Tiefling Warlock Weaknesses?

[A_Gray_Phantom]

Introduced a new villain to my players recently: a tiefling warlock. I threw together the character in a day, didn't even kit her out very well, but OH MAN did she ever DESTROY the party.

She used her natural ability as a tiefling to surround herself in magical darkness, then used one of her invocations to see through the dark. From there she was able to send blast after blast of eldritch horror at the sorceress, eventually killing her, and completely demoralizing the party.

Mind you, she had a couple of vampire spawn acting as meat shields, and it wasn't until after the sorceress died that the party realized, "Oh snap! We need to do something!"

(They clearly were not regarding her as a real threat until one of them died.)

I'm left wondering, though, is what can be done about this combo?

The party is mostly around level 7, and comprises of a human sorceress, a half-orc druid, a human cleric of Pelor (healing and good domains), a Githyanki bard, and a halfling drunken master (who was absent for this fight).

I remember when warlock first came out in Complete Arcane, and people complained it was overpowered. Do they really have unlimited uses of their invocations? That's pretty nifty, not gonna lie.

I really like this character, and I'll continue using her as a villain until they can kill her, I'm just wondering where the weaknesses are.

They did try using an area of effect spell once in the darkness: the druid used Entangle, but with a high dex (and good rolls) she wasn't really affected.

[Troacctid]

Darkness is only a 20% miss chance. It doesn't even block line of sight. Like, it's fine and all, but it's not exactly game-breaking.

[KillianHawkeye]

Also, pretty sure a cleric of Pelor should have a decent light spell on hand?

[Crake]

Darkness is only a 20% miss chance. It doesn't even block line of sight. Like, it's fine and all, but it's not exactly game-breaking.

This sounds like the most obvious answer, it sounds like you were playing darkness as total darkness, with the party having little to no recourse to retaliate, and likely treating the sorcerer as being flat footed due to being unable to see her opponent? But just having a 20% miss chance shouldn't be that big a deal.

[Psychoalpha]

cleric of Pelor (healing and good domains)

No Sun domain? Healing Domain in a party with two other off-healers? I don't... what?

So no Radiant Servant of Pelor for them, no Greater Turning either. I'm starting to feel like this group gets what it deserves. >_>


it sounds like you were playing darkness as total darkness, with the party having little to no recourse to retaliate, and likely treating the sorcerer as being flat footed due to being unable to see her opponent

But they don't deserve that, no. Like I think everyone else has pointed out at this point, 'Darkness' just isn't very impressive.

[A_Gray_Phantom]

This sounds like the most obvious answer, it sounds like you were playing darkness as total darkness, with the party having little to no recourse to retaliate, and likely treating the sorcerer as being flat footed due to being unable to see her opponent? But just having a 20% miss chance shouldn't be that big a deal.


Darkness is only a 20% miss chance. It doesn't even block line of sight. Like, it's fine and all, but it's not exactly game-breaking.

Oooh! Okay, so I totally read this as total concealment. That's my B. In my defense, though, they were all in the Plane of Shadow (from now on referred to as Shadowfell). While the book says "shade" spells are enhanced, I'd say it's logical that darkness spells are also enhanced, thus retroactively justifying the 50% miss chance :smalltongue:

Not that it matters since nobody targeted her at all until she killed the sorceress.


Also, pretty sure a cleric of Pelor should have a decent light spell on hand?

Yeah, you'd think that, wouldn't you? No, they all prepared flame spells... for a plane that impedes flame spells...

I honestly thought that either the druid or the cleric would have prepared daylight. At one point they were bantering with each other, "Why didn't you prepare daylight!?" "ME!? I thought YOU would have!!"


No Sun domain? Healing Domain in a party with two other off-healers? I don't... what?

So no Radiant Servant of Pelor for them, no Greater Turning either. I'm starting to feel like this group gets what it deserves. >_>


But they don't deserve that, no. Like I think everyone else has pointed out at this point, 'Darkness' just isn't very impressive.

Fun fact. It was just after the sorceress died that the player of the cleric visibly facepalmed at the table. He forgot he could turn undead. Like, how do you forget that??

Mind you, there was a vampire cleric actively rebuking the vampire spawn with a Darkskull, and he peaced out when the druid finally cast his entangle spell around the darkness, so the turn check probably would have failed, but he didn't even try until one of them died.

They're all pretty new to roleplaying games, so I'm often offering them knowledge checks to give them hints at what their characters can do. Even with that, they're prone to making odd decisions.

Immediately following that battle they encountered a kyton (chain devil). I leaned hard on the Hellraiser and cenobite themes, and he offered to bring the sorceress back to life if they would all make deals with him. Without hesitation every surviving party member offered him favors.

Obviously the cleric lost his powers immediately after doing this, but was offered the opportunity to replace all of his cleric levels with warlock levels instead. He's decided to atone instead, and wants to stick with being a cleric of Pelor. You made a good point about there being 2 off-healers in the party, so I'll suggest he swap out that healing domain for the sun domain.



Overall, yeah, Darkness isn't as strong as I thought. I only breezed through the description, and thought it was as black as vantablack; seeing as they were in Shadowfell, I feel it's a little retroactively justified.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fg2x0L4YAuU

Thanks to everyone for helping me understand Darkness. They stand a much better chance against her now, especially if they fight her anywhere other than Shadowfell.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Even if it was total concealment there's easy ways to deal with that.
They could've used any number of effects that negate it (Faerie Fire, Glitterdust, Blindsight) or just gained it themselves to create parity (Fog Cloud, Obscuring Mist/Snow, Sleet Storm, Haboob).

BFC spells that target fort or ref or don't even offer a save and actually seriously hinder a caster like Black Tentacles, Kelpstrand or Spiritjaws are also options.

