I have looked this up and found a variety of arguments but not what I am truly looking for.
Say you encounter a CR 10 beasty, the elusive Willy Rumpus. For this example, it has 10 different unusual ability's. It's rare, but not uniquely so. So let's start the DC at 10 + CR or 20.
First player rolls the appropriate skill check and gets 20 smack on.
Player 2 rolls 26
Player 3 rolls 31
My "I can't fight worth a damn, but I have a +20 in every possible skill" rolls a 40.
So what amount of information does each player get?
Player 1 - Name of the critter and one ability? Just the Name?
Player 2 - same as player 1 but one more special aspect of the creature.
Player 3 - one more than 2
Player 4 - 4 bits.
And what are the bits that should be given? Knowing it has darkvision is not on par with knowing it has a save or die gaze attack.
For the record, I believe telling a player that a creature can fly as one of it's traits when it has wings is a douche-bag move and that DM should be pelted with big d20's and made to walk across 10 pounds of d4's.
Thanks.
If you're looking for official information, then you've probably already found it in the CRB as a 'bit of information' with no further clarification. Everything beyond that is just GM fiat. You've already looked for how people like to run them and remain unsatisfied, so I don't think we can really help you with those constraints.
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.
"a bit". One bit for every 5 by which you exceed the DC. It also says the skill can be used to identify monsters AND their abilities. So any successful check gets the identity and one or more abilities.
As for what to tell them, that's up to each DM.
I usually start top-down and give different abilities to each person who makes a check, in the order they make it. By "top-down" I mentally decide which are the most obvious or "well-known" and which are the least obvious powers. I agree, telling someone a winged creature can fly is just about as inappropriate as telling them that a legged creature can walk. Likewise, telling them that a ghost is incorporeal is also inappropriate.
So I tell them one thing per 5 pints that is, in my opinion, most likely to be known but not instantly obvious when they look at it, and work down my mental list toward the things that are least likely to be known about it.
I'm also inclined to disallow knowledge checks for monsters I deem extremely unique. One example of this is in Rappan Athuk, thee are several new monsters that only exist in this dungeon, deep down, where nobody has ever ventured and returned to tell about it. Knowledge checks are not magical divination, they're recalling something you read or heard somewhere, but if nobody has ever seen the monster and lived to tell about it, there has never been anything written or said about it, so no way you possibly have anything to recall. I don't do this often, but it's a fun trick to make unique monsters actually feel unique and mysterious.
There really is no guideline and it is up to you.
Giving the info on an iconic attack or defense of a beasty sounds reasonable. When seeing a basilisk, her gaze attack might be the first thing that pops up in a PCs mind (before her mating habits).
After that it is what you want to tell them. You could ask if the players if focus on one aspect of the beasty over another. Like attacks, defenses, senses, movements, vulnerabilities, behavior, etc.
How rare or common the monster will affect this. If it is an Oni (rare in the Inner Sea region), PCs might get the less interesting and general info like dark vision, rather than some ability that is more important in combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One word of advice, don't tell them exact details and don't do it in game terms. Say that since beastie X lives in hot volcanic conditions that you can assume the beast does not fear fire thus hinting that cold is the way to go. As soon as you give game details you've spoilt the creature.
One word of advice, don't tell them exact details and don't do it in game terms. Say that since beastie X lives in hot volcanic conditions that you can assume the beast does not fear fire thus hinting that cold is the way to go. As soon as you give game details you've spoilt the creature.
There is a study that says that spoilers actually enhance the experience.
But you know, studies doesn't mean actual truth.
One word of advice, don't tell them exact details and don't do it in game terms. Say that since beastie X lives in hot volcanic conditions that you can assume the beast does not fear fire thus hinting that cold is the way to go. As soon as you give game details you've spoilt the creature.There is a study that says that spoilers actually enhance the experience.
But you know, studies doesn't mean actual truth.
Yeah, this leaves me feeling pretty skeptical.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One word of advice, don't tell them exact details and don't do it in game terms. Say that since beastie X lives in hot volcanic conditions that you can assume the beast does not fear fire thus hinting that cold is the way to go. As soon as you give game details you've spoilt the creature.
I disagree with this. With a successful check I should get a fact, not a hint. It is too easy to misinterpret a poorly phrased hint.
Case in point, your example. That could mean that he resists fire or is immune. That doesn't mean that he is weak against cold either. It isn't fun to guess something that you should know.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I actually just started doing was compiling a "booklet" of monster traits (undead, construct, outsider, etc.) that I'm going to bring to each PFS game.
If a player rolls a Knowledge check and identifies the creature, but does not beat the DC by 5, I'll give them the name of the creature and the associated traits of its type. "It's an animated skeleton, a mindless undead. It is immune to mind-affecting spells, poison..."
For every 5pts higher I let the player ask a question. What special attacks does it have? Is it vulnerable to anything? Is it resistant to anything? What special materials hurt it?
If something has "fire resistance 10", I'm not going to give them the number, I'm just going to say "it's resistant to fire". If they still try to use fire, and roll 7 pts, my response would be "your fire spell washes over the creature like water off a duck's back".
