Recognizing an enemy (goblin, ogre, etc.) on sight

[Quasqueton]

When I DM, I take it for granted that the PCs can easily/immediately recognize some creatures. But I see that some other DMs don't beleive this way.

Most DMs seem to allow recognition of the standard PHB races -- humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, and the half-breeds. But some don't allow recognition of the other "standard" humanoids -- orcs, goblins, kobolds, hobgoblins, gnolls, and bugbears.

I'm wondering, how many of you consider that the PCs would/could easily identify the "standard" creatures of the world?

I beleive most PCs would know any of the PHB races plus the standard humanoids I've listed above. When PCs encounter them, I identify them by name. Even if the PCs haven't personally met a hobgoblin or kobold, surely they have heard enough of them to recognize one on sight. I also consider ogres to be easily identifiable.

Do you allow immediate recognition of the "standard" races?

Quasqueton

 

[I'm A Banana]

I do, for the most part.

Then again, my players know little enough at the outset...it's a unique set of problems for those new to the hobby -- you actually have to describe a kobold until they know what one is.

More exotic/rare monsters, I have them roll an Int check to ID by name and general description (DC 10 + CR), but for the most part even 'common' or 'infamous' monsters are easy to ID for your Standard Adventurer. It doesn't take many encounteres with eight-legged lizards before the adventuring community realizes most of them turn you to stone with a gaze. Most big floating orbs of eyes have a lot of magic gaze powers. Etc.

Though it does bascially boil down to a 'how common are these monsters' idea that the campaign should identify. If your campaign is about farmers-that-become-heroes, then they don't know much (Orcs are a rare sight). If it's about a world in which many monsters are still only legend, then not knowing a Beholder is important to the flavor.

On the opposite spectrum, if your campaign is in a planar metropolis, or, say Oathbound, you're going to know a lot more about a lot of wierd critters just because you interact with them on a daily basis. Or if your PC's are 'carreer adventurers,' then they've probably heard stories of most creatures from drunken bar tales.

Of course, for me as a DM, surprising them is never a problem...with MM, MM2, ToH, FF.....I have more monsters than I really know what to do with (ToH ALONE could have me introduce one new monster a week for years), not to mention tacking on class levels or templates for kicks, or pulling from my extensive lore of computer games or myth to pop out a new beasty, or just browsing the web for a million and one monster ideas (The CC, WotC's site, etc.). My players know I have access to a million and one monsters, and I almost never repeat.

 

[magnas_veritas]

Do you allow immediate recognition of the "standard" races?

Strictly speaking, and I hate to say this, but this will depend on campaign world. It's unlikely a person would be able to recognize a griffin if nobody he's known has ever seen it, or if it hasn't been recorded by the thinking class. So, it depends on what's around where the characters grew up, as well as what was there in the past and what's in the regions the characters have communicated with.

Of course, this doesn't mean you have to have dragons in the area constantly for people to know that a dragon's a four-legged reptile with wings that breathes nasty crud on you. Nor will they need to retire to the library for a night's contemplation to realize that the slavering fiery bat-winged thing that popped out of a cloud of brimstone is a demon. Granted, they won't get all the details right, but they'll get the general idea.

And, remember, people are not entirely stupid. If you encounter creatures often enough, you'll have an idea of what they can and cannot do; even if you don't do so personally, if people do and survive, they can relay that information. After all, who here would step between a mother bear and her cub, knowingly?

This isn't modelled very well in 3e, since many classes don't have Knowledge skills in class, and the DCs to recognize things might be wildly inappropriate. Hopefully this'll be rectified in 3.5.

(Oh, and, in short, yes, I would allow PCs to recognize certain monsters without any rolls, but others would require various Knowledge rolls.)

Brad

 

[geezerjoe]

I think that it all depends upon your campaign world. How common are the races? For instance, while a city that's been besieged by goblins for decades would know a goblin on sight, a city that's been rather isolationist may have no idea that the little orange buggers are dangerous. So it just depends.