Or they could've just burned her down with single target damage spells that don't need attack rolls. Warlocks aren't exactly tanky.
A simple Power Word: Pain (cast from a wand even) or Extended Creeping Cold would've probably killed her, assuming a Con score of 14 or less.

The only reason they had so much trouble is because they made bad decisions and forgot their abilities.

[Troacctid]

Even if it was total concealment there's easy ways to deal with that.
They could've used any number of effects that negate it (Faerie Fire, Glitterdust, Blindsight) or just gained it themselves to create parity (Fog Cloud, Obscuring Mist/Snow, Sleet Storm, Haboob).

BFC spells that target fort or ref or don't even offer a save and actually seriously hinder a caster like Black Tentacles, Kelpstrand or Spiritjaws are also options.

Or they could've just burned her down with single target damage spells that don't need attack rolls. Warlocks aren't exactly tanky.
A simple Power Word: Pain (cast from a wand even) or Extended Creeping Cold would've probably killed her, assuming a Con score of 14 or less.

The only reason they had so much trouble is because they made bad decisions and forgot their abilities.
Faerie fire doesn't work against darkness, nor does glitterdust, and kelpstrand, power word pain, and creeping cold all require line of sight to the target. Seems the players aren't the only ones forgetting abilities. :smalltongue:

[sleepyphoenixx]

Faerie fire doesn't work against darkness, nor does glitterdust,
Whoops. I forgot Darkness was 2nd level, not 1st. And completely misremembered how Glitterdust works. My bad.


and kelpstrand, power word pain, and creeping cold all require line of sight to the target. Seems the players aren't the only ones forgetting abilities. :smalltongue:
Partial Concealment doesn't block line of sight (which is admittedly irrelevant since the OP played it as total) but i was assuming some way of negating total concealment being used (which would have to be blindsight, seeing how the other two don't work in this case).

[A_Gray_Phantom]

Question! What does "BFC" stand for?

[sleepyphoenixx]

Question! What does "BFC" stand for?

Battlefield control, as in spells that stop enemies from doing stuff.

[A_Gray_Phantom]

Battlefield control, as in spells that stop enemies from doing stuff.

Ooooh! Okay! Thanks!

[Psychoalpha]

Not that it matters since nobody targeted her at all until she killed the sorceress.

Would they have targeted her if there wasn't a 50% chance for their action to be pointless, instead of first focusing on the visible enemies? I feel like you're being a bit glib about this. If one of your players told you they had total concealment and you later discovered it was because they only glanced at their powers, would you suggest it was your fault for not...what, trying harder?


Fun fact. It was just after the sorceress died that the player of the cleric visibly facepalmed at the table. He forgot he could turn undead. Like, how do you forget that??

Probably the same way you forget to take the Sun Domain as a Cleric of Pelor, or prepare flame spells when heading into a plane that impedes flame spells. i.e. you're probably just not very good at this game and could probably use some DM-prompted common sense check. "Hey, make a Wisdom check. Do you beat a 1? Common damn sense tells you that fire spells are garbage here. Do what you want, but now you know."


They're all pretty new to roleplaying games, so I'm often offering them knowledge checks to give them hints at what their characters can do. Even with that, they're prone to making odd decisions.

Wait, so you explicitely told them that fire spells would be at a disadvantage and they still prepared fire spells? Nnnnngh.


Obviously the cleric lost his powers immediately after doing this

You're the DM, so this is entirely at your discretion, but that seems unnecessarily harsh. Making a deal with a devil may be evil because there's [Evil] involved, but given the spectrum of motivations and actions doing so to an essentially selfless end probably shouldn't have counted as a 'gross violation of conduct' so much as an awareness the next time he prayed for spells that it was Strike One (possibly of only Two) and that an Atonement is probably a good idea regardless while you think about the slippery slope of dealing with devils.

There are plenty of stories of divinely empowered holy men being led down the path of temptation and corruption and not having their power immediately revoked the first time they cross the line. If your world is one where the divine powers that be issue sharp and immediate rebukes so that everybody always knows when they've been bad, more power to you, I guess.


Overall, yeah, Darkness isn't as strong as I thought. I only breezed through the description, and thought it was as black as vantablack; seeing as they were in Shadowfell, I feel it's a little retroactively justified.

You could just say "Hey guys, I messed up on a reading of the rules and it made that encounter much more difficult than it could have been. Sorry about that, everybody makes mistakes, I'll try to do better in the future. For now we'll chalk it up to a quirk of that particular location at that particular time, some kind of planar voodoo."

Screwing up is human. Blowing it off like it doesn't matter isn't a good way to build trust with your players, ime.

[Psyren]

Overall, yeah, Darkness isn't as strong as I thought. I only breezed through the description, and thought it was as black as vantablack; seeing as they were in Shadowfell, I feel it's a little retroactively justified.
...
Thanks to everyone for helping me understand Darkness. They stand a much better chance against her now, especially if they fight her anywhere other than Shadowfell.

Actually, the Plane of Shadow doesn't interact with [Darkness] spells at all, and specifically notes this:


Despite the dark nature of the Plane of Shadow, spells that produce, use, or manipulate darkness itself are unaffected by the plane.

It does interfere with [Light] spells, so if your cleric had tried that tactic then they would have had to make a caster level check on top of needing a light spell equal to or more powerful than 2nd-level. The PoS boosts Shadow spells but not Darkness ones; if the players are plane-hopping you definitely want to make sure you have the local planar traits at your finger tips.

[A_Gray_Phantom]

Would they have targeted her if there wasn't a 50% chance for their action to be pointless, instead of first focusing on the visible enemies? I feel like you're being a bit glib about this. If one of your players told you they had total concealment and you later discovered it was because they only glanced at their powers, would you suggest it was your fault for not...what, trying harder?

