What is a Ranger's subjective experience of Favored Enemies?

[Ring_of_Gyges]

Ranger Rick's player Paul has selected outsiders with the devil subtype as his favored enemy.

The player gets a +2 untyped bonus to various rolls "against creatures of his selected type". What does Rick (the character, not the player) think is happening though?

One argument is that Rangers study the traits of their favored enemy, so Rick knows how devils think and gets +2 to bluff them, he knows the weak spots in their scales so gets a +2 to hit them, he knows their abilities and gets +2 to knowledge checks against them and so on.

What happens when Rick runs into a devil in disguise though? Rick thinks he's fighting a human, but really he's fighting a devil under the affect of an alter self spell. Does Rick get the bonus? RAW seems to say yes, but why would he?

If the bonus does apply do Paul and/or Rick get to know? For example, if he normally does a 1d8+5 damage and rolls a 5, does he know he did 12 damage instead of 10? If the bonus is based on Rick's deep knowledge of devils, how could he not know? Is favored enemy (devils) a devil detector in combat?

One interesting side note is that Pathfinder changed the text of favored enemy. 3.0 and 3.5 contained the line "Due to his extensive study of his chosen type of foe and training in the proper techniques for combating such creatures the ranger gains..." before going into the mechanics. Pathfinder deliberately cut that line and doesn't contain any replacement "in universe" explanation of the ability.

The same question arises with similar abilities. If a dwarf with Hatred is fighting a masked humanoid assassin of unknown race does he get to know the assassin is a half orc when he makes an attack roll?

[VRMH]

Ranger Rick has such a hatred for Devils, that he - subconsciously - often uses tactics that work well against them. And when those tactics happen to work well against an unknown assailant... well, that's a nice coincidence then. Right?

[Torbyne]

My favorite example of Favored Enemy is a human with Racial Heritage. After a very, very long and heated series of threads about that feat it was determined that Racial Heritage does itself not allow a character to have any outward signs of their heritage what so ever. It then makes sense that a lot of people with such heritage wouldn’t even know it. But they still count as having the subtype of their heritage so rangers still get bonus damage against them. Such powerful racially motivated hate knows no bounds, it is almost magical in its ability to detect even a hint of their chosen species.

[William Werminster]

Good catch Ring_of_Gyges.

Let me add my own thoughts.

The fact that "knowing the enemy" don't grant any bonus to AC and saving throws against enemy special attacks (medusa gaze, dragon breath, etc) is also curious.

[Claxon]

I don't really see a rules question here.

Even if you can't identify the creature (such as due to it being in disguise) you still get the bonus. You are already aware of this.

You seem to be asking for justification for it, which is not a rules question.

As for justification...it's so that rangers get to benefit from their main class feature without it being more trouble than it is by being limited to specific creature types.

By the way though, you don't have to choose favored enemy devils, in fact it's not a valid choice. You would choose Favored Enemy [Outsider(Evil)] or even Outsider(Lawful).

[Spacelard]

Would you give the Ranger FCB to a human disguised as a devil?

[Ring_of_Gyges]

What information your special abilities give you is clearly a rules issue.

Let me crunch up the question for you: "Does a ranger (or the ranger's player) learn the creature type of a creature he attacks if that creature is subject to his favored enemy rule?"

Or think of it this way: A masked orc attacks the party, the party fighter (with +4 to hit) rolls a 10 announces he hits AC 14 and is told he misses. The party ranger (with +4 to hit and +2 favored enemy) also rolls a 10, also announces 14. The orc has an AC of 15.

Rule Question 1: Does the ranger hit?
Rule Question 2: Does the ranger know why he hit?

The RAW answer to 1 is clear, but it isn't for question 2.

[Ring_of_Gyges]

Spacelard wrote:

Would you give the Ranger FCB to a human disguised as a devil?

It depends what your explanation is of why the bonus ever applies. In 2nd edition the bonus was psychological, Rangers hated their favored enemies so much that they fought harder. The hatred was so strong they got diplomacy penalties when dealing with the creatures and had to attack them in combat if they had a choice of targets. If it were a morale bonus granted by fanaticism then a convincing disguise should trigger the bonus.

If the explanation is special knowledge (the 3rd edition answer), then no. However good your disguise you don't have the specially vulnerable organs the ranger is striking at.

The more fundamental issue I'm trying to get it is that Pathfinder frequently gives mechanical effects without much discussion of what those mechanics are trying to model.

[Claxon]

Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

What information your special abilities give you is clearly a rules issue.

Let me crunch up the question for you: "Does a ranger (or the ranger's player) learn the creature type of a creature he attacks if that creature is subject to his favored enemy rule?"

Or think of it this way: A masked orc attacks the party, the party fighter (with +4 to hit) rolls a 10 announces he hits AC 14 and is told he misses. The party ranger (with +4 to hit and +2 favored enemy) also rolls a 10, also announces 14. The orc has an AC of 15.

Rule Question 1: Does the ranger hit?
Rule Question 2: Does the ranger know why he hit?

