I love this ability and what you did with Bardic Knowledge
I love that Bardic Knowledge seems more usable and quantifiable now, instead of a constant balancing/judging problem for the DM. I REALLY can't wait to begin playtesting a bard!
Director of Games
|
Question at every level you gain an additional rank in a knowledge skill but when I read it I couldn't tell if it is supposed to be the same skill every time or if you can chose a new knowledge skill each level up, which is it Jason?
It is the same skill every time.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Question at every level you gain an additional rank in a knowledge skill but when I read it I couldn't tell if it is supposed to be the same skill every time or if you can chose a new knowledge skill each level up, which is it Jason?It is the same skill every time.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thank you for answering that question, so basically a bard now has one knowledge he is pretty much guaranteed to always get right (or at least to always be maxed if he doesn't choose to put a rank in it) and then a boost on all other knowledges.
Ok question two, if you get this bonus rank are you allowed to exceed the ranks per level by putting a rank in it, I.e. can you at level up put a rank in it and the bonus rank for a doubled knowledge skill or is it just supposed to be a skill that is always at max ranks, I'm just trying to wrap my head around it, I love it though.
The Lore Master ability gives the bard the ability to take 10 on trained Knowledge checks.
Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.
The Lore Master ability gives the bard the ability to take 10 on trained Knowledge checks.
Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.
Thank you, I was waiting for someone to say that. I'm surprised no one came out and said it, and I didn't want to be the one. But yeah, taking 10 on a knowledge skill = not that exciting. In fact it's very mundane.
Now what would be cool is if bards got a bonus to all knowledge checks, or count as trained in all knowledge skills when using that skill.
Well, remember, taking 10 requires you to not be distracted or threatened, so the ability to reliably point out monster weaknesses in the heat of battle has some merit. Although I do agree that it is less "awesome" in play than it actually appears on paper.
Now, if knowledge checks to know about monsters took more than a free action, and the lore master ability removed a penalty for doing it quickly, then it could be considered cool.
I mean, come on, in the span of six seconds, maybe 3 or 4 if were assuming you are using the "free action" caveat of speaking during a round, can you list off to your allies in an understandable manner the primary offensive and defensive abilities of:
A goblin?
A green dragon?
A xorn?
A kulkichir?
A yrthak?
An ahuizotl?
A delver?
I sure couldnt, past the first 2 and maybe the ahuizotl because I ran one a few weeks ago.
Am I the only one who thinks the "reactive knowledge check" is a bit... overpowered? Its not the greatest word for the situation, but being able to instantly recall what is effectively the entire monster's entry as a free action is kind of overwhelming in scale. Maybe its just me.
Well, remember, taking 10 requires you to not be distracted or threatened, so the ability to reliably point out monster weaknesses in the heat of battle has some merit. Although I do agree that it is less "awesome" in play than it actually appears on paper.
Bards don't get that ability, though. They don't get the ability to "Take 10, even when distracted or under stress". They get the ability to take 10 - which is already available to everyone. The "always-on" part of the Lore Master ability isn't an ability at all, it's available to every character ever made in 3.5/Pathfinder.
|
|
The Lore Master ability gives the bard the ability to take 10 on trained Knowledge checks.
Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.
Um wrong, no one can take 10 on knowledge checks, there is no retry and there is no taking time to make sure you know it, also it can't be used untrained except to learn things that are common knowledge (DC 10 or less)
If you're going to knock a skill do it based on the rules. This one works with RAW unless and if you've houseruled that you're able to take ten on a knowledge skill that isn't RAW
The DC for Knowledge checks against monsters is 10 + the monsters HD. If you succeed, you get one piece of information. For every five you get higher than that, you get one additional piece of info.
Thats hardly the entire monsters stat block. Usually my players manage between zero and three pieces of info. They almost always want to know the follow things in order:
Whats the DR?
Whats the SR?
Whats the energy resistance?
Whats the main attack form?
Now just because they know what the SOB's DR is doesn't necessarily mean they can do anything about it. And sometimes it takes a round of casting to prepare a weapon for combat against the critter.
The only real reason any of my mages want to know the SR is they don't want to waist spells on something that will likely brush it off.
I'm not a fan of the "allowed performance types". Soothing Performance(?) and music isn't a choice? Does anyone else have a problem with this?
Yes, absolutely -- but that's a matter for a different thread. This one's about the Lore Master ability. Which I love.
The Lore Master ability gives the bard the ability to take 10 on trained Knowledge checks.
Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.
