What to do with unlearned characters

[Lou Diamond]

as a GM what do you do when you run into a party that has very limited knowledge skills. Last night I ran Weapon in the Rift. None of the characters had knowledge Planes So they could not ID the demons or the Hound Archons. They did not have knowledge arcane so it was hard for them figure out the prisms and how to use them. I told them about the suits in the room with Galchor but they had no clue on what they di so they ignored them they really d not have the time to fool with them any way. I tried to help them by adding a magic item to aid them in the boss room but they lacked the skills to figure out them item [bracers] and did not want to just put them on so they were not used.

This whole scenario was very frustrating as I felt that I had to push them through the scenario. Besides TpK'ig the party what do the rest of you GM's do when this happens?

[terry_t_uk]

IMHO there's not a lot you can do. Furthermore, you should be running as written, not adding things to help or hinder. The party always has the choice to give up and leave if they can't figure out what is going on.

[zefig]

Creating new magic items on the fly to help the players is really beyond the purview of the PFS GM and the commitment to run as written. Sometimes,the party just doesn't have the tools to succeed and hopefully they take their licks and treat it as a learning experience.

In that situation, after defeating Ghalcor he could have been super clear with them on how to activate the weapon and give them a quick rundown on the batteries to at least get the bare basics. Other than that, the campaign rewards parties with varied skills, especially knowledge skills, and I really don't see a problem with that considering the assumption is that all the PCs are members of a scholarly adventuring society.

[TOZ]

Execute them.

[Sammy T]

Sometimes bad party comps happen.

The players should have recognized this during the muster/character intros and tried to address it in some manner (switching to a different character, someone biting the bullet and running a pregen with skills, seeing if another player from a different table can join the party with an appropriate character, etc).

If they can't complete the scenario, it sucks, but sometimes its better to retreat and lick your wounds than bang your head against a wall for four hours or TPK.

Obviously, its not ideal to fail a scenario, but its far less ideal to softball it or give them non-RAW help because it will happen again and they won't be prepared for the same situation.

[Ascalaphus]

I think people should learn that knowledge and social skills aren't really optional for pathfinders. There's a kind of thinking that you MUST be able to fight, but that other things aren't nearly as important.

That's not true though; many scenarios also require other abilities. Basic social skills (or advanced Diplomacy) and several Knowledge skills are required fairly often.

You can't count on other people having them all the time, so you should certainly try to cover at least a few of those bases yourself. Most characters can scrape together the skill points to have at least one Knowledge, maybe more.

People need to learn that those things are important.

[FranKc]

I had a similar problem with said scenario.

Spoiler:

They were stuck with the puzzle and did not want to just start smashing the door in because it would destroy the battery. They went out to ask if there's any Iomedae worshipers around. Things had escalated to an open war at that point, but I figured that since there will undoubtedly be crusaders that are well versed in Iomedae's faith I gave them a circumstance bonus that they got an extra clue and eventually solved the puzzle. And I can never resist the chance to make a cameo with one of my own characters. :)

So I basically try to usher in some creative thinking. I also ran Night march of Kalkamedes to a party full of characters with no knowledge skills and had to keep telling that I'll explain stuff after this scenario is done.

[Tsriel]

TOZ wrote:

Execute them.

Ignore this one... (-_-)

[Kenji Elindir]

Tsriel wrote:

TOZ wrote:

Execute them.

Ignore this one... (-_-)

TOZ is always completely serious on the boards. Always.

[TOZ]

Kenji Elindir wrote:

TOZ is always completely serious on the boards. Always.

This is a learned poster.

[GM Lamplighter]

Any Pathfinder who doesn't have a rank into at least a few Knowledge skills by level 4 is going to get screwed over at least once by a bad party composition like this, and either fail or die.

As a GM, you aren't allowed to "make up" for this sort of campaign-inappropriate build, any more than you can make up for bad combat builds by randomly removing bad guys from the scenario. Everyone has the rules up front and knows that Knowledge skills are important; if they choose to ignore them and focus on combat, then they will sometimes get stuck without a support character to save them.

