How would you roll a memory check in Pathfinder?


Rules Questions


If you had a player who perhaps heard something said a long time ago (months in RL) and now has to recall it in-game, how would you have them roll for it if you wanted to remind them but not just give it away?

Thanks!


I would do it as a "roll a d20; if it's less than or equal to your Intelligence score, you remember".


Denim N Leather wrote:

If you had a player who perhaps had heard something said a long time ago (months in RL) and now has to recall it in-game, how would you have them roll it if you wanted to remind them but not just give it away?

Thanks!

My group has something called a 'gut check'. For times when the character should probably know something but the player clearly doesnt we have them roll against dcs along the lines of gather info where their bonus is int+wis+character level.

DC:
5. Duh you Just saw that
10. You should probably know this
15. you might remember
20. where did we put that map?
25. How do we get back out of this maze?
30. There was a blue bird in the window outside the castle when we met the king last year.


Thanks for the input!

I was originally going to do it as an Int check, but that is always a pain due to new role players and being told to always roll OVER a target number and now being told to roll UNDER a target number ... it's just confusing for some people.

Really like the gut-check mechanic. Thanks!


Denim N Leather wrote:

Thanks for the input!

I was originally going to do it as an Int check, but that is always a pain due to new role players and being told to always roll OVER a target number and now being told to roll UNDER a target number ... it's just confusing for some people.

Really like the gut-check mechanic. Thanks!

Never, ever have someone do roll 'under' their stat.....that's going back several editions to the land of craziness. The current system (since 3.0), onward, supports a simple int check the same way as every other d20 check.....roll 1d20, add your int mod, try to reach a DC.


Farabor wrote:

The current system (since 3.0), onward, supports a simple int check the same way as every other d20 check.....roll 1d20, add your int mod, try to reach a DC.

The problem with this is that unless you're a Wizard, your int mod is going to be +1 or +2 at most. That means the result of the roll is entirely random. That's just pure silliness. There's a reason that there's no such thing as a pure-stat check in the default rules. Stats are always added to some other scaling modifier to determine your bonus, never used by themselves (the obvious exception of untrained skill checks just prove how silly it is to treat memory as an untrained skill check).

Rolling under your ability score provides a means to roll a viable stat check. It's unfortunate that stat checks rolled the normal way just are not viable in a mathematical sense, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.


Zurai wrote:
Farabor wrote:

The current system (since 3.0), onward, supports a simple int check the same way as every other d20 check.....roll 1d20, add your int mod, try to reach a DC.

The problem with this is that unless you're a Wizard, your int mod is going to be +1 or +2 at most. That means the result of the roll is entirely random. That's just pure silliness. There's a reason that there's no such thing as a pure-stat check in the default rules. Stats are always added to some other scaling modifier to determine your bonus, never used by themselves (the obvious exception of untrained skill checks just prove how silly it is to treat memory as an untrained skill check).

Rolling under your ability score provides a means to roll a viable stat check. It's unfortunate that stat checks rolled the normal way just are not viable in a mathematical sense, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Umm...Just to contradict you, there are several places where pure stat rolls are made. Strength check DCs to destroy objects/break free from entangle/etc. Constitution checks to stabilize.

I know in 3.5, there was a whole second in the rules talking about the philosophy of when to have something be a stat check vs a saving throw vs a skill check, for how much you wanted levels to impact the relative ability of people to make the roll.


Ah, yes, sorry. I forgot we house-ruled all those away. The Strength check on entangle is especially stupid, because it's fairly easy to get it to "impossible".

I maintain that roll-under-stat is a much, much better way to roll a memory check. It scales more smoothly, it provides much finer control of your chance of success, and it's dramatically less random.


Zurai wrote:
Ah, yes, sorry. I forgot we house-ruled all those away. The Strength check on entangle is especially stupid, because it's fairly easy to get it to "impossible".

On the plus side, while they didn't change the escape artist table, they did change the text on the pathfinder entangle to make it less utterly broken....all the rolls to get out of it are now the same as the original save DC, not crazy high 20+s for a level 1 spell.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My suggestion: Have the player who's trying to remember make an Intelligence check.

If you, as the GM, know that in order for the adventure to progress the PC HAS to remember the forgotten info, then no matter what the player rolls on that check, he makes it and you tell him.

If it's something that helps the adventure for the PC not to have remembered, then he fails the check.


James Jacobs wrote:

My suggestion: Have the player who's trying to remember make an Intelligence check.

If you, as the GM, know that in order for the adventure to progress the PC HAS to remember the forgotten info, then no matter what the player rolls on that check, he makes it and you tell him.

If it's something that helps the adventure for the PC not to have remembered, then he fails the check.

I don't like this. It's the same type of thing as "if you can't make an eloquent speech on the spot, you fail your Diplomacy check". It's playing the player, not the character. Characters should never be limited by what their players can do, and success or failure should never depend solely upon the player. That defeats the purpose of a role-playing game.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

Zurai wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

My suggestion: Have the player who's trying to remember make an Intelligence check.

If you, as the GM, know that in order for the adventure to progress the PC HAS to remember the forgotten info, then no matter what the player rolls on that check, he makes it and you tell him.

If it's something that helps the adventure for the PC not to have remembered, then he fails the check.

I don't like this. It's the same type of thing as "if you can't make an eloquent speech on the spot, you fail your Diplomacy check". It's playing the player, not the character. Characters should never be limited by what their players can do, and success or failure should never depend solely upon the player. That defeats the purpose of a role-playing game.

I don't think this is playing the player at all, I think it is moving the story along. If the info the character is needed to complete the adventure and with out it the story stalls, just let him remember. However if the story being told will be more entertaining for the character to have forgotten, or remembered incorrectly then role-play the results of not having the info he is trying to remember. Playing the player would be the Character Knows the answer to the Sphinx's riddle but the player forgot and the DM will only allow the player to remember.


Player knowledge and character knowledge are separate, or at least they should be. If you can force their real life memory to work against them, then you should allow their real life memory to benefit them. So if they know Monster X has DR 10/magic, and fast healing 5 because they know the books then don't accuse them of metagaming because the character has no knowledge skill that would apply.

Note: I am not saying you would do that because I don't know how you play. I was just putting that out there as a matter of perspective.


If they're trying to remember something, INT roll, DC set to fit how specific, obscure, and recent it is.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

James Jacobs wrote:

make an Intelligence check.

If you, as the GM, know that in order for the adventure to progress the PC HAS to remember the forgotten info, then no matter what the player rolls on that check, he makes it and you tell him.

If it's something that helps the adventure for the PC not to have remembered, then he fails the check.

+1


James Jacobs wrote:

My suggestion: Have the player who's trying to remember make an Intelligence check.

If you, as the GM, know that in order for the adventure to progress the PC HAS to remember the forgotten info, then no matter what the player rolls on that check, he makes it and you tell him.

If it's something that helps the adventure for the PC not to have remembered, then he fails the check.

I hope your players take good notes ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Roll an intelligence check for random information. If it falls within the realm of a knowledge check, have them roll that, instead.

If the information is key to continue with the game, and they fail horribly, be vague. Other players (or NPCs) can assist, as needed. If they roll well, simply tell them. In either case, roll a d20 for appearances.

If the information is not key, DM rolls a d20, and adds the appropriate DC modifier.

-25 (If today is your anniversary, if female)
-20 (You're staring at the readily apparent answer)
-15 (Your name)
-10 (Your birthday)
-5 (What you ate for breakfast)
+0 (What you ate for dinner two nights ago)
+5 (Your girlfriend's mother's birthday)
+10 (Your entire family tree for the past 100 years, as told in the form of stories from your grandfather when you were a child)
+15 (How many gold pieces you spent in the past year)
+20 (The number of steps on the stairs you were fleeing down after you were found by the bonny princess' personal guards in her bedchambers last night)
+25 (If today is your anniversary, if male)

Note, additional modifiers as warranted.
Under the effects of alcohol: Number of drinks squared divided by three, rounded down (1 -> 0, 2-> +1, 3-> +3, 4-> +5, 5 -> +8, 6-> +11)

Blunt trauma to the head, cumulative d20-10. (Multiple strikes result in intelligence, wisdom, and charisma drain.)


Zurai wrote:


The problem with this is that unless you're a Wizard, your int mod is going to be +1 or +2 at most. That means the result of the roll is entirely random. That's just pure silliness. There's a reason that there's no such thing as a pure-stat check in the default rules. Stats are always added to some other scaling modifier to determine your bonus, never used by themselves (the obvious exception of untrained skill checks just prove how silly it is to treat memory as an untrained skill check).

Rolling under your ability score provides a means to roll a viable stat check. It's unfortunate that stat checks rolled the normal way just are not viable in a mathematical sense, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

How does this make any sense? Rolling under your Intelligence, rolling to beat a DC by adding your modest Int modifier - they're both governed mostly by the random element of the d20. Whether one is more likely to produce a character capable of remembering something depends on the target number you're trying to reach, not because one method of rolling the check is more viable in a mathematical sense. Rolling equal to or under a 10 Int gives the exact same chance as rolling a DC 11 3e-style Intelligence check for that character. It's just the methods of getting to those probabilities is a little different.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Another thing to remember, of course, is that game time and real-world time rarely, if ever, match up. If you only play once or twice a month, and if your sessions last only a day or two on average in game, then something that might have happened to a PC 24 hours ago actually happened to the player 24 days ago.

Which is why I suggested that if it's important to the story, don't hide it from the characters just because the players can't remember, more or less.


If it's something the character experienced first-hand or something tied to a familiar location, rather than a straight INT check, would a Knowledge [Local] check be better? (Not that he's necessarily likely to have points into Knowledge [Local].)

That whole rolling less than your INT score thing sounds crazy. I never could wrap my head around the mechanics of pre-3e D&D.


Bill Dunn wrote:
Zurai wrote:


The problem with this is that unless you're a Wizard, your int mod is going to be +1 or +2 at most. That means the result of the roll is entirely random. That's just pure silliness. There's a reason that there's no such thing as a pure-stat check in the default rules. Stats are always added to some other scaling modifier to determine your bonus, never used by themselves (the obvious exception of untrained skill checks just prove how silly it is to treat memory as an untrained skill check).

Rolling under your ability score provides a means to roll a viable stat check. It's unfortunate that stat checks rolled the normal way just are not viable in a mathematical sense, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

How does this make any sense? Rolling under your Intelligence, rolling to beat a DC by adding your modest Int modifier - they're both governed mostly by the random element of the d20. Whether one is more likely to produce a character capable of remembering something depends on the target number you're trying to reach, not because one method of rolling the check is more viable in a mathematical sense. Rolling equal to or under a 10 Int gives the exact same chance as rolling a DC 11 3e-style Intelligence check for that character. It's just the methods of getting to those probabilities is a little different.

And how does a standard DC check differentiate between a character with 18 and 19 intelligence?


If the "roll under" mechanic bothers people, you can always "Roll d20 and add the raw score" - just set a DC of 21 and it's the same chance of success as rolling under your Int.

That way the new players still Roll a d20, add something, try to get over a certain number.


Zurai wrote:


And how does a standard DC check differentiate between a character with 18 and 19 intelligence?

Is the 5% difference between rolling under the 19 vs the 18 that important that it needs to be reflected in the chance of remember a bit of detail? That's the only difference.


Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Zurai wrote:
Rolling under your ability score provides a means to roll a viable stat check. It's unfortunate that stat checks rolled the normal way just are not viable in a mathematical sense, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Back in AD&D we used to do it like that, but that may prove more complicated (especially with characters who have a 20+ intelligence, does that make them the Rain Man?) My solution: just wing it. Set an arbitrary DC and have the PC roll the check. Alternatively, a player could take notes and the PC with the highest intelligence might be able to recall those notes.

Memory is a tricky thing, something which falls in the realm of the legendary "Rule 0," where the GM arbitrates what is and is not appropriate. Besides, like James Jacobs said, don't hide story sensitive information from the PCs (but wait until they prompt you to give them the connection).

I ran a game recently where at the end of each "segment" of the campaign, they have seen (or heard of) a black raven. Now, after they run down a corrupt nobleman who hired a hit on a Duke friend of theirs, the nobleman starts blubbering "it was the raven's idea!"

At this point the bard looks at me and says "wait a minute, a raven? Did we see any ravens before?" I know the player has caught a hold of the lead, so I let him make the check and give him all the times he has seen, or heard of, a large black raven watching them.

Often times it is very satisfying to come to the conclusion on your own but, especially when story is at stake, it never hurts to give your players a push or a hint in the right direction (I know our RotRL GM lets my wizard make intelligence checks from time to time to realize story-important aspects, such as where a certain self-important lamia might be hiding).


James Jacobs wrote:

Another thing to remember, of course, is that game time and real-world time rarely, if ever, match up. If you only play once or twice a month, and if your sessions last only a day or two on average in game, then something that might have happened to a PC 24 hours ago actually happened to the player 24 days ago.

Which is why I suggested that if it's important to the story, don't hide it from the characters just because the players can't remember, more or less.

+1


Denim N Leather wrote:

If you had a player who perhaps heard something said a long time ago (months in RL) and now has to recall it in-game, how would you have them roll for it if you wanted to remind them but not just give it away?

Thanks!

I only do Recall-Rolls if absolutely necessary. I have made the experience, that my players do no longer rely on their memories and no longer make notes about an adventure/campaign if they are allowed to constantly make such rolls. There were times, where they even didn't bother to note down/or memorize the names of important NPCs. If the info is important to an adventure's progress, i make fake-rolls and give them the info anyway.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / How would you roll a memory check in Pathfinder? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.