| 9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. |
As the title says. Some favored enemies have many varieties such as magic beasts, would a character need to identify the creature as such to gain their bonus?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think it says in the book.
But not in my game, it doesn't.
So an appropriate knowledge check should be made with favored bonus if applicable ... if check succeeds, they get attack/damage bonus. If they fail, no bonus?
The way I look at it is this: Your character needs to remember exactly what a creature is in order to get his bonus? Why?
He just needs to know what KIND of creature it is (Undead, Magical Beast, Monstrous Humanoid, etc.), which is something you can usually tell just by a quick glance at the creature. If it's some weirdass animal with magic powers, it's probably a Magical Beast, if it's a rotting corpse it's an undead. You don't need to know the difference between a Mohrg and a Lich to know they're both Undead.
From an OOC perspective, if they're rolling a Knowledge check they already know what kind of creature it is unless you're the kind of person who make people randomly fling around Knowledge checks to identify things. If you see an Undead you know you're going to make a Kn. Religion check to figure out what it is, so if your character is going "So what kind of X is it?" with his "Knowledge X", then he already knows the creature type. He's not going to look at a Burning Skeleton and go "Well I guess it's not Undead" if he fails his Knowledge check, right?
You could say it's subconscious, and the training takes effect even if they don't know what they are fighting. A ranger may not conscious know an elephant is an animal, but his subconscious does.
Rules as written, I have no idea.
I ask as situation s such as ...
"Twice the size of a human, this horned monstrous warrior weilds a massive blade"
"Loose robes conceal the sand-etched features of this lanky giant. In each hand he grips a scimitar nearly the length of a human"
One is a giant, one is not. Would a character know which is which?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
RAW requires no such check.
You may not know why you get your Favored Enemy bonus, but you still do.
Flavor it as "I don't know why, but I find myself terribly adept at fighting this creature."
To houserule otherwise, would put needless limitations on an already limited ability.
A
An orc sorcerer might try to use Disguise Self for instance to appear as an Elf while he's being chased by the half-elven ranger who's hunting him down.
I would say this very situation is a very good reason why a Ranger should have to identify an enemy.
If a half-elven ranger was attacking an enemy elf, but suddenly started getting unexpected FE bonuses he would immediately know something's up. Unless you don't tell the player he's getting the bonus.
|
|
A
An orc sorcerer might try to use Disguise Self for instance to appear as an Elf while he's being chased by the half-elven ranger who's hunting him down.I would say this very situation is a very good reason why a Ranger should have to identify an enemy.
If a half-elven ranger was attacking an enemy elf, but suddenly started getting unexpected FE bonuses he would immediately know something's up. Unless you don't tell the player he's getting the bonus.
The player might know "something's up", but the PC would not.
This is a "player knowledge versus PC knowledge" situation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hate saying this, but I think it's kind of up to the GM. I know that in my game, I'm not going to tell the Ranger that has Favored Enemy (Dragon) "Go ahead and add your Favored Enemy (Dragon) bonus to this attack on the reoccurring villain that totally looks human and up until you fired your arrow you totally thought was human". That would ruin the surprise when 10 levels later they find out that "EvilSorcererDude" is actually a Dragon!!!
Now, based on some of the reactions here, I may secretly add the bonus in, but I'm not going to give away a piece of things to come because of he attacked a thing that looks like a thing but is actually another thing.
"You aren't sure why, but you just don't like FriendlyMerchantDude much even though he is offering such a great deal on the magic bow you have had your eyes on". That is more in line with foreshadowing a Favored Enemy that is doing a fairly good job at "hiding in plain sight" than, "Yes, add your Favored Enemy (Evil Outsider) to the attack on the dude in the bar fight"...
Shackled City Spoiler
RAW requires no such check.
You may not know why you get your Favored Enemy bonus, but you still do.
Flavor it as "I don't know why, but I find myself terribly adept at fighting this creature."
To houserule otherwise, would put needless limitations on an already limited ability.
Indeed. Not to mention attaching a very hefty skill tax to Favored Enemy if you actually want it to be usable. Especially since most of the monster identifying skills aren't class skills for rangers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
per RAW there is no requirement, it just applies vs. valid creatures.
just like Paladin Smite doesn't require Detect Evil to work,
and in fact works fine even when somebody 'Detects' as a false Good Alignment.
i believe newer classes like Inquisitor are needed to ID the target with Knowledge before getting a bonus.
if something like that WERE applied to Ranger FE, it would change the dynamic a bit,
besides the obvious way (subjugating Rangers' entire combat advantage over Warriors to their Knowledge skills),
(Inquisitors have non-Knowledge dependent combat bonuses in Judgement)
the DC to disguise oneself as a different sub-type of the same creatures type (e.g. Humanoid: Orc, Human, Dwarf)
is easier than to do so between creature types (non-Humanoid creature types are each 1 FE type, not sub-type distinction ala Humanoids)
so those non-Humanoid FE types become easier to identify and thus apply FE bonuses to.