The RAW answer to 1 is clear, but it isn't for question 2.

The whole question is meta and taken from a character perspective, which if you want to role play it's up to the player and group to decide how to do.

But as far as the rules are concerned the ranger hits (and presumably the GM tells the ranger player to apply his FE bonus) to the roll (unless the GM has a copy of all character sheets).

The rules are actually not at all concerned about whether or not the ranger character has any understanding of why he hit. He also doesn't know he rolled a 4 (the same as the fighter) because it's a meta-construct that a character doesn't experience or know.

If you keep character knowledge and player knowledge separate this question doesn't arise in the first place.

[Dave Justus]

How much a GM wants to reveal to their players is not a rules question, it is just a question of playstyle. In my games, I'm pretty trusting that my players won't mis-use player knowledge so generally I would just let the Ranger's player know that they were getting a favored enemy bonus, unless perhaps I had something really special with that disguised orc and wanted the players to be able to enjoy the surprise of the eventual reveal as well.

As far as the non-rules question of how you should flavor favored enemy bonuses, the answer is whatever makes the most sense/most fun to you, and it doesn't have to be the same in every situation.

It could be knowledge and training.
It could be a set of practiced moves that happen to work best when fighting a specific type of foe.
It could be the power of nature/the universe/the rangers id manifesting to give him a bonus against such creatures.

Whatever works best and makes the most sense to you is the correct answer, but it shouldn't change the actual rule that when fighting an appropriate creature, the character gets a bonus.

[Jeraa]

Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

One interesting side note is that Pathfinder changed the text of favored enemy. 3.0 and 3.5 contained the line "Due to his extensive study of his chosen type of foe and training in the proper techniques for combating such creatures the ranger gains..." before going into the mechanics. Pathfinder deliberately cut that line and doesn't contain any replacement "in universe" explanation of the ability.

No, they didn't. That line does not appear in the SRD, so was never Open Content. What does appear in the SRD is almost exactly the same as what appears in Pathfinder (the exception being the skills are a bit different, as Pathfinder combined some skills).

A lot of the changes attributed to Paizo removing/changing rules are the same - WotC declared part of the ability Open Content, but not all of it. So sometimes text that clarified something or explained why/how an ability works was removed but the actual mechanics remained.

[Murdock Mudeater]

Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

What information your special abilities give you is clearly a rules issue.

Let me crunch up the question for you: "Does a ranger (or the ranger's player) learn the creature type of a creature he attacks if that creature is subject to his favored enemy rule?"

Or think of it this way: A masked orc attacks the party, the party fighter (with +4 to hit) rolls a 10 announces he hits AC 14 and is told he misses. The party ranger (with +4 to hit and +2 favored enemy) also rolls a 10, also announces 14. The orc has an AC of 15.

Rule Question 1: Does the ranger hit?
Rule Question 2: Does the ranger know why he hit?

The RAW answer to 1 is clear, but it isn't for question 2.

RAW for disguised enemies is really up to the GM on how to handle the secret natures of things.

For example, if the players attack an NPC Druid that is under the effects of Tree Shape. Yeah, the GM records the damage and tells them if they hit or not, but informing the PCs that this is actually a druid transformed is not something the PCs are aware of as per the spell (unless they saw it being cast).

Regarding hitting a disguised enemy, the AC of a target can change depending on who is hitting them and with what. Yeah, the player could compare rolls and assume an answer, but the character isn't rolling dice, so the ranger will just know that he hit and the fighter didn't.

And really, within the setting, there are so many variables that would go into actually living in such a setting. The ranger could conclude that god was with him that day, and that's why he seemed more accurate. Could be something he ate, or a lucky item, or anything. Just because enemies in a certain outfit seem to be easier to hit than perhaps they should, doesn't mean that he has anything to do with it. It would probably boil down to the personality of the ranger and how they believe the world relates to them.

[N N 959]

Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

Ranger Rick's player Paul has selected outsiders with the devil subtype as his favored enemy.

The player gets a +2 untyped bonus to various rolls "against creatures of his selected type". What does Rick (the character, not the player) think is happening though?

Ostensibly, Ranger Rick responds to cues in the way his favored enemy moves and reacts that result in Ranger Rick attacking the creature in a way that manifests itself as a FE bonus.

For example, if you're know how to wrestle pigs more than any other animal, and someone disguises a pig to look like a dog, you're going to instinctively use your pig technique when the dog moves and behaves like a pig...and your'e going to find that technique is just as effective as if the dog were a pig, which will lead you to the conclusion that this might be some sort of pig.

Quote:

One argument is that Rangers study the traits of their favored enemy, so Rick knows how devils think and gets +2 to bluff them, he knows the weak spots in their scales so gets a +2 to hit them, he knows their abilities and gets +2 to knowledge checks against them and so on.

Yes, that was the IC explanation in 3.5.

Quote:

What happens when Rick runs into a devil in disguise though? Rick thinks he's fighting a human, but really he's fighting a devil under the affect of an alter self spell. Does Rick get the bonus? RAW seems to say yes, but why would he?

