
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I have always struggled with both the amount and actual information to give the players when they ask for a knowledge check on creatures.
Now now I use these! :)
(Paizo Site)
Bestiary 1
Bestiary 2
(RPGNow Site)
Bestairy 1 on RPGNow with a good preview of it underneath the picture of the actual product :)
Bestiary 2 on RPGNow with a preview at the bottom of the picture of the product
The above links are of the Monster Knowledge PDF's not the actual Bestiarys by Paizo. and these are Pathfinder Specific :)
I know this may sound like an advertisement but actually I am curious as to what YOU as a GM do for their players and as Players what you EXPECT for information from the GM. Specifically with PFS tables and events in mind?

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

When players make knowledge checks, I let them ask for specific information ("Does it have SR?") or general information ("Any special attacks?"). Each bit of data ("It has fire resistance 10") beyond the name counts as one piece of information for purposes of determining how much they know based on the Knowledge skill check.

![]() |

I handle it similarly to Jonathan. I've had tables who allow specific numbers and tables who only allow for what would be in game knowledge, which to me seems odd, because it greatly restricts what you can actually ask about the monster.
Some GMs have ruled me asking for HP/AC/Saves/DR/Hardness too metagamey. While I can see their point, beyond that what can you ask for? Most DMs wont let you ask for common tactics or spells known, so that basically restricts it to Special Attacks and Special Defense.
What do you guys think about asking for tactics, particularly with nameless creatures like Succubi/Goblins/Bears/Etc.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I think that as a GM and the MAIN reason I use the Monster Knowledge Cards is that it does not pull the character out of the "in character" and keeps it out of the metagame range. The asking questions thing would mostly just illicit say... a demon was encountered most players would ask the GM.. What are it's resistances. Weaknesses.
To me as a GM I have always had a problem with that as it is way way to specific. I like the fact that the above cards try and keep that in mind for the most part. It can be specific but also keeps in mind that the players are in character and gives general knowledge too.

![]() |

The question thing I have always hated both as a player and as a GM. We do it here locally and are actually have a big debate going on on our message boards on the meet-up site too.
Yeah, the "what does my character know?" thing is kind of awkward. I'm not really sure what the right answer is.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

Kurthnaga, Have you checked out the preview of the Monster Knowledge cards yet? To me those are the answer. It is the thing I do with my players now and think that as players they actually find it consistent and very useful in some ways and frustrating in others. Useful because they get some of the information they may need or not need as it goes. SOme have even developed plans based off of what they garnered from it.
Some of my players have found it frustrating because they were expecting the question thing to happen and as a GM I hate it. They felt it was unfair as the question is how some of the local GM's do it here and felt I should too. I disagreed. I think that it gives to much information for one and to much specific information for two. The cards facilitate this in my mind. They give enough information to the players that they could use it. but not so much specific information that it is game breaking so to speak.

![]() |

Kurthnaga, Have you checked out the preview of the Monster Knowledge cards yet? To me those are the answer. It is the thing I do with my players now and think that as players they actually find it consistent and very useful in some ways and frustrating in others. Useful because they get some of the information they may need or not need as it goes. SOme have even developed plans based off of what they garnered from it.
Some of my players have found it frustrating because they were expecting the question thing to happen and as a GM I hate it. They felt it was unfair as the question is how some of the local GM's do it here and felt I should too. I disagreed. I think that it gives to much information for one and to much specific information for two. The cards facilitate this in my mind. They give enough information to the players that they could use it. but not so much specific information that it is game breaking so to speak.
I hadn't until this post, but that's definitely interesting. It definitely gets around the problems I've had with GMs who treat questions as metagamey, in that then you don't have many great questions to ask, and those questions you would ask could be either gamebreaking or irrelevant. Having a list of info they might know given how knowledgeable they are on the subject seems great.
It still has some downsides I think, such as taking the last bit of interaction out of that particular skill check, but I don't know how much that matters in the long run. Also if these were to completely replace questions you might see slightly more detailed accounts on some of them, such as the Planetar.