if you are going to use such a system, it also seems reasonable that you can simply allow the Ranger to declare what he assumes the target to be, i.e. without requiring a passed check... if he's wrong, he doesn't get the benefit of FE, but there is no daily usages expent like Smite.
that is pretty much the approach that most corresponds to actual play for me... most creatures will easily 'look like' certain FE humanoid types/ creature types, even if in a few cases that is wrong. IF you roll Knowledge or Perception vs. Disguise, that is an extra chance to realize the truth... but regardless of whether you truly know or not, the FE apply, sometimes you may not act in the most optimized tactical manner if your FE bonuses do/don't apply to a target you do/don't choose to attack, but that's about extend of it's limitations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hate saying this, but I think it's kind of up to the GM. I know that in my game, I'm not going to tell the Ranger that has Favored Enemy (Dragon) "Go ahead and add your Favored Enemy (Dragon) bonus to this attack on the reoccurring villain that totally looks human and up until you fired your arrow you totally thought was human". That would ruin the surprise when 10 levels later they find out that "EvilSorcererDude" is actually a Dragon!!!
If the GM can pull it off that would be great. I would love to do it but would find it very difficult as I play with open dice and rely on the assistance and the cooperation of the players to run the game smoothly. To make this work the GM would have to keep all the stats and rolls secret, otherwise this might happen.
Fighter: I roll a 15 and bonuses of 8 make 23
GM: Miss
Ranger: I roll a 16 and bonuses of 6 make 22
GM: Hit, roll for damage
Fighter: Hey, I got a higher score so how come I missed
GM: Sorry, I can't tell you
Requiring any check to use the FE ultimately nerfs the ability. I think it is better to reveal that the creature's combat style means it qualifies for your favoured enemy bonus. That way you have given the ranger a reward without giving the entire game away and prevent any thoughts of GM fudging.
Fighter: I roll a 15 and bonuses of 8 make 23
GM: Miss
Ranger: I roll a 16 and bonuses of 6 make 22
GM: Hit, roll for damage
Fighter: Hey, I got a higher score so how come I missed
GM: Sorry, I can't tell you
I personally do this stuff all the time. The players don't need to understand how my monsters work, sometimes I'll give a PC a +2 circumstance bonus without telling anyone just to keep them on their toes.
I get some players like to metagame to figure out monster stats, but mine just accept that they don't know everything that goes on behind the screen.
If you can rely on the cooperation of players, I don't see why you can't rely on the cooperation of players to not metagame like that.
As I wrote above though, that FE works regardless of what the Rangers knows about the target is not contestable - it likewise applies if you are in total Darkness and can't see the target at all. It does seem well within the rules to use Knowledge checks to determine if the Ranger character can FORSEE whether their FE bonus will apply or not, but that is distinct from the bonuses actually applying.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Real Answer:
The bonuses should always apply against appropriate foes. It's a game and there is no reason to attempt to deny the use of a class ability. There are enough barriers in the game between the to-hit mechanics, monster defenses and/or terrain and hazard rules to properly challenge a ranger.
IC-vs-OCC Excuse Answer:
They aren't changing how they fight to suit their foe, it's more of something where their combat tactics happen to be more effective against the foes they have as their favored enemies. The ranger fights as usual and those particular foes are generally weak against those kinds of tactics. The Ranger swings his sword with a particular style that giants just can't seem to on average get out of the way of.
Whoa! Is that, like, choosing fluff in a way that is compatable with the RAW, rather than choosing fluff that conflicts with RAW? Who'da thought?
Just passing by...
The FE class feature offers a bonus to Knowledge skill checks against the ranger's FE and let the ranger make such checks untrained. So you should succeed a Knowledge check in order to get a bonus on your Knowledge check??
Sounds odd to me...
+1 to Morgen.
Its a reasonable house rule in the right situations.
There's obviously no RAW answer to this question, although Djelai above makes a good point; how can you have a bonus on Knowledge checks that you need a knowledge check to get?
I propose this way of looking at it - the techniques that work well against whatever favored enemy are just techniques that the ranger has worked into his repertoire, so when his fighting style is put up against a favored enemy, it just works better. He or she is ALWAYS doing those certain things that make him/her more effective against the favored enemy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like a pretty huge oversight in the rules that a ranger has a favoured enemy where the ranger can't tell what his favoured enemy is.Ah but he can, under FE is states
He gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against creatures of his selected type.and
A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures.