They weren't interested in fighting the warlock at all. They wanted to focus first on the enemies that were right in front of them. They didn't even know about the concealment or the miss chance since they didn't try attacking the warlock. It didn't factor in at all.


Probably the same way you forget to take the Sun Domain as a Cleric of Pelor, or prepare flame spells when heading into a plane that impedes flame spells. i.e. you're probably just not very good at this game and could probably use some DM-prompted common sense check. "Hey, make a Wisdom check. Do you beat a 1? Common damn sense tells you that fire spells are garbage here. Do what you want, but now you know."

LITERALLY... EVERY... GAME... :smallannoyed:


Wait, so you explicitely told them that fire spells would be at a disadvantage and they still prepared fire spells? Nnnnngh.


No. They did zero research, asked for no knowledge checks, and didn't ask what sort of monsters they'd be fighting. Mind you, they knew weeks in advance they'd be going to Shadowfell, and did no research.



You're the DM, so this is entirely at your discretion, but that seems unnecessarily harsh. Making a deal with a devil may be evil because there's [Evil] involved, but given the spectrum of motivations and actions doing so to an essentially selfless end probably shouldn't have counted as a 'gross violation of conduct' so much as an awareness the next time he prayed for spells that it was Strike One (possibly of only Two) and that an Atonement is probably a good idea regardless while you think about the slippery slope of dealing with devils.

There are plenty of stories of divinely empowered holy men being led down the path of temptation and corruption and not having their power immediately revoked the first time they cross the line. If your world is one where the divine powers that be issue sharp and immediate rebukes so that everybody always knows when they've been bad, more power to you, I guess.


This was entirely fair, as he'd been walking down this path for a while. He hesitated to smite an evil dragon, got pissed drunk in front of a goddess Pelor told him to be respectful towards, helped torture a goblin, and finally made this pact. Yes, he did the wrong thing for the right reason, but overlooked the fact that he was helping the forces of evil for a service that he himself could have performed. Heck, the druid could have cast reincarnation.

Mind you, the part of the game world they were in causes the dead to rise as undead, but they had 6 hours to go to another plane of existence, rest, then cast their spells to bring Kitty (the sorceress) back to life. Kitty's player even tried to suggest this, but everyone jumped at the opportunity to make pacts with Evil.

He did it without thinking of the consequences. That's why he lost his powers. This is Pelor teaching him a lesson (a wake up call) that actions have consequences.

This wasn't a decision I made lightly. I explained after the session was over that I've seen DM's do this sort of thing as a means of punishing players they don't like, or doing it because they're bored and want to do it because they can. I went on to explain that it's crucial you NEVER use the rules to punish a player. Rather, it's something that needs to follow a logical conclusion.

Everyone at the table, including the cleric's player, agreed this was the correct response. Aiding a devil who has active intentions to harm people is an abhorrently evil act, even if it immediately seems to benefit him in the short term.

I'm introducing an NPC in tomorrow's game. He's a bishop with the Church of Pelor sent from across the seas to assess Troy (the cleric) and his reputation. It's not good, and when he learns that Troy lost his powers in Shadowfell, he'll be immediately sent on a quest to get his powers back: send the devil back to the 9 Hells, then he'll be given his powers back.

Mind you, this was originally a bad guy I was expecting them to kill on sight. Now that they've helped him, he's going to be sticking around for quite a while. It's going to be very, very interesting to see where this goes. I can give you more details on what the devil, named Smith, is now planning to do since meeting the adventurers.



You could just say "Hey guys, I messed up on a reading of the rules and it made that encounter much more difficult than it could have been. Sorry about that, everybody makes mistakes, I'll try to do better in the future. For now we'll chalk it up to a quirk of that particular location at that particular time, some kind of planar voodoo."

I did bring this up with the players after the game, and pointed out it didn't get brought during the fight since everybody ignored her. Nobody has argued this fact, because that's exactly what happened.


Screwing up is human. Blowing it off like it doesn't matter isn't a good way to build trust with your players, ime.

Please stop acting like you know me, my players, or our history. If you'd like to know more details about us, please ask politely.

One last edit: I have made mistakes during games, and whenever a player corrects me on something, I always reward them with bonus experience points. I felt this might matter.

[A_Gray_Phantom]

Actually, the Plane of Shadow doesn't interact with [Darkness] spells at all, and specifically notes this:



It does interfere with [Light] spells, so if your cleric had tried that tactic then they would have had to make a caster level check on top of needing a light spell equal to or more powerful than 2nd-level. The PoS boosts Shadow spells but not Darkness ones; if the players are plane-hopping you definitely want to make sure you have the local planar traits at your finger tips.

Oh, cool! Thanks.

And yeah, they tried casting light, and failed to make their caster checks. They did have a magical orb that produced light, so that helped a lot.

[Crake]

No. They did zero research, asked for no knowledge checks, and didn't ask what sort of monsters they'd be fighting. Mind you, they knew weeks in advance they'd be going to Shadowfell, and did no research.

They aren't supposed to ask you for knowledge checks, you're supposed to ask them. If their character knows something, they know something, but the player doesn't know what they don't know to ask. If one of the characters has knowledge (planes), the player shouldn't ask you to know about the effects of the plane, you should ask them to roll, and if they succeed, you tell them.

If you cultivate an expectation that the onus is on the player to ask, you're gonna end up at a table where the players will constantly ask about every little thing because they're not sure if they should, either that or the players will just begin to resent you for constantly blindsiding them over things that their character should know, but they have no idea about.