This is why I advocate the Lamplighter philosophy of having your own skills to do everything, even if that makes you slightly less effective at your main thing. 1 rank in a couple of Knowledge skills (important ones, like arcana, planes or religion) let you roll and get at least *some* information. Those redeployed skill points that reduce your stealth from +25 to +22 won't matter much, but the Knowledge skills will get used in almost every scenario (even if someone else also has them and rolls better).

[TriOmegaZero]

My characters rock one rank in every class Knowledge skill. Even if all it gives is +4. Sometimes you roll that 20. (No, it won't help you ID the Herald of Vishnu, but it will get you that DC 20 to know how to open a damn door.) Sometimes I even take a trait to get a Knowledge skill as class skill.

As for Weapon in the Rift, there isn't much help for it. From the sound of it, they got to the final room without Knowledge checks, which means they didn't need them to complete the scenario. They probably didn't get full rewards, but that is just how the cookie crumbles. In the future, remember to run as written and give GM hints, not additional treasure that isn't in the scenario.

[Finlanderboy]

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Any Pathfinder who doesn't have a rank into at least a few Knowledge skills by level 4 is going to get screwed over at least once by a bad party composition like this, and either fail or die.

I disagree with this completely

Our bonekeep 1 DM at gencon used 25+monster cr. SO my maxed out knowledged max int wizard failed int checks.

My trip in the walking rune also failed vital knowledge checks for a similar ruling.

Some characters are not meant for certain skills, and if you understand your weakness you can manage it just fine.

If your character is has a weakness and you do not adapt to that, then yes you will suffer. Die and fail at extreme options

If someone takes this advice and give their character geography and nobility thinking they need this to survive or not fail. Well that is horrible advice.

I build my characters with a theme I min max that and ensure they have out of combat skills to help the group. Although my 5 int face, i have no intention to ever put a knowledge rank is very solid at bluff and diplomacy. In the slave ships of absalom I saved the day being a dedicated face.

[TriOmegaZero]

Finlanderboy wrote:

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Any Pathfinder who doesn't have a rank into at least a few Knowledge skills by level 4 is going to get screwed over at least once by a bad party composition like this, and either fail or die.

I disagree with this completely

Our bonekeep 1 DM at gencon used 25+monster cr. SO my maxed out knowledged max int wizard failed int checks.

You disagree with the idea that characters without knowledge skills are going to be screwed once in awhile, and your evidence against that is a Knowledge monkey getting screwed by an illegal ruling?

[Jiggy]

GM Lamplighter wrote:

1 rank in a couple of Knowledge skills (important ones, like arcana, planes or religion)

Finlanderboy wrote:

If someone takes this advice and give their character geography and nobility

[Finlanderboy]

Steven Schopmeyer wrote:

Finlanderboy wrote:

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Any Pathfinder who doesn't have a rank into at least a few Knowledge skills by level 4 is going to get screwed over at least once by a bad party composition like this, and either fail or die.

I disagree with this completely

Our bonekeep 1 DM at gencon used 25+monster cr. SO my maxed out knowledged max int wizard failed int checks.

You disagree with the idea that characters without knowledge skills are going to be screwed once in awhile, and your evidence against that is a Knowledge monkey getting screwed by an illegal ruling?

Well even having the knowledge you get screwed. SO having it is a waste if you get screwed because it was made worthless via DM fiat.

Since it has happened and happenes often is worht mentioning some DMs make knowledge worthless.

If you understand your character lacks knowledge and can adapt that weakness then it is not a weakness. I advocate buildng your charatcer and understand what things you are mising and how to deal with that.

Putting a rank in a skill so a 20 or 19 will help you in rare situation is minor if you could instead spend that giving you a 10% bonus remainign hidden while shooting.

[zefig]

Finlanderboy, those GMs "making knowledge useless" aren't running the game correctly, full stop. The important plot roll DCs shouldn't be affected by that kind of fiat regardless. But sometimes you roll poorly anyway, which is why rerolls and redundancy are great. Itbdoesnt mean knowledge skills are generally useless.

[Finlanderboy]

zefig wrote:

Finlanderboy, those GMs "making knowledge useless" aren't running the game correctly, full stop. The important plot roll DCs shouldn't be affected by that kind of fiat regardless. But sometimes you roll poorly anyway, which is why rerolls and redundancy are great. Itbdoesnt mean knowledge skills are generally useless.

