To Name Or Not To Name

[fluffmonster]

You could base the ident DC on the rarity of the creature. The MM has that information (common, uncommon, etc.). Take that as a base, then modify it based on the rarity of the more specific nature, i.e., the "sorcerer" or "scout" part.

[Mayhem]

Thanks for the suggestions, Mayhem.

On point 5, as with any skill check, level does partially factor in. The higher the level of the player, the more ranks in the skill they can have, but it doesn't forgo the need to invest in that skill. If level was applied directly to skill checks, then any high level character would have this knowledge regardless of what they've faced or how much they've invested in the skill. Intelligence also factors into knowledge checks, which can increase with level.

Heres the thing. Skillpoints are extremely valuable to characters. Fighters, Paladins get 2 points per level, as standard.

Give the Fighter a choice between the skill that lets him remain standing up when the big hairy thing tries to knock him over, and the skill that tells him its a wolf, and its a no-brainer.

"Hey Warrick? What are those big hairy things?"
"Wolves.. argh! I'm down, get it off me, get it off me! Argh!"

vs

"Hey Warrick? What are those big hairy things?"
"Damned if I know, but at least they can't knock me over."

So the 9th level guy who has killed probably 50 or so wolves still can't recognise one when he sees them, unless he sacrifices his ability to do something that, mechanically, is actually valuable to him - the ability to not get killed by wolves, for example.

On point 6, by relative power, do you mean challenge rating? That might be interesting to reveal so parties could know whether they were in above their heads or not - something any self respecting scout should be able to advise.

Yes, I definately mean CR. If I *must* spend 50% on my skill points to recognise a Goblin Fighter, I want to be told more than "Its a Goblin Fighter."

[darrenhfx]

Cipher quoted:

* Arcana (ancient mysteries, magic traditions, arcane symbols, cryptic phrases, constructs, dragons, magical beasts)
* Architecture and engineering (buildings, aqueducts, bridges, fortifications)
* Dungeoneering (aberrations, caverns, oozes, spelunking)
* Geography (lands, terrain, climate, people)
* History (royalty, wars, colonies, migrations, founding of cities)
* Local (legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids)
* Nature (animals, fey, giants, monstrous humanoids, plants, seasons and cycles, weather, vermin)
* Nobility and royalty (lineages, heraldry, family trees, mottoes, personalities)
* Religion (gods and goddesses, mythic history, ecclesiastic tradition, holy symbols, undead)
* The planes (the Inner Planes, the Outer Planes, the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, outsiders, elementals, magic related to the planes)

I would be very happy to spend my time adding detail such as this to the game. IMO this would add a great deal to game play by making it important to have a proper team assembled that has someone with the appropriate knowledge area (scouts) before wading into combat. I'd love to see tank builds undercut by making combat as much a process of having the proper knowledge of your foes as having the ABs, ACs and hps.

Also, I like not having the names above the creatures. If a visual can't give you enough of an idea of whether or not you should run from or fight an opponent maybe you should think about a new career. Note also that in the above list of knowledge skills that having local knowledge will allow you to have a chance of identifying humanoids which is what the majority of what most pc's will encounter anyway. You then add layers of knowledge by including a ranger, a bard/wizard, a cleric, etc. or by using your skill points to broaden your character's knowledge base.

How marvelous that not every farmer turned fighter will be able to identify an ooze while poking around in the depths of a cave because its name floats over it's head. The smart group of adventurers will hire themselves a dwarf, for the ooze example, or someone else familiar with the environment which makes for added rp'ing opportunities as pc's with the sought after knowledge area will become a valuable contact... again emphasizing a team approach.

As for not being able to read combat reports, who has time to examine these closely in the heat of battle anyway? Again, wading into a group of critters without having a clue what they are will be bad for your health, do we need the surgeon general's report?

This has all been a bit of tongue-in-cheek but I think we could have a really nice system develop from this sort of dialogue making combat a much more interesting experience.