[A_Gray_Phantom]

They aren't supposed to ask you for knowledge checks, you're supposed to ask them. If their character knows something, they know something, but the player doesn't know what they don't know to ask. If one of the characters has knowledge (planes), the player shouldn't ask you to know about the effects of the plane, you should ask them to roll, and if they succeed, you tell them.

If you cultivate an expectation that the onus is on the player to ask, you're gonna end up at a table where the players will constantly ask about every little thing because they're not sure if they should, either that or the players will just begin to resent you for constantly blindsiding them over things that their character should know, but they have no idea about.

But I do always ask them to roll for knowledge checks. I've just been wanting them to be more proactive in preparing for combat and travels. I offer them knowledge checks all the time, but I've been asking them to ask for knowledge checks, too.

And why shouldn't they ask me for checks? You haven't presented a reason why not.

[Crake]

But I do always ask them to roll for knowledge checks. I've just been wanting them to be more proactive in preparing for combat and travels. I offer them knowledge checks all the time, but I've been asking them to ask for knowledge checks, too.

And why shouldn't they ask me for checks? You haven't presented a reason why not.

Because a player won't always know when to ask about something that their character knows about. In most circumstances with knowledge checks, the character will already know something, like for example, the planar traits of the shadow plane, but the player might not even know that something like planar traits are a thing, so they wouldn't even know to ask for a knowledge check in the first place. It's a notion of "things you don't know you don't know". If the player finds out later that it's something his character would have known, but because he, the player, didn't ask about it, he wasn't informed, then he'll feel cheated, because how was he supposed to know.

Basically, by asking the players to ask for knowledge checks, you're essentially denying them information that they should have access to (their character knows it after all, they don't learn it upon rolling the check), and putting it behind a wall, requiring them to ask for it, rather than offering it to them, and what that will do is make the players ask at every turn, in fear of missing out on things that they are really actually entitled to.

Now, granted, a DM isn't infallible, and there may be plenty of cases where something either slips your mind to ask for players to roll, or you may just take something so entirely for granted, that you forget the other players don't know something that you learned ages ago (I do this all the time), and for times like that, the players asking for a roll is fine, but that should be the exception, not the expectation. The only time the players should really be asking for checks is when they're trying to actively do something (this is where knowledge checks derived from research should fall in, the player has to ask to do those obviously), or, as above, if they feel like the DM might have missed something.

[Celestia]

Because a player won't always know when to ask about something that their character knows about. In most circumstances with knowledge checks, the character will already know something, like for example, the planar traits of the shadow plane, but the player might not even know that something like planar traits are a thing, so they wouldn't even know to ask for a knowledge check in the first place. It's a notion of "things you don't know you don't know". If the player finds out later that it's something his character would have known, but because he, the player, didn't ask about it, he wasn't informed, then he'll feel cheated, because how was he supposed to know.

Basically, by asking the players to ask for knowledge checks, you're essentially denying them information that they should have access to (their character knows it after all, they don't learn it upon rolling the check), and putting it behind a wall, requiring them to ask for it, rather than offering it to them, and what that will do is make the players ask at every turn, in fear of missing out on things that they are really actually entitled to.

Now, granted, a DM isn't infallible, and there may be plenty of cases where something either slips your mind to ask for players to roll, or you may just take something so entirely for granted, that you forget the other players don't know something that you learned ages ago (I do this all the time), and for times like that, the players asking for a roll is fine, but that should be the exception, not the expectation. The only time the players should really be asking for checks is when they're trying to actively do something (this is where knowledge checks derived from research should fall in, the player has to ask to do those obviously), or, as above, if they feel like the DM might have missed something.
When a player goes to a new place, no matter where or what it is, it should be common practice for them to ask, "Is there anything we should know about this place?" They don't even have to know that planar traits are a thing; they just have to have the common sense to ask about the basic facts of a foreign location. That's not an unreasonable expectation, and putting the onus and responsibility for every minor thing entirely on the DM's shoulders is how you get non-interactive non-games. The OP may have made a mistake with the Darkness, but I think they were more than fair in giving the players a chance. Anymore handholding, and you start reaching the stage where you question whether or not the players even need to be there.

[Psychoalpha]

They weren't interested in fighting the warlock at all. They wanted to focus first on the enemies that were right in front of them. They didn't even know about the concealment or the miss chance since they didn't try attacking the warlock. It didn't factor in at all.

This doesn't make any sense. Did they know there was a Warlock? If so, did they know the Warlock was functionally invisible to them? If so, what on earth do you mean that they "didn't even know about the concealment or the miss chance"? If they did know about the Warlock but didn't know it was functionally invisible to them, what did you even describe to them? They come into the room and there's just a blob of darkness and some vampires? I am so confused right now.


No. They did zero research, asked for no knowledge checks, and didn't ask what sort of monsters they'd be fighting. Mind you, they knew weeks in advance they'd be going to Shadowfell, and did no research.

You are the DM. They don't need to ask you for knowledge checks, especially for some crap that should be super obvious to anyone with Knowledge (The Planes) or arguably Knowledge (Arcana) or even Spellcraft. Especially since you already seem to understand that these players are either very inexperienced or very dumb.

You said 'LITERALLY... EVERY... GAME...' about DM prompted checks, so how are you not prompting them to make the knowledge checks you seem all too aware need to be made? Knowledge checks do not require research, they are literally described as taking no action because you either know something or you don't. Research is what you do when it occurs to you that you don't know the answer to something and want to find out.

If you decide you're going to a restaurant, you either know how to get there or you don't. You don't get in your car and start driving and then realize you have no idea where you were even going. And before anybody says they have done exactly that, I would point out that driving to get dinner and going to a hostile plane of existence with different metaphysical rules is not the same thing.


