Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 daedel Aug 25, 2014 12:34:43	I noticed there's no mechanic to identify a spell being cast. How would you handle this? Automatically? With a Intelligence (Arcana) Check as a free action? Not allowed at all? Others?
#2 OgreBane99 Aug 25, 2014 13:29:48	daedel wrote:
#3 Plaguescarred1 Aug 25, 2014 13:37:52	daedel wrote:
#4 reddaemon Aug 25, 2014 14:37:48	My preference is the less dice rolling the better. I plan on everyone automatically knowing what spells or abilities are being cast. Let's be honest. If everyone at the table gets to roll, someone will almost always succeed anyway and tell everyone. No point in having people roll a superfluous check.
#5 thewok Aug 25, 2014 15:20:31	At first it seems cool to have them have to make skill check to figure out what's being cast.  Honestly, though, unless it's part of the story, what's the point?  Most spells can be cast in a single action, anyway.  So what if they can see it's a fireball being cast?  They have no chance to dodge it until the saving throw.   As part of a story, though, I'd make it an Arcana check with the ability rolled determined by the character's spellcasting ability (default to Intelligence), regardless of the source of the spell.  Divine, Arcane, Psionic, whatever.  Arcana is suitably generic in its description that it works for everything.   However, at some point, a group of adventurers, trained in Arcana or not, will have seen enough spellcasting that they can pick out a lot of stuff without a spell check.  Even the Fighter's going to be able to figure out instantly that, "Yep.  That's a Fireball," and react accordingly (again, with the standard saving throw).
#6 Captain_Xenon Aug 25, 2014 15:33:22	the point is the Counterspell, a reaction speed wizard spell. knowing what their casting affects if its worth blowing a lv 3 spell slot to stop them, as well as if they would get a save against it. if an abjurer has counterspell memorized, then he cans nap his fingers (somatic only reaction at that) and stop that fireball before it kills half his party.   an intelligence(arcana) check is the best choice, for all spells, because thats what the arcana skill is for- identifying lore about spells. intelligence(religion) would help identify the clerics god, but not the spell being cast.
#7 Plaguescarred1 Aug 26, 2014 3:12:40	I found this bit that might indicate a spell is not as obvious as it may seem otherwise everyone seeing you would know you just cast read thoughts if automatic identification!     BR80 Targets: A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets  to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description  tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or  a point of origin for an area of effect (described below). Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature  might not know it was targeted by a spell at all. An effect  like crackling lightning is obvious, but a more subtle effect, such as an attempt to read a creature’s thoughts,  typically goes unnoticed, unless a spell says otherwise.
#8 daedel Aug 26, 2014 12:04:45	Good catch plague. Thank you all for the input!
#9 Kalani Aug 26, 2014 13:05:03	Plaguescarred wrote:
#10 Jared711 Apr 28, 2015 11:23:41	Anyone have a better anwser to this?  It seems since the Players handbook left out most specific skill checks, it's left up to the GM to determine how much information the player knows about a spell being cast.
#11 Rya.Reisender Apr 28, 2015 13:04:56	Like with anything, the ability check depends on what the players actually do. Do they want to carefully watch the movement of the fingers to see what spell is cast? Do they use their arcane knowledge to remember which spell that is? Do they want their sense of magic make them feel it? Trust their gut feeling? Depending on the player approach the roll might be quit different. Difficulty is giving as in the rules 10 if you consider it easy, 15 if you consider it a normal challenge and 20 if you think it's hard.   As ability checks (usually) require an action, it only really makes sense if the spell takes longer than 1 turn to cast in the first place.   Also I think you could use Detect Magic to determine the spell. At the very least you will know the school of magic of that spell.