I never said they were. By no means are they worthless.

I am telling players to account for things. A smart player should acocunt for a cheatign GM. They happen you can read the boards, and i doubt anyone that significantly played that claims they never have.

So realize your effort spent in knowledge skills may be made worthless. Just like stealth and perception(again many many many many DMs cheat be giving free surprise rounds).

Understand your characters weakness and strengths. Understand the strength of putting one or more ranks in skills you might not be veryy good at. Rationalize how that will help and how much, and do the same if you spent it elsewhere. Understand what you are missing not having this skill, and how it will hurt you and possible other means to make up for it if you choose to ignore it.

I highly regret spending knowledge skills in arcana on my first character. The +4 has never helped me once, but I have missed several diplomacy checks by 1.

[nosig]

Sammy T wrote:

Sometimes bad party comps happen.

The players should have recognized this during the muster/character intros and tried to address it in some manner (switching to a different character, someone biting the bullet and running a pregen with skills, seeing if another player from a different table can join the party with an appropriate character, etc).

...

Here's the fix. What Sammy T says above.

Sit down at the table, glance around and see...

4 Human Greatsword Uthden Barbarians all with glassy eyed expressions.

So you pull out your Human Greatsword Uthden Barbarian to play... yeah.

This one is on the players. The judge shouldn't (IMHO can't) fix it for them, they need to learn this. And if one judge "fixes" it... it's just going to keep happening.

If all the players had sat down with Halfling Investigators armed with saps and no healing wands... the fights would have been much harder too. We shouldn't softball because the players are un-prepared. And part of being prepared is "party balance".

[Gwen Smith]

During muster or the mission briefing, I sometimes give out hints of things the characters will need before they head out, to give them a chance to buy last-minute supplies to shore up any weaknesses.

Not actual spoilers or hints like "you guys are going to need to some oil of Daylight". I'm talking about hints like "You guys can go to the library and do some research before your boat leaves tomorrow" or "It's common knowledge that Mendev is at war with demons, so you think that maybe your Tiefling will not be well-received there".

I'm usually a fairly "sharing" GM, though. I'll just tell players things that I think their characters should reasonably know, and I'll give them any knowledge that's DC 10 or less. Also, if the player is making a mistake that their character would not (e.g., not knowing the correct range of a spell), I'll correct the player.

[nosig]

heck, with the groups I play with we do it all the time.

Damage dealer? check.
Face? check.
Mr. Know-it-all? check.
Skill monkey (traps?) check. (check for magical traps)
Healer? Check.

Somebody to cover all that, the best we can... and often lots more. Sometimes we may say we're a little weak at something. "I can detect traps - but not disable." "I got disable, but not magic traps." "I've got Arym Zays spell for the magic ones...on two scrolls. Think we'll need more than that?"

Often we try to get this out of the way thru emails before we even head out to play. Sometimes before we even know what scenario we are playing...

[Snorter]

Lou Diamond wrote:

as a GM what do you do when you run into a party that has very limited knowledge skills?

Give them chronicles with zero prestige?

This isn't kindergarten sports day; you don't deserve a prize just for turning up.

[John Compton]

When I'm developing a scenario, I aim to ensure that even when a situation "requires" a skill, there's some means of brute-forcing the obstacle. It might not be pretty, and it might not net one the full rewards for an adventure, but the brute force option exists.

A large part of why this exists is because the author and I can't assume that every group will have someone who can reliably hit a challenging but realistic skill check DC for a trained skill (somewhere around DC 15-19 for Tier 1–5). Hitting that Knowledge (religion) check might make one's life a whole lot easier if, for example, the PCs identify the fiery outsider as actually being a servant of Sarenrae with whom they can parley, but it's certainly an option to just cut down the angel and move on. It the same reason that most of the complex puzzles come with an Intelligence check or the like to solve them in case the players are just having an off day. Likewise, failing a puzzle or skill check usually results in making the subsequent encounters tougher without forcing the immediate end of the scenario.

Scenario #5–13 Examples:

The trap? You can just experiment blindly and eventually open it, at the cost of loses some of the charges.