<stuff about the cleric>

Fair enough. I've seen a lot of stuff where people are punishing Clerics for screwing up once like the Gods have nothing to do but monitor their every action and judge them for it immediately. If the Cleric had been on a bad path already, so be it.


When a player goes to a new place, no matter where or what it is, it should be common practice for them to ask, "Is there anything we should know about this place?" They don't even have to know that planar traits are a thing; they just have to have the common sense to ask about the basic facts of a foreign location. That's not an unreasonable expectation, and putting the onus and responsibility for every minor thing entirely on the DM's shoulders is how you get non-interactive non-games. The OP may have made a mistake with the Darkness, but I think they were more than fair in giving the players a chance. Anymore handholding, and you start reaching the stage where you question whether or not the players even need to be there.

This is straight up nonsense. It's like arguing that you don't get a Spot check (or Perception, or whatever) to notice something because you didn't ask your DM if there was anything to notice. Except worse, because in the example the DM clearly made the observation that the players were ignorant of a situation and punished their characters for not speaking up.

Sure, encourage people to ask questions, even ask for knowledge checks. But part of your job as the DM is providing information about the world the characters inhabit, whether it's descriptions of locations, observable cultural norms, etc. Sometimes the information you provide is because it's obvious, sometimes it's tailored to what characters would know, but you don't know what they would know if you don't ask them for a skill check. Unless you're just arbitrarily deciding they're ignorant for one reason or another, like because the players of those characters didn't jump through your hoop.

Players are not as smart or as wise as their characters. Penalizing them because of that is garbage. It's the kind of logic that encourages people to think it's cool to have Charisma 8 while letting them be charming and influential with NPCs because they roleplay that way. :p

[Crake]

This is straight up nonsense. It's like arguing that you don't get a Spot check (or Perception, or whatever) to notice something because you didn't ask your DM if there was anything to notice. Except worse, because in the example the DM clearly made the observation that the players were ignorant of a situation and punished their characters for not speaking up.

Sure, encourage people to ask questions, even ask for knowledge checks. But part of your job as the DM is providing information about the world the characters inhabit, whether it's descriptions of locations, observable cultural norms, etc. Sometimes the information you provide is because it's obvious, sometimes it's tailored to what characters would know, but you don't know what they would know if you don't ask them for a skill check. Unless you're just arbitrarily deciding they're ignorant for one reason or another, like because the players of those characters didn't jump through your hoop.

Players are not as smart or as wise as their characters. Penalizing them because of that is garbage. It's the kind of logic that encourages people to think it's cool to have Charisma 8 while letting them be charming and influential with NPCs because they roleplay that way. :p

Agreed, the players shouldn't have to ask for information that their characters already know. If there's anything important that the characters should already know, the DM should divulge that without being prompted. That being said, as I mentioned, sometimes the DM may forget something, and when the players feel like perhaps they're missing a piece of the puzzle, that's when they should be asking, but otherwise, if you're setting the expectation at your table that you need to ask for information to recieve it, get ready to be bombarded by "What do I know about this?" at every turn once your players start to catch on that they don't get given such information otherwise, or, more likely, if your players aren't interested in such tedium, a slow and steady decline in interest in your game as players grow to resent such treatment, and the continued dissatisfaction you feel as a DM when your players carry onward uninformed of what awaits them and how to handle it as they bumble around like fools, despite their characters having mental ability scores in the 20s.

[16bearswutIdo]

Re: the whole "Not needing PC prompt for knowledge checks" thing, I gotta say that sounds like complete bollocks. Does every combat start with two rolls, one initiative and one relevant knowledge check? Does entering a new city prompt a knowledge (local) roll? I don't think it's unreasonable at all to expect a PC to say something like "What do I know about X/I'm trying to recall if I read anything about X."

The rules say it doesn't take an action and you don't get retries, but that doesn't make it automatic. That being said, if a player does some stupid **** like use fire on a fire elemental I'll prompt a knowledge check.

I guess it's just something people run differently.

[Crake]

Re: the whole "Not needing PC prompt for knowledge checks" thing, I gotta say that sounds like complete bollocks. Does every combat start with two rolls, one initiative and one relevant knowledge check?

At my table, yes, I'll generally describe the monster, call for initiative, and then ask if anyone has XYZ knowledge skill, and if they do, to roll it for me, then, on their turn I'll give them the relevant information their character would know.


Does entering a new city prompt a knowledge (local) roll? I don't think it's unreasonable at all to expect a PC to say something like "What do I know about X/I'm trying to recall if I read anything about X."

This is a little different, because we don't have time for me to go through every detail of the town in question, not to mention I likely haven't come up with every minor detail, but, for example, if there's an important detail like the fact that the mayor that they've come to see is in cahoots with a drug cartel, then yes, I will ask the player to roll that, I won't wait for the player to ask if they should roll a knowledge local check to see if they know anything about the mayor, because if I did, then they'd be asking me that for every character they meet, and it would just be tiring and tedious.


The rules say it doesn't take an action and you don't get retries, but that doesn't make it automatic. That being said, if a player does some stupid **** like use fire on a fire elemental I'll prompt a knowledge check.

I guess it's just something people run differently.

For reference, what it actually says is "Usually none. In most cases, making a Knowledge check doesn’t take an action—you simply know the answer or you don’t. "

If you wait until the player asks to divulge information, you're effectively saying that the character didn't know information, and now they do, thus contradicting the bolded section. If your character knows something, you shouldn't have to ask to know that too.

[Psyren]

I agree with Crake and Psychoalpha here. Particularly if one of the players has ranks in Knowledge (Planes), simply being on the new plane should prompt a check, and you should call for it even if the players don't explicitly remember to do so. If I was a player in your game, I would be a little put out by a GM "gotchaing" me like that, and therefore ask for checks constantly, both to be safe going forward and to prove a point. It's not metagaming if they've spent the build resources to learn something and rolled well.