Yes, and I've seen that confirmed. The ruling is that your (sub)type doesn't change so all things that affect your (sub)type , still affect you.

Quote:

Is favored enemy (devils) a devil detector in combat?

Essentially yes. FE means you get to recognize a FE whenever you fight it. Remember the Matrix II? The Oracle's body guard had to fight Neo to recognize him as such.

Quote:

Pathfinder deliberately cut that line and doesn't contain any replacement "in universe" explanation of the ability.

]Paizo did that with a lot of things. Your very question in this post is probably what led to Paizo taking this route. Whenever the rules try to concoct an explanation for why things work they way they do, you get two inherent problems:

1. People are going to find fault with the rationale and impose restrictions;

2. Some circumstance is going to arise such that a GM is going to think the nature of how the power works should be affected, when the rules don't intent for that to happen. Case in point, you're suggesting that if a Ranger doesn't recognize its FE, it can't gain the benefit. Guess what? By removing the rationale, Paizo is affirming that they want the bonus to apply unless they explicitly tell you it doesn't.

Quote:

The same question arises with similar abilities. If a dwarf with Hatred is fighting a masked humanoid assassin of unknown race does he get to know the assassin is a half orc when he makes an attack roll?

Does it say recognition is a requirement? If not, then the bonus applies and the dwarf instinctively knows its fighting something with orc blood.

[N N 959]

Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

Let me crunch up the question for you: "Does a ranger (or the ranger's player) learn the creature type of a creature he attacks if that creature is subject to his favored enemy rule?"

Yes. If you hit a tomato with a bat and it responds like a baseball, you know damn well it's no tomato. If you grab a beach ball and you find it weighs, rolls, and fits your fingers like a bowling ball, you're going to treat it like a bowling ball and be able to knock down bowling pins just as you would with a bowling ball.

If you have a bonus to for using a bowling ball, you'll apply it to the "beach" ball and benefit from the bonus because the thing you're using responds like a bowling ball, whether it looks like one or not.

Quote:

Rule Question 1: Does the ranger hit?

Rule Question 2: Does the ranger know why he hit?

1. Yes.

2. Yes. While the rules don't explicitly address FE in this context, players are entitled to know what modifiers are being applied to their PC. The rules don't allow GMs to hit players with invisible modifiers. You may not know what your having to hit through, but you know what you're using to hit with.

[N N 959]

Ring_of_Gyges wrote:

The more fundamental issue I'm trying to get it is that Pathfinder frequently gives mechanical effects without much discussion of what those mechanics are trying to model.

That's right. And because this has often involved removing an explanations that already existed, I've interpreted that as a specific intent that GMs should not be denying these mechanics based on an arbitrary assessment of applicable circumstances.

Why? Because it removes a huge burden on the GM to figure out how it should work and allows for GMs to be more consistent in their application of the rules.

For example, in your example, what if Ranger Rick's buddy Fred doesn't know they're fighting a devil. Fred decides to screw with Ranger Rick and arbitrary tell Ranger Rick, "hey...I've identified that monster, it's a a devil, you should be able to take it down by yourself." Fred think's he's lying to Ranger Rick. Does Ranger Rick now get the bonus?

Who knows. There is no right answer because all the game mechanics are arbitrary so there is no "truth" or proof we can go through. So let's eliminate, where we can, situations where the GM has to try and resolve how/why mechanics work. We'll tell you when they work and when they don't. There's no need to burden GMs with connecting the dots.

And more to the point, if we open the door for GMs to take this approach, some of them are going to rule contrary to what we intend. Your very question is such an example. You're suggesting the Ranger shouldn't get the bonus because he needs to know what he's fighting. I have no doubt there is a small army of GMs that would agree with that approach. Well, obviously Paizo feels differently, because there is no such requirement.

[Spacelard]

GM: Tim the ranger's hair stands up on the back of his neck...His ranger senses tingle!
GM: You can add your FCB when attacking *points* that figure...

Game moves on without worrying about stuff which really doesn't matter and if you do, over complicates things and opens up all sorts of unseen problems.

Everyone has fun.

[roguerouge]

I'd justify this as muscle memory, which means that it's unconscious as a result of training.

[Murdock Mudeater]

Given that it's an Ex ability, I'd argue that the way FE manifests is in a combat style of sorts. The ranger has learned that certain motions and ways of striking, are more effective against their favored enemy. So they've trained to attempt this against every opponent they face, knowing full well that it only has effect against certain opponents. The other bonuses are the same, it's a matter of being extra trained in a certain way of thinking, one that is strong against a certain type of opponent.

[William Werminster]

N N 959 wrote:

Quoting a very nice and well explained chain of posts.

Excellent explanation.

Maybe let the ranger auto-succed on a passive Perception check against Disguise after the first hit?

A passive Perception roll + FE bonus + Familiarity bonus if the previous option wasn't convincing for other group of GMs?

Always adding the FE bonus to hit/damage from the beggining of course.