![]() |
We just have the DM randomly determine from the monster's special abilities, qualities, feats, etc. It has worked pretty well for us. I suppose we believe that you can't control exactly what you know, although some PCs would say they specifically study monsters' SR and DR, etc. At game days, I usually just ask the DM to tell me whatever useful information strikes their fancy.

![]() ![]() ![]() |

I give out information based on what I think would be the most commonly-known information (then the second-most commonly known, and so forth). I almost always start with relevant types and associated traits (so if you meet the DC for a ghoul, you get that it's undead and therefore has undead traits). After that you generally get a special defense/attack/weakness, depending on what would be "common knowledge" for those familiar with the creature. (So at DC+5 for the ghoul, you get its paralysis, as that's something that everyone who's ever fought a ghoul - and therefore everyone who's ever told a tale or written a textbook about a ghoul - has encountered and knows about.)

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
as a player I generally just say:
"I got an XX, what do I know?"
It puts a lot on the judge, but then it's kind of silly to have me ask questions, when I know many of the answers and could just meta-game the question/answer. Do I just ask random questions? Or ask questions I know the answer of?
And how is that fair to the next player, who may not have the slightest idea what to ask, because they haven't been doing this for 30 years?

![]() ![]() ![]() |

So Finlanderboy you would rather have the question aspect of Knowledge checks then? And specifically are they immune or have some type of DR against Cold Damage??
As a GM how would you handle it?
William, how does the GM do that though? roll a dice assigning a number to a random ability/power?
I think it is more fun(point of playing) to let the players things they want to know. The only problem is when you have a player that has no idea what to ask. Then I just tell him thinks I think he would want to know.
I ask how does cold magic effect them. So far I have yet a DM to do anything but tell me.

![]() |

The biggest choice a GM has is in setting the DC: Is it common (CD=5+CR), normal (DC=10+CR), or rare (DC=15+CR). In addition you need to figure out what categories you use. I treat everything bold as a separate category. Some GMs I have seen lump some of the things together (i.e. special defenses may include DR, immunities, resistances, etc).

![]() |
When I am DMing, I do randomly determine what the character knows. I completely agree with nosig on the strangeness of being expected to ask questions. Just my opinion. Rarely, a PC may disagree with what I consider to be useful information, but I can't remember this happening yet. I have, on the other hand, at other tables, seen players demanding to know particular resistances. I personally found their behavior in poor taste. But that's just my opinion.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

As a GM I inform the player how many pieces of information they know about the creature, and treat each bold entry as a single piece of information (except for spell-like abilities if a creature has several, then I wing it). I also treat each paragraph from the text below the stat block as a piece of information.
Information I give to all successful knowledge checks in addition to the above is the creature's name, type, primary subtype (other subtypes can be learned based on the roll) and the descriptive text just below the creature's name in the bestiary.
If the creature has any templates, I'll include a descriptive bit to indicate such, but not identify them, otherwise treating templates as additional bits of info. For example I might describe a fiendish creature as possessing a faint scent of brimstone or an advanced creature as appearing unusually strong and capable.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

The one thing I've always had a problem with is what to do when a player asks questions about a creature with class levels. Obviously an ogre is an ogre, but an ogre with a few levels on fighter will be noticeably different, and also different from an ogre with levels in ranger in stead. Not to mention to unusual ogre with a higher than average Cha and a few levels in sorcerer.

![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |

I have no problem with players asking questions about a monster. If you've got a cold specialist, then yeah. Your character is going to spend a lot of effort learning what creatures his trick doesn't work on, and on which creatures it's super effective.
But generally, I'm with Jiggy. Beat the base DC and you know what it is, its type, and anything common knowledge about it. After that, if you don't have a specific question, I'll tell you something I think would be helpful. So far I've never had a player complain when I tell them more information than I probably should.