[Psychoalpha]

That being said, as I mentioned, sometimes the DM may forget something, and when the players feel like perhaps they're missing a piece of the puzzle, that's when they should be asking

This, 100%.


Does every combat start with two rolls, one initiative and one relevant knowledge check?

Yes, unless it's something the players are demonstrably already familiar with or could have no knowledge of. Jesus, I'm actually not sure how to deal with the idea that there are people who don't already get this.


The rules say it doesn't take an action and you don't get retries, but that doesn't make it automatic.

This makes no sense. Imagine for a moment that you, in real life, are in the business of wrangling wild animals. You literally spend your days going from place to place finding exotic pets that have escaped and etc. You are trained and educated in information about such animals. When confronted with a tiger, you don't just not think about the best way to deal with a tiger. Again, you are specifically trained and educated with information specific to this subject, not some rando who's not sure what the difference between a tiger and a cougar is.

Crake already touched on why Knowledge (Local) and such are different, but yeah: I ask for relevant knowledge checks for a new city/plane/etc and give them what I consider relevant information, then ask if there are any questions. Because, again, providing relevant information about the world is actually my job as DM.


If I was a player in your game, I would be a little put out by a GM "gotchaing" me like that, and therefore ask for checks constantly, both to be safe going forward and to prove a point. It's not metagaming if they've spent the build resources to learn something and rolled well.

This. So much this. Instead I, and our other DMs, provide information we think is important based on the PCs knowledge, and they ask questions where they think the DM has forgotten things or they feel they're missing something.

[A_Gray_Phantom]

This doesn't make any sense. Did they know there was a Warlock? If so, did they know the Warlock was functionally invisible to them? If so, what on earth do you mean that they "didn't even know about the concealment or the miss chance"? If they did know about the Warlock but didn't know it was functionally invisible to them, what did you even describe to them? They come into the room and there's just a blob of darkness and some vampires? I am so confused right now.



You are the DM. They don't need to ask you for knowledge checks, especially for some crap that should be super obvious to anyone with Knowledge (The Planes) or arguably Knowledge (Arcana) or even Spellcraft. Especially since you already seem to understand that these players are either very inexperienced or very dumb.

You said 'LITERALLY... EVERY... GAME...' about DM prompted checks, so how are you not prompting them to make the knowledge checks you seem all too aware need to be made? Knowledge checks do not require research, they are literally described as taking no action because you either know something or you don't. Research is what you do when it occurs to you that you don't know the answer to something and want to find out.

If you decide you're going to a restaurant, you either know how to get there or you don't. You don't get in your car and start driving and then realize you have no idea where you were even going. And before anybody says they have done exactly that, I would point out that driving to get dinner and going to a hostile plane of existence with different metaphysical rules is not the same thing.



Fair enough. I've seen a lot of stuff where people are punishing Clerics for screwing up once like the Gods have nothing to do but monitor their every action and judge them for it immediately. If the Cleric had been on a bad path already, so be it.



This is straight up nonsense. It's like arguing that you don't get a Spot check (or Perception, or whatever) to notice something because you didn't ask your DM if there was anything to notice. Except worse, because in the example the DM clearly made the observation that the players were ignorant of a situation and punished their characters for not speaking up.

Sure, encourage people to ask questions, even ask for knowledge checks. But part of your job as the DM is providing information about the world the characters inhabit, whether it's descriptions of locations, observable cultural norms, etc. Sometimes the information you provide is because it's obvious, sometimes it's tailored to what characters would know, but you don't know what they would know if you don't ask them for a skill check. Unless you're just arbitrarily deciding they're ignorant for one reason or another, like because the players of those characters didn't jump through your hoop.

Players are not as smart or as wise as their characters. Penalizing them because of that is garbage. It's the kind of logic that encourages people to think it's cool to have Charisma 8 while letting them be charming and influential with NPCs because they roleplay that way. :p

This is not a nanny-state. I do prompt them for knowledge checks often, but I will not be held responsible for them not asking to research a planar destination before going to it. What's next? Are you going to expect me to move their miniatures on the grid? Tell them what spells to cast, what levels to take, or how their characters feel?

I'm not telling my players what to do. I offered them a quest to Shadowfell, and they leapt in without any preparations. Even smart characters make mistakes, especially ones that are cocky. And they have been cocky. This falls into the category of "should have known better."

And that metaphor with the restaurant doesn't work. I use a GPS, like everyone. I ask the GPS for directions.


Because a player won't always know when to ask about something that their character knows about. In most circumstances with knowledge checks, the character will already know something, like for example, the planar traits of the shadow plane, but the player might not even know that something like planar traits are a thing, so they wouldn't even know to ask for a knowledge check in the first place. It's a notion of "things you don't know you don't know". If the player finds out later that it's something his character would have known, but because he, the player, didn't ask about it, he wasn't informed, then he'll feel cheated, because how was he supposed to know.

Basically, by asking the players to ask for knowledge checks, you're essentially denying them information that they should have access to (their character knows it after all, they don't learn it upon rolling the check), and putting it behind a wall, requiring them to ask for it, rather than offering it to them, and what that will do is make the players ask at every turn, in fear of missing out on things that they are really actually entitled to.

Now, granted, a DM isn't infallible, and there may be plenty of cases where something either slips your mind to ask for players to roll, or you may just take something so entirely for granted, that you forget the other players don't know something that you learned ages ago (I do this all the time), and for times like that, the players asking for a roll is fine, but that should be the exception, not the expectation. The only time the players should really be asking for checks is when they're trying to actively do something (this is where knowledge checks derived from research should fall in, the player has to ask to do those obviously), or, as above, if they feel like the DM might have missed something.