Um wrong, no one can take 10 on knowledge checks, there is no retry and there is no taking time to make sure you know it, also it can't be used untrained except to learn things that are common knowledge (DC 10 or less)
If you're going to knock a skill do it based on the rules. This one works with RAW unless and if you've houseruled that you're able to take ten on a knowledge skill that isn't RAW
No dude, having no retry means you can't take a 20 on Knowledge, but according to the SRD you can take a 10 whenever you aren't threatened or distracted, and since the Knowledge skill doesn't say you can't take a 10, you can take a 10, which is part of why knowing common knowledge is DC 10. Case in point, the 3.0 PHB, which specified which skills you can take a 10 and 20 with, said you can take a 10 on Knowledge.
More than that the only skill in 3.5 that specifically states you can't take a 10 is Use Magic Device. Now why would they go out of their way to tell you you can't take a 10 on only one skill? Supposedly this would make sense for Concentration, but since you're using that to prevent being distracted anyway it's a moot point I guess.
Um wrong, no one can take 10 on knowledge checks, there is no retry and there is no taking time to make sure you know it, also it can't be used untrained except to learn things that are common knowledge (DC 10 or less)
If you're going to knock a skill do it based on the rules. This one works with RAW unless and if you've houseruled that you're able to take ten on a knowledge skill that isn't RAW
As mentioned, you're 100% incorrect. There is precisely one skill in the SRD that a character cannot take 10 with: Use Magic Device. No retry and no use untrained has nothing to do with ability to take 10 with a skill. Taking 10 isn't at all like taking 20; with take 20, you're considered to fail the skill 19 times before rolling a 20 - you make 20 rolls, effectively. That's why you can't take 20 on a skill that can't be retried on a failure; take 20 is defined as failing multiple times.
With take 10, you make exactly one phantom roll, and it's a 10. There's no auto-success or auto-failure implied or defined with taking 10; it doesn't matter if you can re-try on a failure.
As far as the untrained usage, no, you can't take 10 on a skill that is trained-only IF YOU AREN'T TRAINED IN IT. There's no rule that prevents a character from taking 10 on a trained-only skill, and no rule that prevents you from taking 10 on a skill you aren't trained in, as long as it's a skill that can be used at all untrained. Knowledge is usable untrained, there's just an upper limit to the knowledge that can be gleaned from an untrained use. And that doesn't apply to the Bard anyway, because they are considered trained in all Knowledge skills.
So, please, know the rules before you make claims about the rules.
|
First you stated A:
[...]Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.
Then you stated B:
[...]As far as the untrained usage, no, you can't take 10 on a skill that is trained-only IF YOU AREN'T TRAINED IN IT.
Knowledge is a trained-only skill.
According to A, you can take 10 in Knowledge without ranks i.e. without training.
According to B, you can't take 10 in Knowledge without ranks i.e. without training.
Which one is it?
First you stated A:
[...]Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.Then you stated B:
[...]As far as the untrained usage, no, you can't take 10 on a skill that is trained-only IF YOU AREN'T TRAINED IN IT.Knowledge is a trained-only skill.
According to A, you can take 10 in Knowledge without ranks i.e. without training.
According to B, you can't take 10 in Knowledge without ranks i.e. without training.Which one is it?
Taking 10 in a trained-only skill that you are untrained in is stupid. You cannot use the skill in the first place at all, as you are untrained in a trained-only skill.
|
|
There's no rule that prevents a character from taking 10 on a trained-only skill, and no rule that prevents you from taking 10 on a skill you aren't trained in, as long as it's a skill that can be used at all untrained.
3.5
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htmChecks Without Rolls
A skill check represents an attempt to accomplish some goal, usually while under some sort of time pressure or distraction. Sometimes, though, a character can use a skill under more favorable conditions and eliminate the luck factor.
Taking 10
When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10.
Knowledge is usable untrained, there's just an upper limit to the knowledge that can be gleaned from an untrained use.
3.5 SRD
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/knowledge.htmKnowledge (Int; Trained Only)
[...]
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/skillDescriptions.htm
Trained Only
If this notation is included in the skill name line, you must have at least 1 rank in the skill to use it. If it is omitted, the skill can be used untrained (with a rank of 0). If any special notes apply to trained or untrained use, they are covered in the Untrained section (see below).
Alpha 3, p.54
Table 5–4: New Skills
[..]
Knowledge (arcana) [...] Untrained: No
Knowledge (dungeoneering) [...] Untrained: No
...
Alpha 3, p.60
Knowledge (Arcana) (Int; Trained Only)
You have studied the secrets of magic and can identify
spell effects that are in place. [...]
So, please, know the rules before you make claims about the rules.
Hmmm...
Regardless of the final rules interpretation, this thread argument clearly suggests that the text needs additional clarification.
But it doesn't! They are Trained-only skills; therefore you cannot take 10 in them untrained, as you cannot use them at all untrained. This is a very simple, rules-based answer.
Since bards can use them untrained, they can take 10. You can always take 10 on a skill that you can use (like Bards and untrained knowledge skills) as long as the skill does not prohibit taking 10.|
|
You can always take 10 on a skill that you can use (like Bards and untrained knowledge skills) as long as the skill does not prohibit taking 10.
