combat is frowned apon. But I get around that by not using things out of the MM without some alteration.

-The Luddite

 

[hong]

What would be the difference between the player that has the PHB completely memorized verus the player that looks up spell information at the table?

In practice, it all evens out. If you don't like looking up details for all the spells ahead of time, you're probably not the kind of player who'd like playing a spellcaster. Thus you wouldn't really have any business checking up on spells when they're cast.

 

[Piratecat]

Are you kidding? An arcana check to know what it does if they can CAST it?? Don't you think that's, well, insane? I mean, if I was playing a wizard, and the DM told me I couldn't remember the details of a spell in my spellbook, I don't think I'd stick around much longer.

Darkbard made his "interpret Admin" roll. *grin*

As he deciphered, I'm using "spell list" in the sense of "a wizard can use a spell completion item if that spell is on their spell list." Thus, if a PC could conceivably cast the spell, it's on their spell list, even if it isn't in their spell book. If it was a wizard who already knew the spell, I'd let them look it up automatically.

Confusing terminology. Make more sense now?

 

[Ravellion]

I really don't like Knowledge Arcana for the determining of Spell effects. That's what spellcraft is for! Knowledge Arcana is: How many members does the college of wizardry have? How do you become a lich? The ancient Archmage Treldipon lived to be 89 years old, and died when he stumbled over the stairs, leaving his cache of magical items on a demiplane none know how to reach.

Not IMO, by the rules.

Rav

 

[Urbannen]

Actually, it's debatable what exactly Knowledge (arcana) is for. Unless a skill has a listed effect and target DC, its use (and usefulness) depends entirely on the DM. The knowledge skills are definitely "soft" skills since the PHB doesn't give characters any definite benefits for taking them. (As a side note, I would really like to see a supplement that gives DCs for what Knowledge skills actually do. That would be cool. Also any region source book should give a list of DCs for uses of the knowledge skills in that area. Example: Knowledge (Anywhere local) DC 23: The count likes to wear ladies' underwear.)

Magic of Faerûn does has some concrete uses for Knowledge (arcana).

However, I know that Knowledge (arcana) should NOT be used to identify the effects of spells. I think there is some very difficult Knowledge (arcana) check you can use to identify certain magic items' properties, but that's about it.

As a side note, I had a DM that used a spell from the PHB that completely mystified our party. It was "Prying Eyes", a 4th or 5th level spell, I think. Even those of us who had "memorized the PHB" thought he had gotten the spell from a supplement.

 

[Mulkhoran]

Confusing terminology. Make more sense now?

Well, yeah. Hence my:

Or are you saying to identify it from it's effects? In that case, disregard the ranting.

Sorry for the confusion. Ya spooked me.......

 

[Bryan Vining]

Two things pop to mind here...

First, dealing specifically with your problem, I would be irritated if players acted on knowledge their characters could not have. Unless a member of the party has that spell or has some other reason to know of it (which is your call), they absolutely should not be able to alter their tactics to defeat it. That's like a person who doesn't know the first thing about a nuclear reactor stopping a meltdown seconds before disaster. It doesn't make sense.

My recommendation for dealing with that would be for you to simply say as you become aware that they are using player knowledge to their advantage something like "I'm sorry, but I do not appreciateyour attempt to use knowledge that your characters could not have. It shows a lack of respect for the amount of time and effort I put into developing a challenging and interesting scenario for your characters to play through. It also deprives you of the they enjoyment of having thought your way out of the situation, rather than cheating. At the same time, I recognize that I have not demonstrated to you that I do not approve of you cheating. To make that clear, I will not permit any action you take based on knowledge your characters could not have. Instead, should you try such an action, you will have wasted your turn while your character stood still trying to figure out what to do."

Second is players metagaming. One of my gripes with both 2E and 3E is that the player's handbooks have a lot of information that is not strictly necessary for players to have. In this respect, I think the 1E rulebooks were superior because the players had just the information they needed, and the details of many things were left to only the DM AND the DMG recommended hefty sage's fees for characters whose players used knowledge they should not have.

 

[jgbrowning]

i've house ruled that unless you can cast magic you cant look up magic during the game.

I've also houseruled spellcraft to be divine/arcane specific. My mages know just as much as the fighters about divine magic.

i also use the 6 second rule ( on their round i give em about 6 seconds before i start counting down from 6 to zero) this really helps with people using books.

joe b.

edit: i also dont allow those who DO know to explain it to those who DON'T. unless they want to take their free action and explain is 6 seconds real time what it does...

 

[ced1106]

Another vote for the skill check, but don't make your bad guys bulletproof. Give the players a chance to find out what they're up against long before they meet the bad guy. For example, the players have already known about the wizard and how he uses giants to terrorize the countryside. And then they find out about how a mage tried to fight the giants and could fell "all but one". Insert pleas by terrified townsfolk **not** to fight the giant here.

Don't kill your players. Scare 'em to death!


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[hong]

That's like a person who doesn't know the first thing about a nuclear reactor stopping a meltdown seconds before disaster. It doesn't make sense.

But damn, it's fun!