Ever have players fail to distinguish between Raise and Animate Dead?

[Erit]

And if so, how can one get the difference to stick? Because my table just missed out on a sidequest I'd had planned out for them using a Raise Dead scroll they'd won from a previous encounter, thanks to them mistaking Raise Dead for a spell that animates the corpse as an undead minion rather than returning them to life.

[Psyren]

Haven't had this specific problem, but you're actually asking a broader question here - "how can I remind the players that an item they picked up in the past could be used to trigger a sidequest now?"

There is no single right answer to this one - some DMs use Wis or Int checks to see if a given character "remembers" something important, while others have an NPC ask about it pretty bluntly, and still others stick a clue into whatever the party is currently doing to try and get them back on the rails.

There are also DMs who just say, it's the players' responsibility to know what they're carrying and remember what it does, so they missed their chance. The big downside to this one is that whatever content they skipped still took you time to prepare. You can always just pack up the sidequest and use it (or large chunks of it) somewhere else down the line instead, with some tweaks.

[Bakkan]

If this specific piece of nomenclature is a problem, then you could give them a scroll of "lesser resurrection" instead. That name is a little less ambiguous.

[edathompson2]

Characters with Spellcraft should get a roll to see if the character knows the difference.

I never understand why DMs get mad at a player for metagaming but when the reverse happens, They should have know.

NO! Their characters should have known. Just like their characters wouldn't know certain things. Be consistent.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I never understand why DMs get mad at a player for metagaming but when the reverse happens, They should have know.

NO! Their characters should have known. Just like their characters wouldn't know certain things. Be consistent.
Hmm. You know, I don't think I've ever heard it put that way before, but that's a really good point about the player knowledge/character knowledge divide.

[Psyren]

Characters with Spellcraft should get a roll to see if the character knows the difference.

I never understand why DMs get mad at a player for metagaming but when the reverse happens, They should have know.

NO! Their characters should have known. Just like their characters wouldn't know certain things. Be consistent.

This too, if it's something the character would obviously know then just tell them. Especially if the players are less experienced, as seems to be the case here.

[Erit]

Characters with Spellcraft should get a roll to see if the character knows the difference.

I never understand why DMs get mad at a player for metagaming but when the reverse happens, They should have know.

NO! Their characters should have known. Just like their characters wouldn't know certain things. Be consistent.

Thing is they'd previously identified the scrolls, and their characters have every right to know the distinction, since one is a Cleric and another a Death Master. The players themselves forgot it.

[Psyren]

Thing is they'd previously identified the scrolls, and their characters have every right to know the distinction, since one is a Cleric and another a Death Master. The players themselves forgot it.

Since you agree the characters should have known, why not tell the players?

[Erit]

I did. It's up to them whether they believe or listen to me though, which they did not.

[Psyren]

I did. It's up to them whether they believe or listen to me though, which they did not.

W... why the heck not??? :smallconfused:

Sounds like you have a completely different problem.

[Rynjin]

Yeah, this has moved from an issue of inexperienced players to a player-DM trust issue.

Are they coming in from another game with an abusive DM, or have you in the past given them (the players, not the characters) false information?

[Mordaedil]

Call it the "zombie spell".

[EldritchWeaver]

I did. It's up to them whether they believe or listen to me though, which they did not.

Why don't you tell them to look up the spell? It is in the PHB after all.

[edathompson2]

I did. It's up to them whether they believe or listen to me though, which they did not.

Wait..................What?

Maybe someone was playing "Dumb" and wanted to try and screw over another character?

That's odd.

Did you explain that if they do what they are saying they want to do, one the players will be a zombie and not resurrected?

[Darrin]

Have an NPC steal the scroll, with the idea that the thief intends to complete the sidequest that they failed to take up.

This will incense the players, who will upend heaven and earth, sink continents to the bottom of the ocean, and destroy the gods themselves to get their property back. The thief puts up a token defense, but ultimately caves and starts blubbering about his plans to complete the sidequest. This should illustrate exactly to the players why this scroll and this sidequest is important.

If the PCs *still* decide not to take the bait...

You been murderhoboed, dawg. It happens.

[ericgrau]

Simple, tell the players: "That scroll could be used to raise this guy and then you could advance the plot". Or have an NPC say it. Or some such obvious thing. If you're going to railroad by providing only one solution then quit beating around the bush.

The better way is to not have only one solution. Lock and key challenges are notoriously bad because players aren't mind readers and they might have come up with a different solution. Which is just as valid, just not what you planned on.

If you're going to run a story instead of a game with only one outcome, then quit wasting time pretending. Just narrate it and declare that it happens. Which is fine at times; sometimes players don't want things too open and just want to move forward. Then you hand-wave events until they move forward to the point they want to be at. Just say it and don't waste game time on 20 questions.

Or maybe it should be obvious to the characters even though it isn't obvious to the players. Just tell them. It's ok. Their character knows.

[Debatra]

Simple, tell the players: "That scroll could be used to raise this guy and then you could advance the plot". Or have an NPC say it. Or some such obvious thing. If you're going to railroad by providing only one solution then quit beating around the bush.

He was fairly clear that this was just a sidequest opportunity. I'm not seeing any desire to railroad here.