Are there any rules that say whether or not pc's know the creature type of the creature they are looking at? Some are very obvious, but some are not. I can see this being a case by case basis/GM discretion, I'm just curious to know if any of the books have actually come down with an answer to this.
When DMing, if the PC's don't pass a knowledge check they don't know anything about the creature even its type, i'll prompt the PC's to roll a particular knowledge check to try to know about the creature
The DM can ask for a specific knowledge skill check, which might give a clue as to the creature's type but should not just spell it out for them.
To answer your question simply, yes there is a rule for it. It is the knowledge skill check.
I know knowledge checks can give you all sorts of information, I suppose what I'm getting at is how to address this type of situation:
I see a creature, let's say it is a fox. Do I need to roll knowledge nature to realize it is an animal, or do I just know?
I see a creature, let's say it is a zombie. Do I need to roll knowledge religion to realize it is undead, or do I just know?
Obviously, I need to have a knowledge check to identify, learn abilities, etc., but does knowing the type based on observation constitute metagaming? I suppose it is nothing but a guess otherwise, which makes sense if you've never seen a creature before, and relates to player vs PC knowledge.
Knowing the type based on observation does not necessarily constitute metagaming in my opinion.
I could see the short, furry, four-legged creature and assume that it is a fox. If the players allow their characters to assume that, then let them. It could be a kitsune or a demon in the guise of a fox or whatever, but they will only find out through more in depth interaction and possibly a knowledge skill check or some other means to determine if it actually is just a fox.
To go back to your original question of are there any rules that say whether or not PC's know the creature type of the creature that they are looking at, no, not really. There are, as mentioned, skill checks, class features, and other magical means that a character may use to determine that.
There is not, however, any rule that says I automatically know the creature's type or sub type(s) by just looking at it without a roll or action of some sort.
Maybe I am missing your point but that is what I have to offer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are there any rules that say whether or not pc's know the creature type of the creature they are looking at? Some are very obvious, but some are not. I can see this being a case by case basis/GM discretion, I'm just curious to know if any of the books have actually come down with an answer to this.
As far as I know there are no rules for it but as a house rule we usually make it a DC 10 knowledge check of the appropriate type to identify creature type.
Which basically works out as you roll the appropriate knowledge check and if you fail to identify the creature as a GM I will tell you the creature type and the normal sorts of information associated with that.
As an example for Undead, I would say "Undead normally have the following":
Medium BAB
Good will saves
No constitution, replace with Cha
Darkvision
Immunity to mind-affecting
(Insert the rest of the undead entry)"
After a certain point I don't bother saying this as everyone remembers these sorts of general information, but its helpful for new players and rewards for investing in a skill even if you don't successfully identify a creature.
It's basically like, "That thing looks like it has a lot of qualities of Undead but I'm not familiar enough with it to know any specific qualities about that creature."
I have NPClasses basically ignorant of anything past the most common Types they would encounter, while PCClasses get a bit more on Types. Sub-Types are the next step on that path. Favored Enemy would be next. A Class specializing in a particular critter would reach the next level (appropriate KS, FE, etc), recognizing little things like altered abilities, sizes, AC, etc. of a given encountered X.
EG: Goblins in my world are mutation ridden. One is Cyclopean, range penalties and a +4 to Str (from -2 to +2). They tend to be the only Goblins who use two handed weapons other than spears. The Ranger has FE: Goblins and knows this like he knows deer poo. The Wizard has no clue, not even having a vaguely relevant skill.
Please note that just because you've run into X before, does not mean you learned about it. If it did, I should have an inkling about women by now!
A Ranger gets to use his FE bonus on a great number of useful skill checks and in myriad situations!
Are there any rules that say whether or not pc's know the creature type of the creature they are looking at? Some are very obvious, but some are not. I can see this being a case by case basis/GM discretion, I'm just curious to know if any of the books have actually come down with an answer to this.As far as I know there are no rules for it but as a house rule we usually make it a DC 10 knowledge check of the appropriate type to identify creature type.
Which basically works out as you roll the appropriate knowledge check and if you fail to identify the creature as a GM I will tell you the creature type and the normal sorts of information associated with that.
As an example for Undead, I would say "Undead normally have the following":
Medium BAB
Good will saves
No constitution, replace with Cha
Darkvision
Immunity to mind-affecting
(Insert the rest of the undead entry)"After a certain point I don't bother saying this as everyone remembers these sorts of general information, but its helpful for new players and rewards for investing in a skill even if you don't successfully identify a creature.
It's basically like, "That thing looks like it has a lot of qualities of Undead but I'm not familiar enough with it to know any specific qualities about that creature."
This is how I like to play. A Bear with the advanced template should not be any harder to identify as an animal than one without. I think applying that type of focus to the rules itself is metagaming.
Considering that a lot of magical beast looks like animals it is not unreasonable to require a knowledge nature roll to identify an animal. If the characters encounter a wolf like creature how do they know it is just an ordinary wolf? Devil Dog’s, and Worgs are both described as looking like wolves. Telling the players what the creature looks like does not mean they can identify it, that requires an appropriate skill check.
I would allow a character with the skill in what the creature looks like to roll to find out that they are not actually that type of creature. So someone with a knowledge nature would be able to roll it to figure out that the Worg is not in an animal, but without knowledge arcane they don’t know it is a magical beast.
It is not just animals and magical beasts that often resemble each other. Many creatures appear as something else. Vampires can and do pass themselves off a human. A lot of outsiders resemble other creatures. This is why the knowledge skills are used to identify creatures.