(Reply to #7) Kentor_Slowhand_02	Plaguescarred1 wrote:
(Reply to #12) Jared711	I am looking for some hard rules that should have been implimented in the game so people just know how it works.  Rather than ask  you GM.?   There are two things that identifiying a spell is good for.    1. To determine a bad affect a party member might have accquired.    2. To use the counterspell (spell).     So identifing a spell would need to be some sort of non-action.  Perception check might be needed based on if spell was hard to detect.  Knowledge skills except investigation are pretty unused skills so they need a little help.   1.  Use Intelligence (arcana) to identify arcane based spells. (Wiz, Sorc, Bard, etc)   2. Use Intelligence (religion) to identify all clerical.   (Cleric, Paladin, etc).   3. Use Intelligence (nature) to identify (Druid, Ranger)
(Reply to #13) AaronOfBarbaria	Jared711 wrote:
#15 Orethalion Apr 28, 2015 15:04:09	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#16 Kentus Apr 28, 2015 15:22:05	Jared711 wrote:
(Reply to #15) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#18 reddaemon Apr 28, 2015 18:51:11	Jared711 wrote:
#19 Orethalion Apr 28, 2015 18:36:34	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#20 jonathonhawke Apr 28, 2015 19:40:21	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #19) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#22 Orethalion Apr 28, 2015 21:58:33	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #22) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
#24 FrogReaver Apr 28, 2015 22:19:06	Seems to me the DM is given complete agency when it comes to deciding whether a character knows what spell another is casting.
(Reply to #19) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #22) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #16) randl	Kentus wrote:
(Reply to #24) AaronOfBarbaria	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #25) randl	FrogReaver wrote:
#30 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 6:16:33	FrogReaver wrote:
#31 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 6:21:42	randl wrote:
#32 AaronOfBarbaria Apr 29, 2015 9:38:18	Orethalion, thank you for finally posting some evidence from the book that could lead a person to believe you have to roll something to figure out what spell someone is casting even if they'd never played the prior editions that were much clearer that your character is meant to have gaping holes in their knowledge at the whim of their dice.   It would have been nice if you could have done that earlier, but at least we got there eventually.   ...now if only there were some text regarding recalling lore about weapons so that PCs had a chance at figuring out what weapons their opponents are wielding.   And for the record: I don't believe that "recall lore about spells" is actually intended to mean indentifying them as they are cast so much as it is meant to enable the character to answer the question "what spell could do this?" or "is this possible via a spell?"
(Reply to #32) Jared711	I were GM I would just tell players effects of obvious spells or abilities like dragon's breath, fireball, etc.    If there was a illusionary or perhaps enchantment based spell, I would require an arcana check.   As a different topic, for skills it would be nice to see the intelligence skills rolled into less skills.   Intelligence (Religion, Nature, History) can easily be rolled into one skill  Intelligence (knowledge).    A knowledge check is a guy just knows stuff and obscure details whether it's history, nature or religion related.   It’s basically treated as bardic lore from 3.5.      Intelligence (arcana) could be kept a separate skill because it could be used for identifying magic stuff including spells which is pretty important.
#34 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 11:20:36	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #34) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#36 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 12:22:43	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#37 reddaemon Apr 29, 2015 13:29:21	I wouldn't really argue it if a DM decided to rule that you don't automatically know what spell is being cast, but there isn't much reason to identify a spell being cast anyway.  It is almost always a good idea to counter any spell you can.  Even if the DM metagames it to have the creature cast a cantrip to make you waste your counterspell, you are still using a reaction to make that creature waste its action.  Besides, the better course of action for the DM is to have the spellcaster counter the player's Counterspell so that their spell goes off, in which case everyone will find out what it is anyway, so there's no reason to hide it.
(Reply to #36) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #37) AaronOfBarbaria	reddaemon wrote:
#40 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 14:02:31	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#41 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 14:11:01	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #40) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #5) Patron1972	thewok wrote:
#44 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 15:28:15	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#45 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 15:27:40	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#46 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 15:28:53	MechaPilot wrote:
#47 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 15:38:44	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #41) randl	MechaPilot wrote:
#49 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 15:58:35	MechaPilot wrote:
#50 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 16:32:29	Orethalion wrote:
#51 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 16:57:30	MechaPilot wrote:
#52 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 17:17:45	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #44) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#54 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 18:09:04	MechaPilot wrote:
#55 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 18:27:05	Orethalion wrote:
#56 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 18:31:28	MechaPilot wrote:
#57 MechaPilot Apr 29, 2015 18:52:03	Orethalion wrote:
#58 Orethalion Apr 29, 2015 21:29:03	MechaPilot wrote:
#59 Imaculata Apr 30, 2015 3:16:13	You could just make this really easy on yourself. If a mage has to identify an arcane spell, you could rule that he can instantly tell what spell is being cast. Same for a cleric identifying any divine spell. If a mage has to identify a divine spell, or a cleric needs to identify an arcane spell, you could have them roll an intelligence or arcana check. The less rolls the better.