How would anyone not know that a different plane of existence has different rules? I told them they were going to the plane of shadows, and I told them to ask me if they have any questions. The thing is that they didn't bother asking me anything. So I ask them to roll knowledge checks.

And asking for knowledge checks at every turn? Surely you don't mean a literal turn? That's hyperbole. And I still don't understand what's wrong with rolling dice in a tabletop roleplaying game that has the base mechanics anchored in rolling dice.

Or are you new to D&D? Dice are used in this game. It's okay to roll dice.


I agree with Crake and Psychoalpha here. Particularly if one of the players has ranks in Knowledge (Planes), simply being on the new plane should prompt a check, and you should call for it even if the players don't explicitly remember to do so. If I was a player in your game, I would be a little put out by a GM "gotchaing" me like that, and therefore ask for checks constantly, both to be safe going forward and to prove a point. It's not metagaming if they've spent the build resources to learn something and rolled well.

I DO ask them to make checks. All the time, but apparently this is a bad thing?

I'm confused. On one hand I'm being told I need to prompt knowledge checks, but on the other hand I'm being told rolling dice is a bad thing, so which is it? I'd ask if I'm being trolled, but Poe's law and all.


When a player goes to a new place, no matter where or what it is, it should be common practice for them to ask, "Is there anything we should know about this place?" They don't even have to know that planar traits are a thing; they just have to have the common sense to ask about the basic facts of a foreign location. That's not an unreasonable expectation, and putting the onus and responsibility for every minor thing entirely on the DM's shoulders is how you get non-interactive non-games. The OP may have made a mistake with the Darkness, but I think they were more than fair in giving the players a chance. Anymore handholding, and you start reaching the stage where you question whether or not the players even need to be there.

Yes! Thank you!

Mind you, I do prompt knowledge checks from them all the time, but it's not my responsibility to micromanage everything the players think, feel, and do.


This is seriously getting ridiculous. I don't even think my detractors realize how hypocritical they're being. I explain I do ask for knowledge checks, and y'all glaze over my words.

It seems the biggest argument is that if I don't ask for knowledge checks from them all the time, then they'll ask for knowledge checks all the time. But if you want to avoid knowledge checks all the time, then why ask for knowledge checks all the time?

The big thing people aren't asking is: did the players have fun? The answer is yes, yes they did. In fact, most everyone had one of the best games ever that night.

And the player whose character died? Not mad at me one bit. None of the players were upset with the outcome, rather they were thrilled.

Clearly I'm doing something right.

[Crake]

This is not a nanny-state. I do prompt them for knowledge checks often, but I will not be held responsible for them not asking to research a planar destination before going to it. What's next? Are you going to expect me to move their miniatures on the grid? Tell them what spells to cast, what levels to take, or how their characters feel?

I'm not telling my players what to do. I offered them a quest to Shadowfell, and they leapt in without any preparations. Even smart characters make mistakes, especially ones that are cocky. And they have been cocky. This falls into the category of "should have known better."

And that metaphor with the restaurant doesn't work. I use a GPS, like everyone. I ask the GPS for directions.

No preparations is one thing, and I don't at all support the notion of rewarding lack of forethought, as I've said, and others have agreed with me, if they were lacking information because they failed their knowledge checks, then the onus is on them to go and research, but....


How would anyone not know that a different plane of existence has different rules?

This is a case of you taking knowledge for granted, as I explained above. There are things that people don't know they don't know, and there are plenty of alternate planes and dimensions in mythology which had litte to no "planar traits" that affected the heros in any way, so "planar traits" is not necessarily something I would expect players to know about unless they're already quite fanatical dnd players.


I told them they were going to the plane of shadows, and I told them to ask me if they have any questions. The thing is that they didn't bother asking me anything. So I ask them to roll knowledge checks.

And asking for knowledge checks at every turn? Surely you don't mean a literal turn? That's hyperbole. And I still don't understand what's wrong with rolling dice in a tabletop roleplaying game that has the base mechanics anchored in rolling dice.

Or are you new to D&D? Dice are used in this game. It's okay to roll dice.

"At every turn" is a fairly common phrase used to mean, by google's definition "on every occasion; continually." And there's nothing wrong with rolling dice, the problem is when the players have to beg for every piece of information, when 9/10 there's no information to give, it's easier instead for the DM to give the information every 1/10 times it comes up, rather than having the players ask constantly.


I DO ask them to make checks. All the time, but apparently this is a bad thing?

I'm confused. On one hand I'm being told I need to prompt knowledge checks, but on the other hand I'm being told rolling dice is a bad thing, so which is it? I'd ask if I'm being trolled, but Poe's law and all.

Uhh, I'm not sure where this is coming from? Who has said rolling dice is a bad thing?


Yes! Thank you!

Mind you, I do prompt knowledge checks from them all the time, but it's not my responsibility to micromanage everything the players think, feel, and do.

But it is your job to provide the information that the players would reasonably have access to and is relevant to the situation. The players don't know how to roleplay their characters if they don't have the necessary information to make choices for their character. Imagine this situation: the players arrive on the shadow plane, are fighting something, and one of them throws out a fire spell and it fizzles. They ask why it happened, and you say "roll a knowledge check". They succeed, and you inform them "ok, so you know that fire spells are impeded on the shadow plane", to which they say "So.... I already knew this?" "Yes" "Okay, then I'm gonna go ahead and reprepare my spells, because my character's not an idiot".


This is seriously getting ridiculous. I don't even think my detractors realize how hypocritical they're being. I explain I do ask for knowledge checks, and y'all glaze over my words.