[Mayhem]

I would be very happy to spend my time adding detail such as this to the game. IMO this would add a great deal to game play by making it important to have a proper team assembled that has someone with the appropriate knowledge area (scouts) before wading into combat. I'd love to see tank builds undercut by making combat as much a process of having the proper knowledge of your foes as having the ABs, ACs and hps.

Also, I like not having the names above the creatures.

Have you tried it without the names? On paper, I agree it sounds like an excellent idea. What a marvellous boon to RP, I thought. In practice, I really, really dislike it.

If a visual can't give you enough of an idea of whether or not you should run from or fight an opponent maybe you should think about a new career.

If the visuals allowed you to easily tell the difference between a goblin in dirty leather and a goblin in rusty plate, and to see the accumulated battlescars and the way the creature carries itself, the way it handles its sword, I would agree.

They do not.

Of course, if you the player are using the visual as a cue, how is that any different from just sticking the creatures name above its head? I, the player, know its a kobold, even if my character does not. I, the player, might even know its a kobold elite, if all kobold elites wear the same gear, even if my current PC has never met one before How does making its name invisible help?

The avoidance of meta will only occur if the player is as ignorant as the character. All the removal of the name does is screw up the battle-tracking and logging, and make ID a pain in the ass for the player even when it should be easy for the character.

(Interesting side point - can DMs see the names in the DM logs?)

Why not trust us to roleplay our ignorance, the way we did in NWN1?

How marvelous that not every farmer turned fighter will be able to identify an ooze while poking around in the depths of a cave because its name floats over it's head.

Conversely, any fighter that has encountered a score of oozes but who has been forced to spend his skill points on discipline and concentration so that he doesn't get pwned by dire-wolves and smart-ass kobold rogues using taunt, will *also* not be able to identify the ooze.

Skill points are rare and precious to fighter types. Since the player would rather have a character that's alive than knowledgable, I think points are likely to go into "keeping me alive" skills rather than a skill that lets you know that the 3 foot high lizard-thing in the area where teh village eldar told you to look for kobolds, is a kobold.

As for not being able to read combat reports, who has time to examine these closely in the heat of battle anyway?

Unless your system performance is so good that what happens on screen is *exactly* what's happening in the fight, its the only way to get an idea of which creature is actually hitting you.

I was battling (curiously) an orc, a gnoll and a zombie the other day. I had no idea which of them was actually hitting me, or which one I was getting attacks of opportunity against, things that would be obvious to the PC, especially that last one, even if you use the "confusion of battle" excuse.

[AcadiusLost]

Remember, discipline is out in NWN2- so there won't be a need for keeping that maxed to "stay standing"- thankfully, NWN2 rearranged the knockdown/disarm/discipline mechanic completely.

I'd agree that having no names above the creatures at all is bothersome- NWN1 gave us some handy functions for renaming on the fly, though their effects are sometimes a bit odd- we're supposed to be getting them back in NWN2 eventually. If we do pick them up again, it's quite possible we could get the creatures initially listed by generic "category" names like "undead", "dragon", "fey", "abberation", "humanoid", or "animal". That way the combat panel would still yield some useful information, and the creatures could be auto-renamed if anyone in-party IDs them with the appropriate skill.

Now, there are a lot of big "if"s in there- we need custom content selectable at character creation so people can take the "knowledge" skills, custom tlk support so those skills would actually have descriptions (so folks know what they are when taking them)- and we need the renaming functions re-enabled, plus a good dose of scripting to automate the process. None of those are currently available as of 1.05 NWN2.

The first step, though, could be adding back manually the creature "category" as their floatover name. Humanoid, Outsider, Magical Beast, etc- until the rest of the framework is developed, then at least that level of information would be there for folks. Would that be a reasonable compromise position?

[ç i p h é r]

If the visuals allowed you to easily tell the difference between a goblin in dirty leather and a goblin in rusty plate, and to see the accumulated battlescars and the way the creature carries itself, the way it handles its sword, I would agree.

They do not.

Interesting point. I know it's a little less than ideal, but what if these details were given in the creature's description? It doesn't help in real time combat, but then that's the nature of the beast. If you get jumped right away, you wouldn't really have time to notice anything but the most obvious of details - their size, their weapon, their armor perhaps. I should also point out that having the names wouldn't convey such detail either so at-a-glance divination of such things isn't possible.