#60 Orethalion Apr 30, 2015 6:48:08	Imaculata wrote:
#61 Razintarr Apr 30, 2015 8:43:12	Jared711 wrote:
#62 Jared711 Apr 30, 2015 9:33:51	Razintarr wrote:
#63 Jenks Apr 30, 2015 10:07:42	I love how there's a big argument going on in this thread over a subject that, as has been stated in almost everyone's response, has no hard coded rules. Everyone's just arguing over their verion of RAI lol.    Short answer, do it how you want.
(Reply to #63) OoftaMeg	Jenks wrote:
#65 MechaPilot Apr 30, 2015 12:27:21	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #63) AaronOfBarbaria	Jenks wrote:
#67 Orethalion May 01, 2015 6:42:39	MechaPilot wrote:
(Reply to #67) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#69 RulesJD May 01, 2015 12:18:00	If you're only arguing over RAI, then the evidence is overwhelmingly on Aaron's side.  That is because the only evidence we have for RAI is the following: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/10/11/shield-before/ That is blantantly clear RAI that a player gets to know the spell being cast and the slot it is cast at.  JC had that tweeted to him by MM and has yet to issue any different ruling.  Anyone who argues otherwise is arguing against RAI.
(Reply to #69) AaronOfBarbaria	RulesJD wrote:
(Reply to #70) randl	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#72 Orethalion May 01, 2015 14:32:05	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#73 Jared711 May 01, 2015 14:41:26	randl wrote:
#74 El_Condoro May 01, 2015 15:17:47	Open to most spells and the first sentence of the text is a description of what the spell looks like (e.g. Color Spray - a dazzling array of flashing, colored light springs from your hand.) Isn't that what should be given by the DM: a description of what the character sees? From there, the player may deduce, "oh, that's Color Spray", or may not and instead describe how their character tries to remember what that spell is (Arcana check, if the DM asks for one). To me, that keeps immersion, but I wouldn't penalise a player whose 1st-level barbarian, who has never seen a spell in his life to that point, knows the spell's name.   For reactions, like Shield, the "glowing darts of magical force" description should be enough for the character to know to cast it, even if the caster was invisible.   But, at the end of the day, an experienced group of players, who recognise the spell descriptions, might be better served by the DM just saying "a magic missile has been cast at you" (or similar). It's going to depend on the DM and the group - there is nothing in RAW to say either way is 'correct'.
(Reply to #72) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#76 Orethalion May 01, 2015 16:04:25	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #76) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#78 Orethalion May 01, 2015 20:55:25	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#79 RulesJD May 01, 2015 23:26:01	You're absolutely importing the argument that "another edition did this, so it must work this way in 5th".  Wrong.  RAI a player gets to know the attack roll so as not to waste a Shield slot (a mere level 1 slot at that).  RAI is clear that a player should not waste a Counterspell slot either. Yes, you must see our target to Counterspell them.  One of the best defenses against being Counterspelled is casting from hiding or Greater Invisibility.  If you can see the caster and you are within 60ft, RAI is clear that you get to know the spellslot and spell.  At best, if for some reason you enjoy screwing your players as faaaar to many DMs do, a spell caster's Passive Arcana (or rather Passive Spellcasting Stat + Proficiency) would cover this situation.