The hound archons? You can just hit'em hard with weapons and spells.

The tower's weapon? There's no skill check to operate it, but with some skill checks it's possible to operate it more quickly.

With all of that said, sometimes a group just trips over all of the exposed roots, misses the clues, and triggers all of the hardest conditions. In the relatively rare cases when that happens, having the PCs run away with their tails between their legs can be a sobering but still enjoyable lesson for later adventures.

[Lamontius]

PFS rewards characters who are balanced

[Finlanderboy]

Lamontius wrote:

PFS rewards characters who are balanced

PFS rewards parties that are balanced.

[Lamontius]

which you cannot control, unless you specifically play with the same people

[nosig]

Lamontius wrote:

PFS rewards characters who are balanced

actually, I think that RPGs reward PARTIES that are balanced.

I like to think of PFS as a game of specialists. The classic picture of a D&D adventuring party has a Fighter, a Cleric, a Wizard, and a Rogue. Each has their area of expertise, each has their part to fill.

Like any team, they cover for each other when they need to, but the best at fighting is the fighter, the best at healing the cleric, etc.

This is a social game. I expect the PCs to need each other and to work together during the adventure. I have played with a player that trys to be sure that he can do everything - he hated depending on another player for anything. The rest of us were there just to provide extra "Targets" for the monsters, to fill the roles of extras in HIS adventure. (He actually developed the art of hiding behind another PC). He's not as much fun to play with as the team member who saves my butt cause he knows I'll save his later. (Not to say Generalist characters are like that. That's a PLAYER problem, not a character issue).

[Lamontius]

see above

[nosig]

Lamontius wrote:

which you cannot control, unless you specifically play with the same people

bah, I do it all the time. Many people I know do it too.

We just check when we first sit at a table to see who is there.

Do we have a healer?
Do we have a Melee dude?
Do we have a Max Damage monkey?
Do we have a Trapsmith? (for locks and/or traps)
Do we have a Face?

if there is no face - I'll pull one out (or someone else will). I used to not worry about the Max Damage guy, but I've resently started to hit tables where we don't have one. It's a shock to me, but it looks like I'll have to build one - just to have a DPR specialist available for when no one runs one.

On the off chance that NO ONE HAS one of the above, someone takes one for the team and runs an Iconic. But normally we have a PC that fills all the roles.

[TOZ]

Finlanderboy wrote:

Lamontius wrote:

PFS rewards characters who are balanced

PFS rewards parties that are balanced.

These are not contradictory statements.

[nosig]

Lamontius wrote:

see above

Do this all the time with total strangers.

Been doing it now for ... 6 years? yeah, 6 years.

It does mean that I have 19 PCs... But when I sit down at a table, I always check to see what we don't have - and I pull a PC that fills that gap. Sometimes that fills more than one gap.

[Finlanderboy]

Lamontius wrote:

which you cannot control, unless you specifically play with the same people [/QUOTE

yes you can. I do all the time. I choose to play different characters and work with the people that come to a table I play at.

This is a social game, and the party working together including what character to send is a large part of it. If the group together cannot fill a role we work on finding other solutions to fill it. If we can not I explain this could cause issues and we may need to be creative and may have a difficlut time.

This is all part of the social aspect of the game.

[nosig]

TOZ wrote:

Finlanderboy wrote:

Lamontius wrote:

PFS rewards characters who are balanced

PFS rewards parties that are balanced.

These are not contradictory statements.

but many people hear the first statement and assume that it says...

"PFS will punish characters who are not balanced" which is just not true.

As long as your party is balanced, your PCs don't have to be.

[Finlanderboy]

nosig wrote:

Lamontius wrote:

see above

Do this all the time with total strangers.

Been doing it now for ... 6 years? yeah, 6 years.

It does mean that I have 19 PCs... But when I sit down at a table, I always check to see what we don't have - and I pull a PC that fills that gap. Sometimes that fills more than one gap.

Nosig, maybe we are just weird that we talk and cooperate with our fellow players?

[nosig]

Finlanderboy wrote:

nosig wrote:

Lamontius wrote:

see above

Do this all the time with total strangers.