There is no RAW support to suggest you need to identify them first. RAW needs to tell you if you have to do something, not tell you that you don't.
To require it is a houserule based on interpretive fluff (and a harsh one, IMO)
Edit: But I can understand the thought process behind the question, and it makes sense in a realism kinda way.
/thread :)
Ah I think you may have mis-interpreted what I was getting at.
All I was pointing out was that a ranger can identify with a knowledge check, not whether they need to.
again, there is no difference here for FE (attack bonuses, knowledge checks) vs. paladin smite.
it may be NICE for the ranger to ID the enemies first, just like it is for the paladin,
in order that they may be able to discern which enemies would be effected and how strongly
(albeit since the ranger isn't expending limited daily usages, it matters less),
but regardless of whether they correctly ID the target, or they say "to hell with it, i'm attacking this bastard with all i got",
they can still make the attack and the bonuses apply depending on the target's type/alignment and nothing else.
same as for a paladin, the target can even have a false alignment aura, the paladin detects it and it says 'good',
but he says 'whatever, this guy is giving me a bad day, i'll smite him anyways', and the smite DOES work,
because smite doesn't care about what the paladin BELIEVES or DETECTS, it cares what the target's TRUE ALIGNMENT is.
same thing here, FE bonuses apply when the target of the check IS one of the favored types, no knowledge needed.
there's nothing in the RAW that suggests the attacks of a blinded ranger who has been charmed into thinking the target is a vampire rabbit are any less supposed to apply FE attack/damage bonuses. (when he doesn't have FE:vampire rabbit)
that is the RAW. sure, i can imagine some fluff that would make that RAW seem wierd.
and i can imagine some fluff that fits just fine with this RAW, as could Morgen up-thread.
IC-vs-OCC Excuse Answer:
They aren't changing how they fight to suit their foe, it's more of something where their combat tactics happen to be more effective against the foes they have as their favored enemies. The ranger fights as usual and those particular foes are generally weak against those kinds of tactics. The Ranger swings his sword with a particular style that giants just can't seem to on average get out of the way of.
given that the RAW is all we have here, unless Jason Bulmahn came to visit you in the night and whispered the secret intent of this ability in your ear, i would say the prudent approach is to assume that the ability works like it says, and that it succesfully implements the desired imagery that was planned. maybe in the type of movies or fiction you like, there is some other 'favored enemy training' whose fluff wouldn't match this. ok... but how do we know that THIS ability IS the mechanical implementation of THAT fluff concept? we don't. maybe that is for some other feat, or who knows what. the ranger FE ability doesn't have to be the mechanical implementation of that concept, FE can be implementing some OTHER fluff concept, right?
again, there is no difference here for FE (attack bonuses, knowledge checks) vs. paladin smite.
it may be NICE for the ranger to ID the enemies first, just like it is for the paladin,
in order that they may be able to discern which enemies would be effected and how strongly
(albeit since the ranger isn't expending limited daily usages, it matters less),
but regardless of whether they correctly ID the target, or they say "to hell with it, i'm attacking this bastard with all i got",
they can still make the attack and the bonuses apply depending on the target's type/alignment and nothing else.
same as for a paladin, the target can even have a false alignment aura, the paladin detects it and it says 'good',
but he says 'whatever, this guy is giving me a bad day, i'll smite him anyways', and the smite DOES work,
because smite doesn't care about what the paladin BELIEVES or DETECTS, it cares what the target's TRUE ALIGNMENT is.
same thing here, FE bonuses apply when the target of the check IS one of the favored types, no knowledge needed.
This is probably the best justification that I've seen thus far in the thread. A Paladin without Detect <Alignment> can attempt to Smite a target without knowing its alignment; if the target is evil, then it still gets nuked - but the DM doesn't have to necessarily relay this information to the player, and in my case I would simply have him read off the damage and then add in the appropriate bonuses.
Now, in the case of a Paladin, the player could logically ask, "Did the powers of my god seem to burn him when I attacked (i.e., was the Smite effective?" and the DM could allow a Perception check to find out. In the case of our Ranger and his favored enemy, after doing extra damage to an enemy once or twice due to his FE bonus, I might make a secret Perception check and (if he succeeds), slip him a note that says, "Your arrows seem to be causing the enemy a lot of grief."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, in the priest/dragon example, if the ranger had favored enemy (human) would he get the bonus until someone told him it was really a dragon? Could the party wizard use illusions to give the ranger his FE bonus against everything?