#80 Orethalion May 02, 2015 6:18:21	RulesJD wrote:
#81 xirr2000 May 02, 2015 7:28:55	Plaguescarred1 wrote:
#82 Orethalion May 02, 2015 7:39:27	xirr2000 wrote:
(Reply to #82) ObeseBoyWonder	Orethalion wrote:
#84 Orethalion May 02, 2015 8:57:58	ObeseBoyWonder wrote:
(Reply to #84) ObeseBoyWonder	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #80) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#87 Kentus May 02, 2015 9:59:15	Somehow I think you all forgot what your original arguments were... Somehow it just seems that one is bashing the words of another (plus retaliation), without seeing the key points. So I suggest that you just settle it here and try to go back to your points without trying to find faults in others. Like me.   I can see why people like to tend, that there should be Arcana rolls, but I'm not one of them. I describe that the enemy is chanting, beginning with some minor effects (like purple fire, which engulf the caster in a fiery aura, which is concentrated at his palm or simply pointing the focus between the characters while making the chant), wait a few seconds for any counterspells and then say the effect the characters perceive (and often I make some variations to it) plus the spell name afterwards. This works for my party, since they tend to pay more attention to spell effects and if any questions comes up, everyone can grab their book, if needed. And it makes it more exciting when to use counterspells (even though they tend to be casted more at the start of the combat, when many spells makes a big difference). If it's a magic missile, I just let them use their shield spell, since he trigger states 'hit'.   I don't see any reason to withhold the information in general and since some spells are used more often, the game becomes faster. No need to slow it down with Intelligence (Arcana) checks. Especially since I try to make as few rolls as possible, unless I think the outcome becomes interesting. How much does it actually weight to know or not know the exact spell? Since a lot of them uses similiar mechanics (like concentration, saving throws each turn, etc.) it's easy for a lot of players to categorize them. What I'd rather do is to make it even more special, if it's hard to tell, if someone is using magic (maybe because it's actually a magic item or it's a sorcerer with subtle spell) and what kind of spell it could be (maybe it's simply psionics). I don't think that every character automatically knows how the spells work, but the players? They deserve to know, especially since you can sometimes be plainly wrong about a spell. And if they know, they can manage the spell effects themselves.
#88 Orethalion May 02, 2015 10:13:04	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #88) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#90 Orethalion May 02, 2015 12:32:36	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #90) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #91) randl	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#93 AaronOfBarbaria May 02, 2015 15:14:20	My answer to the same question is simple: by not making a special case out of identifying a spell, just like there isn't a special case made to tell a gnome from a halfling or a longsword from a shortsword, but making a special case out of how to figure out what a magic item does, the text supports my interpretation of not considering identifying a spell to be a special case.
#94 Orethalion May 02, 2015 16:21:45	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#95 Orethalion May 02, 2015 16:26:04	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #94) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#97 Orethalion May 02, 2015 18:48:33	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#98 MechaPilot May 02, 2015 18:54:28	Is there actually a point to this discussion anymore?
#99 Orethalion May 02, 2015 18:58:06	MechaPilot wrote:
(Reply to #97) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #98) AaronOfBarbaria	MechaPilot wrote:
#102 grendel111111 May 02, 2015 20:06:33	From what I can see this is the process that should be done to follow the 5th Ed text on how to deal with this situation:     Step 1: DM: You see the shaman at the back of the orcs start to cast a spell. Step 2: Player: What is the spell? / "I use my knowledge of the arcane to try and identify the spell the shaman is casting." / "I watch the shamans actions to determine what the spell is." Step 3: DM decides if the players attempt works, doesn't work, or is uncertain. ( the key here is that it is a DM descision). Step 4: DM: "It's a fireball." / "You can't work out what the spell is." / "It's a fireball cast as a 5th level spell" / "You will need to make an arcana  check to identify the spell DC:X" / "It is a fireball spell, if you want to know the level you will need to make an arcana check DC:X" Step 5: Player decides what to do..........     If the DM decides that you can always identify spells in his games he can skip steps1-4 and just say what spell is being cast (and what level if that is what he has decided).   Good DM's will be clear on how they are likely to rule, and will be consistant in thier rulings.   The effect is that you create multiple kinds of games which can appeal to a broad range of player types.   Some people like everything to be out in the open, so there is no chance of misusing a resource. Some people like the uncertainty and having a reason for having invested in certain abilities (such as arcana).   Neither is better than the other and both work fine in 5th Ed. They are just different.   As for "you can tell a fire ball as easily as a sword", some people like playing that way, others don't. If I saw a formula (someone casting) for an chemical (a spell) I would know that it was an organic chemical (mage spell) , but I wouldn't be able to quickly identify what is was a formula (spell) for. If I had carried on to higher levels of studying organic chemistry (arcana), then I would be more likely to know what the chemical (spell) will do by looking at the formula (casting). This is the reason some people like using arcana to identify spells. I can tell it is a fireball as I smulder in the ashes of my allies because it was a ball of fire, but I want to know from the mages hand movements, before he throws the spell what it is. But until the effect takes place I only have my knowledge of what V,S,M components are needed to cast any particular spell (hense why an arcana check makes sense to some people).