I think you're getting confused. There are two sides to this argument, and the two sides are arguing with each other, not with you. We're arguing a principle with the opposing side, but you happen to be caught in the middle.


It seems the biggest argument is that if I don't ask for knowledge checks from them all the time, then they'll ask for knowledge checks all the time. But if you want to avoid knowledge checks all the time, then why ask for knowledge checks all the time?

It's not so much that you ask for knowledge checks all the time, it's that you ask for knowledge checks when it's relevant, rather than expecting some kind of foresight from your players to know when asking for a knowledge check is relevant. You, as the DM, know best when it's a reasonable time to ask for knowledge checks, but the players don't, which is why, if you expect the players to ask, then they will learn to ask all the time, just to be safe, even when there's no need whatsoever for a knowledge check.


The big thing people aren't asking is: did the players have fun? The answer is yes, yes they did. In fact, most everyone had one of the best games ever that night.

And the player whose character died? Not mad at me one bit. None of the players were upset with the outcome, rather they were thrilled.

Clearly I'm doing something right.

Definitely, DMing is a tough job, and if you walk away from the table with smiles on everyone's faces (or hell, maybe even tears after a tragic session), then you're doing a good job. Don't mistake a philosophical discussion about DMing methods as any kind of detraction from that, but a lot of us love discussing this game as well, and will argue for hours over what is better between A or B, don't take it as a personal attack.

And keep in mind, when discussions like this arise, typically the two sides will argue in terms of absolutes, simply to better demonstrate a point, which is why I, for example, try to make sure to add in a disclaimer that there are exceptions, in the case of this discussion, like when the DM maybe forgets something, or if the players feel like they're missing something.

On the topic of asking for rolls, this is actually something I learned very early on when running a solo campaign for my sister when we were kids. Literally every time she walked into a room, she would say "Can I roll a spot check to see anything?", and it's then that I learned that, if I tell her "Don't worry, if there's anything extra to spot beyond what I describe, I'll ask you to roll", and that quickly curbed that behaviour. The same thing applies to knowledge checks in a way. You're describing something "Can I roll a knowledge check to see if I know anything extra", you're introducing an NPC "Can I roll a knowledge check to see if I know anything more about this guy", etc.

Oh, actually, here's a perfect example from my last session: My players entered a tainted scar, and were attacked by corrupted servals. Now, the way I described them, as having boils and being twisted and corrupted, none of my players thought to ask anything more, but it just so happened that the tainted minion template (yes, I know it's technically only supposed to apply to humanoids, I used it anyway), actually turns a creature into an undead. One of my players is a cleric, and could easily dust them with a single turn attempt, but because they had no idea the creatures were actually undead, they wouldn't have at all thought about asking. Now, naturally, this is also an example of me screwing up, because it wasn't until about round 2 or 3 that I myself realised they were undead, and hastily asked the cleric for a religion check, before informing them that the taint gave the creatures the characteristics of undeath, and they were promptly disintegrated by holy light.

But the point of that story is that, had I not asked for a religion check, the cleric player likely would not have ever even thought to ask.

[Psychoalpha]

but I will not be held responsible for them not asking to research a planar destination before going to it.

Say it with me: That is not how Knowledge checks work.

They do not need to research anything. Research is something you do when you don't know anything. It's what you do when you have no Knowledge (The Planes). Do they have Knowledge (The Planes)? Then they get a roll to see what they know, and as the DM telling people when to roll dice is your job.


Even smart characters make mistakes, especially ones that are cocky.

Except their characters didn't make any mistakes, their players did. You, as the DM, never gave their characters a chance to not make the mistake.

If a party is going to the Elemental Plane of Fire, nobody is forgetting protection from fire. That is not a mistake, that is a gross oversight that is clearly a result of players being oblivious because maybe they're new and thought if you can go to a plane its default state is not 'burning alive'. The characters have no reason to think that way, and prompting a knowledge check (or even just saying 'hey guys this super obvious thing is super obvious') is once again your job as the DM.


And asking for knowledge checks at every turn? Surely you don't mean a literal turn? That's hyperbole.

If you can't recognize the phrase 'at every turn' for what it is, I'm not sure what to tell you.


And I still don't understand what's wrong with rolling dice in a tabletop roleplaying game that has the base mechanics anchored in rolling dice.

Or are you new to D&D? Dice are used in this game. It's okay to roll dice.

Literally nobody has suggested this.


I DO ask them to make checks. All the time, but apparently this is a bad thing?

I'm confused. On one hand I'm being told I need to prompt knowledge checks, but on the other hand I'm being told rolling dice is a bad thing, so which is it? I'd ask if I'm being trolled, but Poe's law and all.

Again, literally nobody is saying this. Nobody. What is being said is that not prompting them for knowledge checks when you observe them doing things that are clearly the result of player ignorance is bad. Because it is bad.


I explain I do ask for knowledge checks, and y'all glaze over my words.

Perhaps it's because you keep muddying it up by talking about how they did some objectively dumb stuff (memorizing fire spells for use on a plane that interferes with fire spells) because of player ignorance and you decided to let them instead of doing the thing you just said you do all the time. That is absolutely the time to ask for checks.


Clearly I'm doing something right.

Hey, play to your table. But we're not your table, and can only react to what you present, and what you presented is bad DMing from my perspective. Which is fine, there are all sorts of people who play under what I'd consider bad DMs and have fun. Somebody was just talking about playing under a DM who tells people to tank their Charisma score, except where they need it for class features, because only their table roleplay will manner for social skills and not their dice. I think that's garbage, but other people seem to think it's preferable. I can't really account for all the ways people enjoy the game.

tl;dr - Everything Crake said, since he put it all without leaning into the crutch of derisive sarcasm that is my comfort zone.