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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6157735" data-attributes="member: 17106">Because there are adventurers defending them?If you don't buy that, than the level of danger a commoner must face given the threats posited in the monster manual(s) is indeed completely untenable, and believing that there are human commoners in large numbers requires some combination of rationalization and suspension of disbelief.FWIW, I once based a campaign on the premise of exploring how miserable it must be to be a commoner in D&D.Assuming that they have proficiency in reading, they must have read something. Only barbarians are illiterate, as far as I know. Regardless, even relatively uneducated people (real or fictional) have quite a bit of knowledge.Given the amount of comparatively useless stuff that pops up in books, I don't think that guidelines for rarity of information are at all prohibitive. The existing rule is lazy (and lousy) design.As per your reading of the rules, any creature of CR 1 or greater cannot be identified by anyone untrained in the relevant Knowledge skill. That means that even if a red dragon were standing right in front of the people, regardless of its age, they would not know that it was a dragon, was evil, or breathed fire, even as they were spontaneously running in fear from the giant, rapacious lizard with smoke coming from its nostrils.I'm not against misinformation on occasion.The books are explicit that using experimentation to identify magic items is under the DM's discretion and is entirely reasonable.</blockquote>

Verification