#103 AaronOfBarbaria May 02, 2015 20:18:18	Thank you, Grendel, for showing what I have been saying; that Orethalion's interpretation is no more supported by the text than any other.
(Reply to #103) grendel111111	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #104) AaronOfBarbaria	grendel111111 wrote:
(Reply to #105) grendel111111	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#107 Orethalion May 02, 2015 21:29:58	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#108 AaronOfBarbaria May 02, 2015 22:14:11	Well, pot, I guess you may as well just call me kettle.
#109 Orethalion May 02, 2015 23:46:06	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #109) grendel111111	Orethalion wrote:
#111 AaronOfBarbaria May 03, 2015 0:39:47	Good job, O, you managed to out do yourself on that one.
#112 Orethalion May 03, 2015 0:48:30	grendel111111 wrote:
#113 AaronOfBarbaria May 03, 2015 1:03:21	No, Orethalion, that is another mischaracterization of what I have been saying. I am not insisting there is no guidance what to roll if you feel a roll is necessary, I am insisting that nothing in the book says that a DM should feel a roll is necessary.
#114 Captain_Kobold May 03, 2015 4:28:16	Please tell me that you two haven't been clogging up another thread, which otherwise contained some interesting insights, with just a very heated agreement. There have been people pointing out that there were no hard-and-fast rules about the exact situation stated in the book, so it just boil down to DM's call earlier, which you generally ignored in favour of trying to score points off each other.   Personally I'd run with the concept that identifying a spell with an obvious effect as it goes off is like identifying a longsword by looking at it. As long as you've seen a fireball before, you know that that is a fireball spell, even if you don't know it by that name. Working out what spell will be produced by any particular person chanting and waving is more like working out what will be produced by a blacksmith pulling out a lump of iron from his forge and starting to hammer.   I generally wouldn't bother with checks most of the time however, because having multiple people rolling dice whenever anyone casts a spell gets really annoying, as I've found out in a different game.  :-)
#115 Orethalion May 03, 2015 9:05:53	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#116 elebritch May 03, 2015 9:08:33	reddaemon wrote:
(Reply to #116) grendel111111	elebritch wrote:
#118 CraggleRock May 03, 2015 9:43:21	elebritch wrote:
#119 elebritch May 03, 2015 9:58:07	grendel111111 wrote:
(Reply to #115) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#121 guachi May 03, 2015 12:23:36	I don't see why you'd need guidance on how to decide a DC is required for the guidance to be specific. Looking at the Using Ability Scores section only gives DC guidance when referring to determing Saving Throws for spells. If you require guidance for a DC, then the rules, according to you, aren't specific about how any of the skills can be used. You must have a hard time running your game, in that case.   The Arcana skill "measures your ability to recall lore about spells..." That seems to fit with the title of this thread - Identify a spell being cast.
(Reply to #121) AaronOfBarbaria	guachi wrote:
#123 Orethalion May 03, 2015 14:04:09	guachi wrote:
#124 Orethalion May 03, 2015 14:09:18	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #124) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #123) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#127 Orethalion May 03, 2015 15:07:03	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #127) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#129 Orethalion May 03, 2015 16:49:32	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #129) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#131 Orethalion May 03, 2015 17:48:14	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #131) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#133 grendel111111 May 03, 2015 18:39:22	So lets look at some different tables/DM's and see what we might end up with (note that not only the DM but also what the players and the setting you are playing in can determine which option is the best to use):   1: DM does not want to add extra risk to players using their resources, so decides all spells can be identified and so she will just announce what the spell is when casting it.   2: Magic is rare in this world and no two spell casters use the same methods to cast a spell.... good luck guessing. (no chance to roll).   3: Dm decides that higher level spells are harder to identify, but cantrips are common so for this table: Cantrips: auto-succeed level 1-3: DC 10  level 4-6: DC 15  level 7-9: DC 20    4: DM decides that you roll an arcana check and that will determine how much you know about the spell being cast. DC 10: you know the level of the spell being cast DC 15: you know the level and the specific spell being cast. DC 20: you know the level and the specific spell being cast, as well as any meta magic or other modifications (who is being targeted etc)   5:  DM decides all spells can be identified equally easily with a DC 10 check.   6: Dm decides that if the spell is known by you the DC is 10. If it is from a spell list that your class(es) knows then the DC is 15. If it is not on any of your spell lists it is DC 20.   6 different approaches (and I am sure there are many more), all valid with the 5th ed rules. If they had just chosen 1 and said, "here is a table, this is how you do it", then I think some of these options would not even be concidered. In fact you may find that if you wanted to change from the default at all, by just telling the players what the spell was as it was cast, you might have got complaints from the players for not using the table in the book.