Been doing it now for ... 6 years? yeah, 6 years.

It does mean that I have 19 PCs... But when I sit down at a table, I always check to see what we don't have - and I pull a PC that fills that gap. Sometimes that fills more than one gap.

Nosig, maybe we are just weird that we talk and cooperate with our fellow players?

nah, most get it - it's just a few that don't see it. Like my friend that trys to be sure that he can do everything - he hates depending on another player for anything. As a result, he often is the second best at everything at the table... and best at nothing.

It does mean he avoids a lot of the risks though... Being the second best "trap disarmer" or "scout" means you don't end up taking the risk.

[Jiggy]

Finlanderboy wrote:

nosig wrote:

Lamontius wrote:

see above

Do this all the time with total strangers.

Been doing it now for ... 6 years? yeah, 6 years.

It does mean that I have 19 PCs... But when I sit down at a table, I always check to see what we don't have - and I pull a PC that fills that gap. Sometimes that fills more than one gap.

Nosig, maybe we are just weird that we talk and cooperate with our fellow players?

Or maybe you're "weird" (more like "uncommon") that you have multiple PCs in-tier whenever you show up to a game?

I currently have a level 8 and a pair of level 3s. (Not counting the level 5 that is reserved for when my wife comes along.) If I show up to a 5-9 and discover that we have three clerics, a druid, a barbarian/ninja and my sorceress, and the party's levels range all the way from 5th to 9th with an APL in the 8-9 subtier (this is what happened at my last game), what would you have me do? There's face and healing covered, but only one real frontliner, no INT/skill-monkeys... but I don't have any PCs I could swap in. Should I play Ezren7 in subtier 8-9? Does that help anything?

Maybe the reason you don't see more people suggesting your "pull out whatever PC the table needs" plan is that most people can't do that. I don't know whether that's actually the case or not, but it's another explanation other than "all these meanies are anti-cooperation".

[TOZ]

nosig wrote:

but many people hear the first statement and assume that it says...

"PFS will punish characters who are not balanced" which is just not true.

These people are failing to use logic.

[nosig]

I consider balancing abilities in a party just as important as balancing abilities in my PC. I am trying to be prepared before the adventure.

Character Preperation...
My character will/should have a missile weapon (some way to do damage at range).
My character will/should have some way to do blunt damage.
My character will/should have some way to stealth (even a potion of sneaking)
My character will/should... you get the idea.

To me is the same thing as:

My party will/should have some way to discover info (Diplomacy, Kn(local), Intimadate, something)
My party will/should have some way to find hidden items (Perception?)
My party will/should have some way of dealing with Devices (traps, locks, etc)
My party will/should have some way to kill things.
etc.

[nosig]

Jiggy wrote:

Finlanderboy wrote:

nosig wrote:

Lamontius wrote:

see above

Do this all the time with total strangers.

Been doing it now for ... 6 years? yeah, 6 years.

It does mean that I have 19 PCs... But when I sit down at a table, I always check to see what we don't have - and I pull a PC that fills that gap. Sometimes that fills more than one gap.

Nosig, maybe we are just weird that we talk and cooperate with our fellow players?

Or maybe you're "weird" (more like "uncommon") that you have multiple PCs in-tier whenever you show up to a game?

I currently have a level 8 and a pair of level 3s. (Not counting the level 5 that is reserved for when my wife comes along.) If I show up to a 5-9 and discover that we have three clerics, a druid, a barbarian/ninja and my sorceress, and the party's levels range all the way from 5th to 9th with an APL in the 8-9 subtier (this is what happened at my last game), what would you have me do? There's face and healing covered, but only one real frontliner, no INT/skill-monkeys... but I don't have any PCs I could swap in. Should I play Ezren7 in subtier 8-9? Does that help anything?

Maybe the reason you don't see more people suggesting your "pull out whatever PC the table needs" plan is that most people can't do that. I don't know whether that's actually the case or not, but it's another explanation other than "all these meanies are anti-cooperation".

ok, questions -

Out of 6 players, each of those people only had one PC available to play in tier 5-9?
What were the PC Roles (not classes - we all know that you can have a Cleric that is a Tank, and a Fighter that is a Face)?
What did you have more than one of?

drat! need to sign off for today...

[Jiggy]

If memory serves, there were two people who had more than one option. I'm not sure what those options were, but we did actually have the discussion you're talking about, and that was the table we ended up with. So I guess those two players must not have had Knowledge/skill-type PCs in tier.

Now, if I knew in advance that my play schedule would be such that I could make sure I had between 1 and 3 PCs at any given level, so I could have multiple options for any given tier/table, then sure, I could try a bunch of different specialists and pull out the one I need for a given table.

But I play only about 2-4 times a month, and I've learned that it's rare I even have ONE character in every level range, let alone multiple options for a given tier. As a result, I have to approach the same "let's get a functional party" goal from a different angle: since I can't bring multiple PCs, I've learned to bring PCs with multiple capabilities.

Same goal, different approach; and I'd wager a guess that most players' circumstances are closer to mine than to yours and Finlanderboy's, which in turn means that the advice of "make a PC with multiple competencies" will result in more well-equipped tables than "make a single-role specialist", as the latter only works if you can swap out those specialists at will. I'm guessing a lot of people can't.

[pauljathome]

Ascalaphus wrote:

I think people should learn that knowledge and social skills aren't really optional for pathfinders. There's a kind of thinking that you MUST be able to fight, but that other things aren't nearly as important.

That's not true though; many scenarios also require other abilities. Basic social skills (or advanced Diplomacy) and several Knowledge skills are required fairly often.

You can't count on other people having them all the time, so you should certainly try to cover at least a few of those bases yourself. Most characters can scrape together the skill points to have at least one Knowledge, maybe more.

People need to learn that those things are important.

I completely agree with you, but the reality is that combat ability is necessary in almost every scenario and lack of it will kill you. Lack of knowledge skills is very rarely fatal and only occasionally significantly costs you.

Played last night (Hall of the Flesh Eaters) in a party where the highest diplomacy was -1 (all the rest were -2), we had no detect magic, and less than 1/2 the knowledge skills were trained and even those were at +5 or so. Still succeeded and got full prestige

[Jayson MF Kip]

nosig wrote:

It does mean that I have 19 PCs...

At this point, your experience doesn't help the 99% of PFS players who have one or two (at most!) PCs in tier for a particular scenario.

Hell, I've got 4 PCs between levels 7-11 (no more than one in any other tier), and I'd wager I'm in the 1%. To expect others to have a stable full of varied PC options just isn't reasonable.

[KestlerGunner]

This sort of situation is why it would be nice to have revised PFS rules on hiring an NPC scholar to ensure that prepared PCs can overcome party compositions with 2sp classes present.

GM: Okay, so you donate your 800 gold to the Mendevian war effort and their designated intelligence officer, Private Daniels, introduces himself. He's a young, balding man in a military coat. He looks useless in a fight.
Fighter: I tell him to stick behind us at all times, unless he wants to die from a fireball to the face.
GM: Private Daniels visibly gulps and says: "Yes sir!"
Cleric: As you are, Private Daniels! Let's get into this tower!

[Jayson MF Kip]

KestlerGunner wrote:

This sort of situation is why it would be nice to have revised PFS rules on hiring an NPC scholar to ensure that prepared PCs can overcome party compositions with 2sp classes present.

GM: Okay, so you donate your 800 gold to the Mendevian war effort and their designated intelligence officer, Private Daniels, introduces himself. He's a young, balding man in a military coat. He looks useless in a fight.
Fighter: I tell him to stick behind us at all times, unless he wants to die from a fireball to the face.
GM: Private Daniels visibly gulps and says: "Yes sir!"
Cleric: As you are, Private Daniels! Let's get into this tower!

Sounds good. My 8STR/10DEX/12CON opera singer bard would like to hire an appropriate combat specialist for the same 800gp. Maybe a paladin.

[KestlerGunner]

That's called a scroll of summon monster.
I'm still waiting for the scroll of summon scholar.

[Ascalaphus]

pauljathome wrote:

Ascalaphus wrote:

I think people should learn that knowledge and social skills aren't really optional for pathfinders. There's a kind of thinking that you MUST be able to fight, but that other things aren't nearly as important.