In the case of your "I made a 40!", I might just hand the book over to that particular player for a moment, and then ask for it back. That way he can tell the party himself, and gets his moment of attention.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The name should come with any success. On top of that (since it's a quite useless bit of info on its own), success and then each increment of 5 you win by should give you useful, combat relevant information.
What creature type and subtype it is. What special attacks it has. What resistances or immunities it has. Any vulnerabilities it may have. What saves might be its strongest and weakest. Its movement modes if not visually obvious.
Stuff like that. Knowing its ecology and favorite foods is cool and all (and you can include that stuff as well if you want), but when you're in a fight with it, the party members do not give a s*** about that stuff. Of course, if such fluff information is useful to a party member (say... a Horizon Walker who'd like to know if the monster is already from one of his dominant terrains so he doesn't need to use his wand of Instant Enemy on it), then for that group it is combat-relevant information.
What tidbits come at which increments is up to you, but as a general guideline, beating the check by 20 should basically be, "here's the monster's statblock," and you should try and roughly evenly divide the info up among DC, DC +5, DC +10, DC +15, and DC +20. This guidance for winning by 20 = you know all about the monster came from the latter half of D&D 3.5, where they'd actually print info gained on a monster for a given knowledge check result on a little table for each monster. It was super helpful, shame PF didn't keep up that innovation.
I'm also inclined to disallow knowledge checks for monsters I deem extremely unique. One example of this is in Rappan Athuk, thee are several new monsters that only exist in this dungeon, deep down, where nobody has ever ventured and returned to tell about it. Knowledge checks are not magical divination, they're recalling something you read or heard somewhere, but if nobody has ever seen the monster and lived to tell about it, there has never been anything written or said about it, so no way you possibly have anything to recall. I don't do this often, but it's a fun trick to make unique monsters actually feel unique and mysterious.
Even for bards? Whose sole shtick is that they might just have heard a tale/story/legend/etc about that one place and be able to provide useful information even if otherwise no one could?
Usually I make the players choose between the following parameters (DC = 1 info, DC + 5 = 2 info, etc): CR, AC, HP, DR and Special Resistances, Elemental Resistances, Saving Throw, Attacks, Special Attacks, Magical Abilities, Standard Feats. Or CMB, CMD.. what they want to know.
Well, the rules state "You can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities." So I would say overall, at the start you positively identify what it is, where it's from, and a very general idea of what it can do. From there, for each additional +5 success, you learn of one (or two, I'd be generous with it in my style) special attack, weakness, or other notable special quality of the creature.
So, let's use an air mephit (minimum knowledge: planes DC 13 to accurately identify). On a successful check, they would get:
DC 13: "You are certain that is air mephit. Mephits usually serve more powerful elementals. They don't have major weaknesses but are as nowhere near as tough as other elementals." (The mechanical information is its name, its creature type, and a suggestion that it is relatively low CR.)
DC 18: As above, plus: "Most mephits have some kind of breath attack. Since that's an air mephit, it'll probably try to blow up a nasty amount of sand and grit in your eyes." (Its special attack.)
DC 23: As above, plus: "It can probably minorly manipulate wind currents and is likely able to summon more of its kind." (Its spell-like abilities.)
And so on, up from there. At higher DCs, as a GM I might throw in campaign specific information as well, such as "That mephit is wearing a mark that suggests it is a servant of the elemental lord Ilmish." Stuff like that is exactly why the guidelines aren't more specific--the GM may need to tailor the information according to the campaign and how common or well known the creature is in his or her setting. Remember specificity in the rules for things like this can be a two-edged sword--if they get too explicit, it can easily begin to constrict the GM from being able to work with the rules to best serve his campaign and the players. If the GM can't be trusted to interpret the rule fairly, that is a problem with the GM, not the rules (and yes, giving obvious details the PCs can observe for themselves is a dick move).
I tend to let my PC ask one Pointed Question about the Creature/Monster per 5 points they make the DC by. this give them a little better choice about what they learn and may cause them to forget to ask the Important stuff like what is it Immune to. (They are learning though)
|
This was such a vague rule that back in 3.5 days on the wizards board they all got together and generated the Monster lore Compendium. It's a bit out of date but is great for getting a feel on setting this up. The layout/breakdown becomes almost intuitively easy once you get used to it.
Here's a good example from the compendium:
Characters with ranks in Knowledge (arcana) can learn more about
cockatrices. When a character makes a successful skill check, the
following lore is revealed, including the information from lower DCs.*Knowledge (arcana)
DC Result*
13 This hybrid avian creature is a cockatrice. This result reveals all
magical beast traits.18 Cockatrices fiercely attack anything and everything they perceive to
be a threat. Flocks of cockatrices attempt to overcome opponents through
confusion, often flying straight into their faces.23 Cockatrices are infamous for their ability to turn creatures to stone
with their bite. They are immune to the bite of other cockatrices, but
other methods of petrification affect them normally.
Quick, easy, informative but without giving away any game terminology.