#134 Orethalion May 03, 2015 19:04:43	grendel111111 wrote:
#135 ORC_Nashira May 04, 2015 1:34:26	I've removed content from this thread because flaming/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_company_about_codeofconduct&menu=Awards   Let's remember to keep posts polite and on topic!
#136 Imaculata May 04, 2015 4:24:20	Orethalion wrote:
#137 guachi May 04, 2015 14:12:05	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #137) AaronOfBarbaria	guachi wrote:
#139 Orethalion May 04, 2015 17:47:24	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#140 Orethalion May 04, 2015 17:48:49	guachi wrote:
(Reply to #139) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #139) AaronOfBarbaria	Thanks, FrogReaver, for getting what I've been talking about.   Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #142) grendel111111	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#144 Orethalion May 05, 2015 6:30:36	FrogReaver wrote:
#145 Orethalion May 05, 2015 6:40:21	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#146 AaronOfBarbaria May 05, 2015 7:04:24	Orethalion, there is this thing I do where I think not only of my self and what I need, but about people in general and what they might benefit from - so no, real world analogues aren't irrelevant just because I don't personally need one.
#147 jonathonhawke May 05, 2015 7:11:52	Orethalion wrote:
#148 AaronOfBarbaria May 05, 2015 7:17:07	As to which of the various methods discussed I'd like to have seen as the official method, the answer would be none in particular - I'd have liked to have seen some more general advice like is given about setting trap DCs, or even more general than that like the advice in the DMG on worldbuilding
#149 Orethalion May 05, 2015 7:41:52	jonathonhawke wrote:
(Reply to #144) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #149) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
#152 reddaemon May 05, 2015 11:26:14	All interpretations are equally supported by the rules (in that they aren't because the rules don't specifically call it out).  Example, in my games everyone knows what spells are being cast at all times.  My interpretation is just as valid as anyone else's.  Does it mean you or I are playing with the wrong rules?  Nope.  I am the DM at my table afterall and per the rules, my rulings are final, same with others who make their interpretations.  Why are people so concerned with how other people are playing the game?  This is obviously an intentional grey area that is up to the DM and may be different depending on what table you play at.  Not knowing what spell is being cast is pretty trivial anyway.  I've been at tables where DMs run it several different ways.  When in doubt... counter it no matter what.  Knowing what spell is being cast is of little consequence.  Every time a spell is cast near me I counter it if able.
#153 Orethalion May 05, 2015 12:31:20	FrogReaver wrote:
#154 Orethalion May 05, 2015 12:53:39	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #153) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #154) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
#157 FrogReaver May 05, 2015 13:04:13	Orthellion, So what did you base the decision on to assign level 1-3 to easy?  There being 3 difficulty levels doesn't necessitate each difficulty level being filled out equally.   It's arbitrary to do something you don't have a good reason to do.
#158 Orethalion May 05, 2015 13:12:45	FrogReaver wrote:
#159 jonathonhawke May 05, 2015 13:19:49	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #158) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #154) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
#162 Orethalion May 05, 2015 14:21:24	jonathonhawke wrote:
#163 Orethalion May 05, 2015 14:22:04	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #162) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
#165 reddaemon May 05, 2015 15:20:12	If you guys really want to attach a DC to identifying spellcasts that badly, you could use the rules for casting a higher level spell scroll as a point of reference.  DMG page 200.   If the spell is on your class's spell list but of a higher level than you can normally cast, you must make an ability check using your spellcasting ability to determine whether you cast it successfully. The DC equals 10 + spell's level.
