I searched the boards but can't find if the subject of Knowledge (local) was brought up here in the Pathfinder Society discussion group. What's everyone's thought about this skill in how a person originating from, let's say Taldor, could, by rule, make a knowledge (local) check when adventuring in Osirion? It becomes more strange if a PC is leaving their small village in Varisia for the first time yet can roll a knowledge (local) check to know the inner-workings of the merchant streets in Qadira. Referencing the first example, wouldn't it make more sense if the skill was chosen by country, for example, knowledge (local: Taldor) and Knowledge (local: Osirion)? Then, when adventuring in that country, a PC could make a Knowledge (local) roll but not in others. Though if this was the case it'll be too costly in skill points to choose every country in Golarion. Instead, following the thought that K:local is too general, is it more prudent to take the skill by continent? If so, then a PC could take Knowledge (local: Avistan) and/or (local: Garund). Perhaps I'm making this too complex but thought to ask what you all thought.

Yes. There's a big wide hole in the idea of the skill.

There is a bit of "this is how things work in the streets..." know-how, and perhaps a bit of "the best way to find out things like that are..." Generally though, yes, it's a crazy skill if you move around a lot. In an earlier campaign I started giving out free ranks in Kn(Local) every level, specific to wherever they were during that level.

In some ways, it's more of a 'sandbox game' or NPC skill. All that said though, as a DM sometimes it's nice to be able to say, "Hey, you have Knowledge Local right?"

I could go either way on this, so I'll play devil's advocate and argue the other point. Someone with good contacts from thier knowledge of thier home area, would be able to get names of reliable contacts in the other areas of the world. These contacts give them the local information as soon as they get to the location, and then they know the local gossip for this area as well

In the society it could also represent studying books on the locations in question between getting the information on where they are going, and getting there.

There's a lot of stepping on toes between Knowledge (local) and gather information (now a part of the Diplomacy skill).

KNOWLEDGE
(INT; TRAINED ONLY)
You are educated in a field of study and can answer both simple and complex questions. Like the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, Knowledge actually encompasses a number of different specialties. Below are listed typical fields of study.

Local (legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids)

Know local laws, rulers, and popular locations Local 10
Know a common rumor or local tradition Local 15
Know hidden organizations, rulers, and locations Local 20

Just the way it reads to me is that you have a way of learning this information, or of hearing it in your travels. I do not feel you shoudl have to take a different skill for each region. You should however have penalties to areas you have not been in.

Edit: Gather Information: You can also use Diplomacy to gather information about a specific topic or individual. To do this, you must spend at least 1d4 hours canvassing people at local taverns, markets, and gathering places. The DC of this check depends on the obscurity of the information sought, but for most commonly known facts or rumors it is 10. For obscure or secret knowledge, the DC might increase to 20 or higher. The GM might rule that some topics are simply unknown to common folk.

KNOWLEDGE

(INT; TRAINED ONLY)
You are educated in a field of study and can answer both simple and complex questions. Like the Craft, Perform, and Profession skills, Knowledge actually encompasses a number of different specialties. Below are listed typical fields of study.

Local (legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids)

Know local laws, rulers, and popular locations Local 10
Know a common rumor or local tradition Local 15
Know hidden organizations, rulers, and locations Local 20

Just the way it reads to me is that you have a way of learning this information, or of hearing it in your travels. I do not feel you shoudl have to take a different skill for each region. You should however have penalties to areas you have not been in.

Edit: Gather Information: You can also use Diplomacy to gather information about a specific topic or individual. To do this, you must spend at least 1d4 hours canvassing people at local taverns, markets, and gathering places. The DC of this check depends on the obscurity of the information sought, but for most commonly known facts or rumors it is 10. For obscure or secret knowledge, the DC might increase to 20 or higher. The GM might rule that some topics are simply unknown to common folk.

I think Rene's point is that when actually playing Pathfinder Society scenarios and not merely reading from the rulebook, there's no advantage or disadvantage based on a PC's nation of origin or faction. In a PFS scenario, there is a DC assigned to a skill that is not adjusted. It doesn't say "Knowledge (Local) DC 20, or DC 10 for PCs from Taldor". A GM may decide to make an adjustment based on circumstances at the table, but most GMs in the absence of author guidance simply accept the DC as the target number. Rene has a valid point and I'd welcome the subdivision of Knowledge (Local) in a future GtPFSOP.

But doesn’t that make Knowledge(local) unnecessarily difficult in comparison to other knowledge skills? If you make Knowledge(local) location based, shouldn't you make Knowledge(History) and Knowledge(Nobility) location based? In fact, it 'could' be applicable for any Knowledge skill.

Yes, it probably makes more sense for knowledge skills to be location-based but there is a lot more implications if you change it. And who's to say that the DC's aren’t already based on the character not being a native. In that case you'd want to give a bonus to the native character.

If the core rules wanted a different Knowledge (Local) for different areas it would say so. One Knowledge (Local) skill fits all.

'Nuff said.

If the core rules wanted a different Knowledge (Local) for different areas it would say so. One Knowledge (Local) skill fits all.

'Nuff said.

This is the Pathfinder Society discussion area however, so since the core rules are written to cover a broad range of campaign settings they really couldn't drill down into subdivisions of what constitutes 'local knowledge'. The seed of this conversation comes from a previous organized play campaign that did divide Knowledge (Local) into six different metaregions. It was a successful campaign detail that departed from the Core Rules, but made the skill more distinct. The appropriate Knowledge (Local) became more valuable since it wasn't as common.

I hate to make a GURPS reference. . . but I see the skill Knowledge (Local) as working like the Savoir-Faire skill.

But doesn’t that make Knowledge(local) unnecessarily difficult in comparison to other knowledge skills? If you make Knowledge(local) location based, shouldn't you make Knowledge(History) and Knowledge(Nobility) location based? In fact, it 'could' be applicable for any Knowledge skill.

PG, I think you have a point here. You got me. It does make it more difficult when you have to spread skill points around. But it also makes it more valuable when you have the right one. I GM a lot more than I play, so I'm in favor of making things more difficult for the players ;)

Yes, it probably makes more sense for knowledge skills to be location-based but there is a lot more implications if you change it. And who's to say that the DC's aren’t already based on the character not being a native. In that case you'd want to give a bonus to the native character.

I think as a GM I need to pay more attention to where the PCs hail from and if there are Knowledge (Local) checks in the scenario, I'll need to consider granting circumstance bonuses or penalties. There should be advantages to adventuring in Qadira if you are Qadiran.

I have no interest in sub-dividing the Knowledge (local) skill and thus radically changing it from it's listing on page 100 in the Core Rulebook. Knowledge (local) covers just what it says it covers. For some, this might seem "unrealistic," but I'm okay with the flavor interpretation that Knowledge (local) is a skill that governs your PCs' ability to find out certain things about local affairs.

I have no interest in sub-dividing the Knowledge (local) skill and thus radically changing it from it's listing on page 100 in the Core Rulebook. Knowledge (local) covers just what it says it covers. For some, this might seem "unrealistic," but I'm okay with the flavor interpretation that Knowledge (local) is a skill that governs your PCs' ability to find out certain things about local affairs.

I've given that response to players in the past and the response I got was "then what does gather info do?"

I've given that response to players in the past and the response I got was "then what does gather info do?"

There is no Gather Information skill in Pathfinder.

Gather information is now a subset of diplomacy and states, "You can also use Diplomacy to gather information about a specific topic or individual."

Whereas Knowledge (local) is defined as covering such typical fields of study as "legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids."

In some ways, the Diplomacy subset and Knowledge (local) do step on each others' toes. I'm okay with that and I'm not going to make a Pathfinder Society-specific ruling on the matter.

Sebastian wrote:

I've given that response to players in the past and the response I got was "then what does gather info do?"

There is no Gather Information skill in Pathfinder.

What!??! I totally missed this! If you will excuse me, I need to write a Very Angry post asking whether it's too late to make changes in the final rules and demanding immediate errata.

It becomes more strange if a PC is leaving their small village in Varisia for the first time yet can roll a knowledge (local) check to know the inner-workings of the merchant streets in Qadira.

I'd suggest that this character probably doesn't have Knowledge (local). The skill represents broad knowledge of customs, laws, and legends from various countries. The higher your skill the more exotic or in-depth the knowledge your character has. But someone who has never traveled, or hasn't learned anything about cultures outside their own probably doesn't have the Knowledge (local) skill at all.

It's difficult to portray a character with a lot of knowledge about local things and no knowledge of the outside world within the DnD system. There are a lot of things that the game doesn't simulate well. This doesn't particularly bother me, and I expect it's not much of an issue for most people. DnD isn't a simulationist game. It's not meant to allow for the portrayal of any and every character concept ever conceived in fantasy literature. The rules are meant to be fair, fun and easy. Not to be the most realistic representation of a fantasy world.

So, would it make more sense? Perhaps, if your goal is to represent all characters that could exist. But that's not the goal. So, it makes more sense to make it a generalized knowledge and cover a broader base of character concepts with a simple and easy rule.

It doesn't say "Knowledge (Local) DC 20, or DC 10 for PCs from Taldor". A GM may decide to make an adjustment based on circumstances at the table, but most GMs in the absence of author guidance simply accept the DC as the target number.

+2 circumstance bonus can be the player's best friend. A LOT of creativity, role playing, synergy and "the way I think things should work" can be shoe-horned into the rules under "+2 circumstance bonus."

Also, if it helps, think of K(local) as Streetwise.

Thanks for all the replies. I was interested to know what you all thought. I wasn't hinting Pathfinder Society should consider revising the skill mechanic. It was better asking here than in the general Pathfinder RPG boards. I also kept the question away from the rules board to not have people think I wanted a ruling. The skill's use crossed my mind from time to time. I wanted to get a feel for how other people perceived it.

What I'm understanding is for home games GMs have made it their own instead of using it strictly as written. For organized play it's best to keep it simple. I agree with both takes on it.

Thanks for all the replies. I was interested to know what you all thought. I wasn't hinting Pathfinder Society should consider revising the skill mechanic. It was better asking here than in the general Pathfinder RPG boards. I also kept the question away from the rules board to not have people think I wanted a ruling. The skill's use crossed my mind from time to time. I wanted to get a feel for how other people perceived it.

What I'm understanding is for home games GMs have made it their own instead of using it strictly as written. For organized play it's best to keep it simple. I agree with both takes on it.

Right. In Pathfinder Society games, you do as James says. In home games make whatever house rules works best for you and your group. And if you want an example of one way to do it, then check out the 3.5 version of the Player's Guide to Faerun.

Skills are just that, skills and to keep current in any skill one must train, research ecta.
While the arcanist researchs more complex topics, the scounderal will trade stories with every which person he meets, not every single part of the game is played out, for example it maybe interesting to know what you guys are eating in the dark undergroun cavern your exploring.
It gives an element of girt and desperation.

However are you going to go into detail about toilet arangements, thats uninteresting and no body wants to talk about that.

The wizards day in a life of gave you a bit of insight into what people do in there off time.
Your just taking a ship to this place and the guy just lands and he knows all about how is that possiable?!
Well because he talked to all of the sailors and the times that had over here and he put two and two together.

Anyway thats my thoughts.

I just think rather than dismiss something out right you should try... and see thing in the way they in vision.