Or just play a Don Quixote type, and think every foe you face is a member of the FE, even if it is just a Windmill/Gazebo. I can see the following conversation happening. ;-)
Player - "That guy looks like an Orc"
DM - "He's not an Orc"
Player - "It's Orcish Trickery, it is an Orc"
DM - <sigh> Make a Knowledge Check
Player - <rolls a 2 and has a +2 modifier> "I failed, It's an Orc"
Real Answer:
The bonuses should always apply against appropriate foes. It's a game and there is no reason to attempt to deny the use of a class ability. There are enough barriers in the game between the to-hit mechanics, monster defenses and/or terrain and hazard rules to properly challenge a ranger.IC-vs-OCC Excuse Answer:
They aren't changing how they fight to suit their foe, it's more of something where their combat tactics happen to be more effective against the foes they have as their favored enemies. The ranger fights as usual and those particular foes are generally weak against those kinds of tactics. The Ranger swings his sword with a particular style that giants just can't seem to on average get out of the way of.
I'd go with this in a game I ran.
I'm reading Favored Enemy in Core right now...
RAW it just says you hit more and do more damage, nothing seems to say you have to identify them for that part to work, and so coming to a "say what you can do" vs "say what you can't do" ruleset debate, I think RAW says you get the bonuses.
Now RAI... especially since an identification bonus is mentioned... who knows? I'll tap this for a FAQ though, as it's an interesting point.
The thing that bothers me about having polymorph affect Favored Enemy is that it means a smart enemy (or player) could dodge favored enemy with just an Alter Self spell.
Just have everyone Alter Self themselves into halflings for free immunity to rangers. No one EVER takes Favored Enemy (halfing). Other random and uncommon humanoid races work equally well.
As to players metagaming, 1) they never have to be told about this bonus, tell them they never worry about it and the GM will take consideration of it for every enemy. the player never needs to know the FE-adjusted to-hit or damage values. 2) if they start metagaming further comparing to-hit values to discern if FE is applying or not, they are just ruining the game thru their own elective actions, it is not a problem with the rules themself, if a player is spending this much energy to simply metagame they are detracting from the rest of the game.
|
I would require the ranger to recognize the target as a member of his favored enemy group, but that would be automatic unless the target has taken actions to disguise what he is.
I.e.: you recognize a minotaur from a giant and can place them in the correct category without any check, and use your appropriate favored enemy bonus.
You don't recognize the polymorphed dragon in human form unless you make a appropriate check against his disguise check.
AFAIK there isn't even any rules for determining a creature's type, or the DC for that Knowledge check, it should presumably be less difficult than ID'ing the exact creature type itself, but then again maybe a certain creature is known but it's classification isn't... so once again, stick with the non-problematic RAW, or go down the rabbit hole of creating your own problems.
i agree that the ranger, or anybody else, should be ABLE to ID creatures/make Knoweledge checks to realize whether or not their FE applies to that type or not, and that can be useful in prioritizing targets of different types, but that isn't a necessary pre-cursor to FE bonuses applying, it may just lead you to more often choosing the targets where it does apply, and as such it remains a useful thing to do that isn't marginalized from the game by not requiring it for FE to work at all.
2) if they start metagaming further comparing to-hit values to discern if FE is applying or not, they are just ruining the game thru their own elective actions, it is not a problem with the rules themself, if a player is spending this much energy to simply metagame they are detracting from the rest of the game.While I agree with you that a given player is ruining the game for himself with this kind of behavior, and it's on his own head, I think you overlook the fact that a player can do the metagaming, and blurt it out to the rest of the players. Thus ruining their game. And yes, this is a case of dealing with a problem player.
However, why use a backdoor solution to head-off a problem player and stick to strict RAW when there is a simple, and obvious, house-rule fix that doesn't significantly reduce the power of FE while simultaneously improving the believability of your game?
This:
I'm always in favor of minor tweaks that make the RAW actually make sense in-game. FE working on polymorphed, unidentified FE's doesn't make sense in game, even if it's RAW.I would require the ranger to recognize the target as a member of his favored enemy group, but that would be automatic unless the target has taken actions to disguise what he is.
I.e.: you recognize a minotaur from a giant and can place them in the correct category without any check, and use your appropriate favored enemy bonus.
You don't recognize the polymorphed dragon in human form unless you make a appropriate check against his disguise check.
While that's all fine, the question of this thread is "What is the RAW?"
So many of these "What is the RAW?" threads quickly devolve into "What should the rule be?", an interesting question to be sure, but let's not confuse these good ideas you're suggesting with the actual RAW.
(Not aimed at you so much BillyGoat, you make a lot of sense, just a general reminder what messageboard section we're in (: )
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really? Do you need to identify a creature that you cast Instant Enemy on?
It would be treated as your favored enemy, and with the "identify first" rule, you would still need to do it.
Want to keep the type super secret? Have the player give a list of his favored enemies, and his bonuses.
Boom! Inability to not metagame problem solved.