Depends on the monster and the group. My group currently has a skills monkey that never uses her knowledge skills and only seems to use them under duress/ prompting/ both, so I'll probably be a bit more generous until I get her in the habit of using her knowledge skills. And if some monsters are more common, I give a bit more information. I'd probably tell a lot more about an imp than I would a chain devil.
|
If they make the check, I tell them a brief description, usually the one from the bestiary, plus the CR and creature type (including subtype if relevant, 'Devil' for example). I'll tell them common features of the type and subtype if they don't remember them, too.
For every five points they beat the DC, I give them a category of abilities. So, offensive abilities, defensive abilities, what spell-like abilities they have, etc. I usually let them pick what they want on the basis that's what they would've focused on. I suppose that's generous of me.
This seems to work pretty well, and keeps Knowledges useful and relevant without being overpowered.
|
I usually let players ask questions, though now and then I'll offer a couple of tidbits that I think are important (signature abilities) that a player might never think to ask about; and then "you have X questions remaining".
What I do like to do is to at least give some information about the "theme" of the monster; for example "these demons are formed from the souls of greedy people; they can grant wishes". That'll count as a tidbit (actual ability) but giving the players insight into what the monster is "about" is important to immersion and world-building. Also, it gives them a lot of context on what sort of mentality the monster will have.
Lately, I have been growing annoyed with party debate about what questions to ask. I'm starting to think that once the roll is made, there can be no consultation about questions. This is all happening in the midst of combat after all. Wise knowledge monkeys will take an interest in their allies beforehand, so they know "what YOU need to know".
On a roll that barely succeeds, I ask the player who made the roll, "Do you want its offense, defense, or magic?" I don't see the point in slowing down combat with a game of Twenty Questions. On a roll that succeeds by 5 or more, I give them the information most likely to make the encounter successful. On a roll that succeeds by 10 or more, I hand that player the bestiary open to the correct page and say, "Read up."
My style was influenced by having a lore master in one of my early campaigns, Rise of the Runelords. This fellow was a specialist in ancient Thassilion lore, the kind who could write 50-page treatises on every site the party was going to visit. Limiting him to just a few tidbits made no sense, but in mid-campaign he had only a +5 Knowledge advantage over the intelligent non-experts. Therefore, +5 ought to make a big difference, rather than merely "another piece of useful information." Later in the Spires of Xin-Shalast module, he could make Knowledge rolls as high as 45. "The location of the abandoned city of Xin-Shalast is lost to scholars, but the best archaeologists pinpoint a particular valley in the Kodar Mountains. Expeditions there found nothing. Still, it is the best place to start." Letting Knowledge experts use their knowledge is amusing.
Official rules are 10 + creature's CR to identify it, then they get one additional piece of info by every 5 they beat the CR by. I usually go by that most of the time. (If a creature is very common, it's 5+CR, and if it's very rare, it's 15+CR.)
If they identify it, they get some basic information before their questions (creature type, some background flavor info, intelligence or lack thereof). I usually let the players decide what to ask, but if I'm dealing with newer players, I'd probably make a few suggestions. I like rewarding people who put ranks into knowledges!
Our usual categories of things to ask about: resistances/immunities, weaknesses, special attacks, spell-like abilities (these count as one question per ability), weakest save....things like that.
Though it does lead to some odd situations sometimes like the Serpent's Skull game I'm currently playing in where the cavalier from Varisia somehow knows more about all the jungle monsters than the medium from the Mwangi Expanse. She just doesn't have as many skill points to throw around.
Though it does lead to some odd situations sometimes like the Serpent's Skull game I'm currently playing in where the cavalier from Varisia somehow knows more about all the jungle monsters than the medium from the Mwangi Expanse. She just doesn't have as many skill points to throw around.
That's not unrealistic. Many non-Americans know a lot more about American history than many/most Americans do.
(Newspaper headline: Are the Mwangi Expanse's Schools Failing Our Children?)
Haha, maybe because they get the benefit of it being taught more impartially.
To be fair, the cavalier had a very thorough education as a kid, so it makes more sense than I originally thought.