#166 Orethalion May 05, 2015 15:26:45	reddaemon wrote:
#167 jonathonhawke May 05, 2015 15:43:49	Orethalion wrote:
#168 jonathonhawke May 05, 2015 16:29:52	Merriam-Webster wrote:
#169 CraggleRock May 05, 2015 16:40:34	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #166) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #170) grendel111111	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #171) FrogReaver	grendel111111 wrote:
#173 jonathonhawke May 05, 2015 23:59:00	.  [/quote]   This is what you said that I was responding to: Orethalion wrote:
#174 Orethalion May 06, 2015 0:26:00	jonathonhawke wrote:
(Reply to #174) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
#176 Orethalion May 06, 2015 7:51:51	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#177 jonathonhawke May 06, 2015 7:58:05	Orethalion wrote:
#178 Orethalion May 06, 2015 8:12:16	jonathonhawke wrote:
(Reply to #174) DarkSphinx	Orethalion wrote:
#180 Orethalion May 06, 2015 8:54:22	DarkSphinx wrote:
(Reply to #180) DarkSphinx	Orethalion wrote:
#182 Orethalion May 06, 2015 10:14:10	DarkSphinx wrote:
(Reply to #182) DarkSphinx	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #179) FrogReaver	DarkSphinx wrote:
#185 Orethalion May 06, 2015 12:05:46	DarkSphinx wrote:
#186 Orethalion May 06, 2015 12:09:21	FrogReaver wrote:
#187 jonathonhawke May 06, 2015 13:39:14	How about this rule:     To identify spell as it is being cast requires a Intelligence (Arcana) check:
#188 Orethalion May 06, 2015 14:25:45	jonathonhawke wrote:
#189 grendel111111 May 06, 2015 18:00:22	Are there other skills that people are struggling to assign DC's for, or think that there wasn't enough guidence given for?
(Reply to #176) AaronOfBarbaria	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #189) AaronOfBarbaria	grendel111111 wrote:
#192 FrogReaver May 07, 2015 6:18:37	D&D forums.  Where word meanings get taken to absurd extremes!
#193 FrogReaver May 07, 2015 6:37:40	Wikipedia - Arbitrariness   "Arbitrariness is the quality of being "determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle".[1] Arbitrary decisions are not necessarily the same as random decisions. For example, during the 1973 oil crisis, Americans were allowed to purchase gasoline only on odd-numbered days if their license plate was odd, and on even-numbered days if their license plate was even. The system was well-defined and not random in its restrictions; however, since license plate numbers are completely unrelated to a person's fitness to purchase gasoline, it was still an arbitrary division of people. Similarly, schoolchildren are often organized by their surname in alphabetical order, a non-random yet still arbitrary method, at least in cases where surnames are irrelevant."
#194 Orethalion May 07, 2015 6:42:52	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #193) grendel111111	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #194) FrogReaver	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #196) randl	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #195) FrogReaver	grendel111111 wrote:
#199 FrogReaver May 08, 2015 9:32:44	randl wrote:
(Reply to #189) lall	grendel111111 wrote:
(Reply to #199) randl	FrogReaver wrote:
#202 Orethalion May 08, 2015 10:30:10	FrogReaver wrote:
#203 Orethalion May 08, 2015 10:31:40	randl wrote:
(Reply to #203) randl	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #203) DarkSphinx	Orethalion wrote:
#206 Orethalion May 08, 2015 11:30:56	randl wrote:
#207 Orethalion May 08, 2015 11:32:39	DarkSphinx wrote:
(Reply to #206) randl	Orethalion wrote:
#209 Cascade.rpga May 08, 2015 12:49:20	daedel wrote:
#210 Orethalion May 08, 2015 12:52:51	randl wrote:
(Reply to #210) randl	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #210) randl	Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #207) DarkSphinx	Orethalion wrote:
#214 Orethalion May 08, 2015 15:56:58	DarkSphinx wrote:
(Reply to #208) FrogReaver	randl wrote:
#216 Orethalion May 08, 2015 21:21:02	FrogReaver wrote: