|
I'm curious how folks handle this.
Do you use the knowledge skill rules and consider type/subtype one of the 'useful' pieces of information? Or do you consider type/subtype to be a more basic type of information received even more easily than the base knowledge skill rules?
Let's get more basic, do you make your inquisitors pick the appropriate type/subtype or can they just say, I'm turning on my bane for that (points at a creature) type of critter?
For your convenience:
You can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster's CR. For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster's CR. For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster's CR, or more. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information. Many of the Knowledge skills have specific uses as noted on Table: Knowledge Skill DCs.
Our group always has the GM roll knowledge checks for all PCs immediately upon seeing/detecting/encountering a monster/creature. Those who make their checks (of the appropriate sort, depending on creature type etc.) know the creatures type. Depending on how much the check exceeded the DC determines how much additional info is known. If an Inquisitor does not have the appropriate Knowledge skill to recognize a creature enough to know its type he better have a friend who does and shouts out to him "Its a DEVIL!" (etc.)
Let's get more basic, do you make your inquisitors pick the appropriate type/subtype or can they just say, I'm turning on my bane for that (points at a creature) type of critter?
The monster must be identified. Usually, it's the inquisitor that's doing so (that's why he has Monster Lore, after all). But if he flubs, and someone else picks it up, nothing stopping them from telling him. Otherwise, he can burn bane, see if it works, then change it to try something else.
-edit- missed the first part. I rule that the base DC to identify is enough to Bane the monster. CR 5 means base DC 15, hit a 15 you gets it's name and what it is. Hit 20 you learn it has DR, or eats weapons, or whatever.
|
|
Ok, must be identified, fair enough. I'm wondering how difficult you make that. We're talking the basic type(and in some cases subtype) here, not specific information on the species.
As a GM, I don't think I'd make it an issue for a player to know the type/subtype of an NPC unless there was subterfuge at play or some special circumstances. However, I've not actually had an inquisitor in one of my games and I never really thought about it until I played one, so I'll admit it's possible I've let player bias creep into "what I would do if I were GMing".
The GM under which I'm playing my inquisitor is inexperienced. I wanted to get a broader set of opinions rather than give him my possibly biased advice.
Edit in response to Grick's edit: again, I find myself not able to completely rule out the possibility of player bias, but I think if I were to put a DC on it I'd subtract 5 just to be able to use Bane. That would be straight CR for common creatures, 5+CR for standard creatures and 10+CR and up for rare creatures. Again, that would be barring special circumstances, for instance seeing a devil impersonating a human via shapechange. Creature types are such broad categories that I see them being on a separate level of knowledge from the more specific stuff you're usually using the knowledge skills for.
Anyway, that's my say on it. I'd like to see more opinions on the matter.
For me, if you have at least 1 rank in the appropriate knowledge skill, you know a creature's type and subtypes (no roll necessary).
I allow "bane whatever the [bleep] that is" in my games.
Oh how i wish my dm let me get away with this rofl
I allow "bane whatever the [bleep] that is" in my games.
I'd allow that for Aberrations, myself :P
|
I think making skills and knowledge about what your fighting an important part of a combat is highly important. It gives smart fighters an advantage and makes those knowledge skills worthwhile.
As others have said, in my games I have my players roll. A DC 15 will give them basic info, 20 will tell some more like DR or SR or whatever, and for every 5 over that, they get to ask me questions about it ("Does it have any specialized attacks?" or "can they cast spells/spell like abilities?", etc)
I think making skills and knowledge about what your fighting an important part of a combat is highly important. It gives smart fighters an advantage and makes those knowledge skills worthwhile.
Agreed. Otherwise, why bother ever investing in Knowledge skills?
|
|
I think making skills and knowledge about what your fighting an important part of a combat is highly important. It gives smart fighters an advantage and makes those knowledge skills worthwhile.Agreed. Otherwise, why bother ever investing in Knowledge skills?
Not requiring knowledge checks (or making the check easy enough that 1 rank is good enough) to use one of the basic (very limited) resources of a class does not equate to making knowledge checks useless, not by a long shot.
The usefulness of knowledge checks to discover abilities and traits of specific creatures isn't at question in this thread. We're talking solely about what it takes to know the type/subtype of a creature. There's a wide separation between the two, IMO.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
I think making skills and knowledge about what your fighting an important part of a combat is highly important. It gives smart fighters an advantage and makes those knowledge skills worthwhile.
As others have said, in my games I have my players roll. A DC 15 will give them basic info, 20 will tell some more like DR or SR or whatever, and for every 5 over that, they get to ask me questions about it ("Does it have any specialized attacks?" or "can they cast spells/spell like abilities?", etc)
No-one is questioning the basic skill check mechanics, just whether the inquisitors bane ability is somehow tied to being able to identify a creature. Or for that matter, this same question has been brought up with the Ranger's favored enemy.
Edit: FWIW, the actual rules text is "She must select one creature type when she uses this ability (and a subtype if the creature type selected is humanoid or outsider). "
But I guess a follow up question is "What is the DC to determine what *type* of creature something is?" Is it easier to identify something is a devil than to identify it's a pit fiend?
|
I believe a Knowledge check that reaches the basic DC (or maybe even the common knowledge DC, 5 + CR) should give the creature's type, subtype and the name of its race. I've also allowed Knowledge checks to determine that a creature is not of the type to which that Knowledge skill applies (if its appearance makes this ambiguous).
A ranger's favoured enemy bonus applies even if he doesn't know the creature is of that type or subtype.
The inquisitor's bane, though, emulates crafting an enhancement to the inquisitor's weapon, takes an action and has no direct connection to the target creature. I don't see a justification for using bane without declaring what creature type it will affect. If she gets it wrong, she can change it before the next swing. The inquisitor gets plenty of skill points and bonuses to Knowledge skills anyway.
Which way makes it more fun? I will probably do that way.