Of course, if you the player are using the visual as a cue, how is that any different from just sticking the creatures name above its head? I, the player, know its a kobold, even if my character does not. I, the player, might even know its a kobold elite, if all kobold elites wear the same gear, even if my current PC has never met one before How does making its name invisible help?

I assure you that you won't know the vast majority of things you're going to encounter - at least initially - unless you choose to open up the toolset and look through the models. Nothing stops anyone from doing this anymore than someone around the PnP table from opening up the Monster Manual.

All the removal of the name does is screw up the battle-tracking and logging, and make ID a pain in the ass for the player even when it should be easy for the character.

I agree the combat log is a minor problem to which a solution may exist, but IDing a creature shouldn't be easy. The table above should be enough of an indication that such a thing isn't just "common knowledge". That's not to say it shouldn't be common knowledge in ALFA. I'm amenable to a poll if we're finding ourselves in two different camps on the issue. I'll grab the PWC first and have a go at Indio's server to gain a better perspective on the issue.

(Interesting side point - can DMs see the names in the DM logs?)

No. They see what the player sees, but what they can do is pull up the creature's character sheet. Unfortunately, the engine does not give us the ability to tailor name displays to a particular client. Pity it doesn't, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Why not trust us to roleplay our ignorance, the way we did in NWN1?

Speaking for myself, it's not a matter of trust. It's about the overall experience.

Conversely, any fighter that has encountered a score of oozes but who has been forced to spend his skill points on discipline and concentration so that he doesn't get pwned by dire-wolves and smart-ass kobold rogues using taunt, will *also* not be able to identify the ooze.

Discipline is no longer in the game, so you can actually spend skill points more selectively in NWN2. Bear in mind that Fighters are not sages. They will be able to bash most things (bash first, ask questions later ), but they are not travelling books. In general, they're not all that smart and that is reflected in the limted skill points they have. If you really want a smart fighter build, and thus more skill points per level, you can make one, but at the expense of something else, obviously. I know it can be frustrating at times - anyone with PnP experience can attest to that - but this diversity in class skills and abilities is what makes the game really interesting.

[ç i p h é r]

Oh and one small point. DMs can always provide the descriptive flavor text to fill in the gaps for players, as needed.

[fluffmonster]

rarity of skillpoints is something folks just have to live with for any skill check and is a non-factor here. If someone wants to play a knowledgeable PC, then maybe fighter isn't for them.

[darrenhfx]

Mayhem wrote:

If the visuals allowed you to easily tell the difference between a goblin in dirty leather and a goblin in rusty plate, and to see the accumulated battlescars and the way the creature carries itself, the way it handles its sword, I would agree.

They do not.

Maybe you haven't encountered the creatures that had been equiped with rusty armour yet (Indio would you mind throwing in one of the undead-types into the mod that rusty armour if you haven't already?) and I'll have to doublecheck myself but i think that armour quality, at least in terms of rust, can be visually presented. We're not quite at the point of getting scars or sword handling technique in there yet.

[indio]

I've set up group spawns for each humanoid race and skeletons and zombies. Each of those groups have further subdivisions of Low, Elite and Boss. And as it stands, every mob in the released ALFA mob package of the above types are potential spawns.

[Mayhem]

Maybe you haven't encountered the creatures that had been equiped with rusty armour yet (Indio would you mind throwing in one of the undead-types into the mod that rusty armour if you haven't already?) and I'll have to doublecheck myself but i think that armour quality, at least in terms of rust, can be visually presented. We're not quite at the point of getting scars or sword handling technique in there yet.

I'm not talking about recognising armour quality, I'm talking about tellign the difference between brown leather armour and brown metal armour.

There are some partially clothed skellies in the 03 beta, I've killed a few and still have no idea whether they are wearing brown cloth, brown leather, or brown metal. Something that would be instantly obvious to my PC as soon as he saw it - or at least, as soon as he hit it.