I would however suggest that a DM let players understand what level of knowledge they would have about the game world before the game begins. For instance in the game I currently play the DM doesn't think that my cleric should be familure with any undead that he's never seen before ... my idea while gaming was "Im a cleric ... I ought to know undead when I see them ... at least the standard ones otherwise one of my character's primary abilities is greatly weakened" (Since I've DMed a LOT its hard for me not to know what monster is what ... but I try to roleplay) Who's right? Well ultimately he is ... it's his game world, but I sure wish I'd put a higher stat in Int. so I could put some ranks in Knowledge Undead!!!!!

l8r)

Joe2Old

 

[KB9JMQ]

For the most part I would say yes.
I figure these adventuring types have listened to war stories, bar talk, bards retelling tales, etc that nearly all common creatures can be correctly guessed/assumed from the get go.
Uncommons and rares are possible after a minute or so of interaction/study to let the characters put a face to a story if you know what I mean.

 

[Tonguez]

Most DMs seem to allow recognition of the standard PHB races -- humans, elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, and the half-breeds. But some don't allow recognition of the other "standard" humanoids -- orcs, goblins, kobolds, hobgoblins, gnolls, and bugbears.

I'm wondering, how many of you consider that the PCs would/could easily identify the "standard" creatures of the world?

My current campaign set in Mythic Polynesia means that Dwarfs are unknown and halflings if encountered would not be recognised (would in fact be confused with Elves). Goblins on the other hand are well known (and a PC race).

Generally however I agree with the sentiment that any PC available races should be recognisable (be they PHB or Homebrew addition - like Goblins).

I also think Dragons as a class (ok Type) will be recognised from legend (but PCs will confuse Wyverns and even Behir as Dragons the first time they meet them). The same general idea applies to Giants to - PCs will recognise the idea of giants but any Humanoid creature more than 8ft tall will be considered a giant too (ie Ogres and Trolls maybe even Bugbears)

That means that IMC, in any area where goblins aren't a PC race, the term Goblin will be applied to Gobs, Hobgobs and Orcs and maybe even a few other things like Grimlocks. Kobolds are described as Lizardmen as are Troglodytes and possibly even Yuan-Ti and Sahuagin

I might even describe Trolls as terrible demons that rise from the swamp!

What I really like doing though is having a Farmer show up yelling that his Cow Bessie has been carried of by Ogres then to have the PCs show up and discover it was a troll! MWAHAHAHA!!!

 

[Hypersmurf]

I tend to take the view that if a race or class gives particular bonuses against a creature, the character should have a working knowledge of that creature.

A dwarf should recognise giants and orcs. A gnome should recognise kobolds. A Ranger with Favoured Enemy: Oozes should know them by sight. A Knight of the Chalice should be able to identify demons.

I don't think a cleric should automatically know all undead, but I'd expect he'd recognise the ones he's of a high enough level to create with Animate Dead, Create Undead, or Create Greater Undead (even if he's of good alignment).

-Hyp.

 

[Kershek]

Here's our house rule on Knowledge: Monsters as a skill.

Each Knowledge skill would be like the list of "favored enemy" of the Ranger class. So "Knowledge Monster: Animals", "Knowledge Monster: Beast", "Knowledge Monster: Undead", etc...
The skill would give you the chance to know about the monster. The DC would be 10+ the CR (+DM mod for low light, bad view, etc…). Making the roll, would let you know the name of the monster. Making it by +5 points would let you know something about its attacks (energy drain, poison, etc...), feats, and/or spell like abilities. When making it by +10, you would know most or all of its attacks and weakness. In class for all classes. It requires book time and the ability to read and/or training.

 

[Fenes 2]

I think we should not forget that the information available to adventurers may not be exact. Descriptions, most of them embellished, are all they have for most critters they did not see themselves. I doubt they would be able to discern between similar monsters.

Remember the medieval lexicons? How "wrong" the exotic animals were described? I'd not let anyone get MM knowledge just because he listened to a lot of bard tales.

 

[Steven]

Here is what I do in my games, but this won't work for everyone. The player's make the majority of their background (based off of world info I provide them) and usually include a list of things that they think they should be able to recognize on sight. The player's that I play with are usually pretty good about not going overboard with this, but occasionally I will rule something out.