Not quite always.
3.5http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm
Checks Without Rolls
[...]
Taking 10
When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10.
Not quite always.
3.5
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm
Checks Without Rolls
[...]
Taking 10
When your character is not being threatened or distracted, you may choose to take 10. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check, calculate your result as if you had rolled a 10. For many routine tasks, taking 10 makes them automatically successful. Distractions or threats (such as combat) make it impossible for a character to take 10.
In which case, like I said, taking 10 would be prohibited.
|
|
Alpha 3, p. 20
Lore Master (Ex): At 5th level, the bard becomes a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that he has ranks in.
If this is inspired by the Rogue Skill Mastery advanced talent, the following clarification would resolve the argument:
Tweak
Lore Master (Ex): At 5th level, the bard becomes a master of lore and can take 10 on any Knowledge skill check that he has ranks in even if stress and distractions would normally prevent him from doing so.
No opinion one way or the other. But it seems that a couple words of explanatory text, even if totally extraneous, would neatly obviate the need for further discussion.
First you stated A:
[...]Problem: Everyone can take 10 on Knowledge checks - even if they have no ranks in the skill.Then you stated B:
[...]As far as the untrained usage, no, you can't take 10 on a skill that is trained-only IF YOU AREN'T TRAINED IN IT.Knowledge is a trained-only skill.
According to A, you can take 10 in Knowledge without ranks i.e. without training.
According to B, you can't take 10 in Knowledge without ranks i.e. without training.Which one is it?
Knowledge can be used untrained. I love how you conveniently only quote the portion of the SRD that agrees with your pedantism, though:
Untrained
An untrained Knowledge check is simply an Intelligence check. Without actual training, you know only common knowledge (DC 10 or lower).
Now what would be cool is if bards got a bonus to all knowledge checks, or count as trained in all knowledge skills when using that skill.
Don't they? I thought that was one of the first abilities they got.
|
|
Knowledge can be used untrained. I love how you conveniently only quote the portion of the SRD that agrees with your pedantism, though:
Untrained
An untrained Knowledge check is simply an Intelligence check. Without actual training, you know only common knowledge (DC 10 or lower).
At your service. It appears that your quote-fu is strong. :-)
Well thankfully it seems this whole thing became clarified while I was gone. Yes you can take 10 in Knowledge untrained because you can take a 10 with ability checks (like the text says, and untrained Knowledge check is an Intelligence check), you just wouldn't know more than DC 10. But yeah, taking 10 in Knowledge is allowed if you're trained in it.
But now that we've proven that, it only further reiterates the point that Lore Master is only half useful in that it lets you take 20 on a knowledge skill once per level per day. That's friggn' awesome, but letting you take 10 on a trained skill is incredibly redundant.
Good EnWorld analysis: Go to Bardic Knowledge analysis.
|
|
Hey Locworks thank you for sticking up for me while I was gone (funny because I thought to write exactly what you wrote before I read it about the two opposing statements), I appreciate that. In the end both of us (not you locworks) were a little wrong. But it doesn't change the fact that it isn't a useless ability because it allows you to take ten when a monster is attacking you to glean information which is something you normally aren't able to do.
|
|
Good EnWorld analysis: Go to Bardic Knowledge analysis.
Good read. Bear in mind that the post was made on April 29th. The "bardful" Alpha 3 was out on May 21st.
|
|
Hey Locworks thank you for sticking up for me while I was gone (funny because I thought to write exactly what you wrote before I read it about the two opposing statements), I appreciate that. In the end both of us (not you locworks) were a little wrong. But it doesn't change the fact that it isn't a useless ability because it allows you to take ten when a monster is attacking you to glean information which is something you normally aren't able to do.
Ad maiorem ludi gloriam!
Thanks to the discussion, we also highlighted a few areas which could do with some tweaking terminology- and ruleswise.
I find rather problematic the Lore master in higher levels. Most Knowledge DC end up around DC 30, specially in story related knowledge. Not hit dice related. So Let say a bard at level 12 has 12 ranks in knowledge of arcana. And has +2 int. +3 because is class skill, and half her level. 6. You End up with a static 23 in that rank. If she takes 20 you have a raw 43. This is far more that most knowledge requires. And since you can do it once per day and those story related knowledge don't come as often as a swing of a blade. The bard ends up knowing it ALL. I really don’t enjoy placing pieces of information that are just absolutely unknown. It feels like cheating the players. The take ten can be a problem too, because it eliminates the chance of failure, meaning that below certain DC a characters knows it all again, an given a 23 skill. DC 33 seems pretty obscure knowledge. Perhaps level 12 seems pretty high but In 5 level is 22 still. I just want to be able to add certain chance of failure. I am cool with a very knowledgeable person but not nearly omniscient.