Fighting a skellie in a rotten tunic is clearly a different kettle of fish to fighting one in a corroded breastplate

Interesting point. I know it's a little less than ideal, but what if these details were given in the creature's description? It doesn't help in real time combat, but then that's the nature of the beast. If you get jumped right away, you wouldn't really have time to notice anything but the most obvious of details - their size, their weapon, their armor perhaps. I should also point out that having the names wouldn't convey such detail either so at-a-glance divination of such things isn't possible.

My ideal would be to have the floating creature name include a basic description. "Kobold in Scale" "Kobold in Leathers" "Kobold in robes", just to give you something to differentiate them by and give you perfectly IC hint as to what they *might* be able to do.

(Interesting side point - can DMs see the names in the DM logs?)

No. They see what the player sees, but what they can do is pull up the creature's character sheet. Unfortunately, the engine does not give us the ability to tailor name displays to a particular client. Pity it doesn't, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Actually, Vis this question I'm more interested in this from the logging point of view. Should the need arise, it will be very difficult for a DM to review a log (eg for purposes of tech-res or other DM admin type functions) if none of the creatures fought in the course of a session can be identified.

rarity of skillpoints is something folks just have to live with for any skill check and is a non-factor here. If someone wants to play a knowledgeable PC, then maybe fighter isn't for them.

Are you saying that even if the character has encountered the creature dozens of times before, its Metagaming to recognise it unless he has bought sufficient skillpoints?

Next up! The recognise furniture skill! No more will you be embarassed by accidentally sitting on the table, mistaking it for a chair.

[ç i p h é r]

Let's please refrain from needless hyperbole and keep the dialogue constructive.

Thanks.

[indio]

When the gags are as good as Mayhem's it's an easy sin to forgive.

lol

Well, here's my take: It's easy to change, so let's give it a go.

[Mayhem]

Let's please refrain from needless hyperbole and keep the dialogue constructive.

Thanks.

Feel free to ignore the one light-hearted comment at the end. But please take some time to read the rest of the post. The underlying point under that comment - the suggestion characters learn nothing from their experiences except what they spend skillpoints on - is a valid concern I should think.

My PC has fought trolls with other PCs along the long road, who told him that to make them stay dead you need to burn the bodies with fire or acid. I subsequently passed this on to a young hin ranger "apprentice" in Shadowdale.

None of the characters involved had any points in the relevant skill for troll recognition. If we are saying that past experience counts for nothing unless you spend the skill points, then we are saying that despite their many experiences with trolls:

* Use of the use fo fire to burn trolls by all of these characters was meta,

* Actually having these characters recognise their enemies as trolls was meta.

****

Of course, without knowing the DCs of the tests its difficult to comment.

If the DC of recognising common creatures is 5, and the next band up is 10, then only a character with less than average intelligence will fail to recognise these creatures on a take 10. Hopefully that will include all the "workaday beasts" of everyday adventuring.

[Dorn]

rarity of skillpoints is something folks just have to live with for any skill check and is a non-factor here. If someone wants to play a knowledgeable PC, then maybe fighter isn't for them.

So my fighter with int 14 is very good at learning new information and reasoning but becasue he doesn't have lore maxed can't identify stuff?

Also, the dwarf example. So dwarves get an advantage identifying oozes becasue they are underground types.

So does this mean that gold dwarf Barry who was born and raised in Waterdeep as cleric of Tempus in the arena (int 10 lore 1, high wis) and has never been underground gets an advantage over my int 14 fighter (lore 1) who spends his time fighting in the caves of the savage frontier?

Remember ability bonus' are very low in comparison to the effect of skill point availability. Isn't it OOC to choose character levels like rogue (and get sneak attack etc) or wizard (low hps and spells) JUST to get skill points for law and make yourself knowledgable and able to learn if you've already sacrificed ability points from str/const to intelligence to give that 'slant' to your PC?

I agree with many of the points but it seems that we are going to be making general rules/advantages up with trample accross the huge variety of pre-creation backgrounds and post-creation experiences that make a character who he/she is.