That's not true though; many scenarios also require other abilities. Basic social skills (or advanced Diplomacy) and several Knowledge skills are required fairly often.

You can't count on other people having them all the time, so you should certainly try to cover at least a few of those bases yourself. Most characters can scrape together the skill points to have at least one Knowledge, maybe more.

People need to learn that those things are important.

I completely agree with you, but the reality is that combat ability is necessary in almost every scenario and lack of it will kill you. Lack of knowledge skills is very rarely fatal and only occasionally significantly costs you.

Played last night (Hall of the Flesh Eaters) in a party where the highest diplomacy was -1 (all the rest were -2), we had no detect magic, and less than 1/2 the knowledge skills were trained and even those were at +5 or so. Still succeeded and got full prestige

I just got back from playing that on the high tier with my level 3 alchemist, a level 3 fighter (not optimized), a level 4 barbarian (seemed optimized) and a level 4 Lem. It was pretty brutal. Nobody could really do the K:Religion checks to know anything particularly useful - Lem tried, but he's more focused on K:Nobility *shudder*. We seemed to have all the other knowledges covered fairly well though. Obviously it was easy for my alchemist, but the barbarian had a lot of Nature as well, getting 25+ results several times.

I'm picking up a tendency in S6 that Murderhobo Is Back as a functional and even necessary playstyle, featuring a lot of mindless/unreasonable/too-alien/too-evil-to-live enemies, while S5 had a lot of scenarios that are hard to earn full credit on if you 'bo.

Anyway, I've observed in my local area that most PCs are good at 1-2 important knowledges, even though we have a glut of 2H melee striker types.

[thejeff]

nosig wrote:

I consider balancing abilities in a party just as important as balancing abilities in my PC. I am trying to be prepared before the adventure.

Character Preperation...
My character will/should have a missile weapon (some way to do damage at range).
My character will/should have some way to do blunt damage.
My character will/should have some way to stealth (even a potion of sneaking)
My character will/should... you get the idea.

To me is the same thing as:

My party will/should have some way to discover info (Diplomacy, Kn(local), Intimadate, something)
My party will/should have some way to find hidden items (Perception?)
My party will/should have some way of dealing with Devices (traps, locks, etc)
My party will/should have some way to kill things.
etc.

Even if you're making sure the basic roles are covered, do you also go through the list of Knowledges to make sure somebody has each one at an appropriate level? I'll admit I'd expect Arcane (Planes a bit less so) to be common, but that may just mean everybody assumed somebody else had it.

More generally, do people usually rely on having 1 Knowledge character covering all the bases or is it more common for most characters to have a few of them at decent levels?

[Gwen Smith]

As we were leveling up a group for an Eyes of the Ten run, I realized that our group didn't have a knowledge monkey. (We had a bard, but he wasn't "that kind of bard"...)

My cleric/ranger bit the bullet and made herself the knowledge monkey. She already had about half of the knowledge skills as class skills, so she took a feat and an Extra Traits feat to get all the knowledges as class skills, and devote two levels of skill points into knowledge skills. Then she picked up a wand of Kreighton's Perusal and all the useful Pathfinder Chronicles, so she could get +2 to any knowledge skill in a single round. (Move action: pull the right book from the handy haversack; swift action: pop the wand out of her spring-loaded wrist sheath; standard action: cast Kreighton's Perusal; free action: make the knowledge check at +2 and tell the party what to do.)

She also took the Helpful trait to assist anyone who already had the knowledge skill at a higher bonus, but that hasn't come up yet.

[Muser]

I've just made it a habit to put at least a rank into each of my class skills. Unless I'm playing a low int Cleric or some such.

Accordingly bardic knowledge, Breadth of Experience, the knowledge domain ability, etc are real life savers in PFS, and the recent Technologist debacle only highlights this. Assuming you can circumvent Technologist with these abilities, that is.

[Finlanderboy]

it is more than just picking a different character.

Before you head out the supplies you buy can help fill a role. The spells you prepare. There area a bunch of little ways you can rebalance a party.

We had PC pitch in togther to buy needed items before a scenario.

Teamwork is expansive.