Does the bonus from Monster Hunter persist if you change Prey?

[N N 959]

This is a reposting of a previous questions, but now the title makes it clear.

Reposting some of the discussions...

N N 959 wrote:

Thanks for weighing in.

Alchemical Wonder wrote:

“If you use Hunt Prey against a creature when you already have a creature designated, the prior creature loses the designation and the new prey gains the designation.”

Since the creature loses the designation, it is no longer prey and you lose any benefits of that designation including the circumstance bonus from Monster Hunter.

Yes, I suggested that interpretation in my OP, but Monster Hunter doesn't explicitly require that the target remain Prey.

Monster Hunter wrote:

You and allies you tell gain a +1 circumstance bonus to your next attack roll against that prey.

This is ambiguous as to whether the bonus is lost when you designate a new Prey. As written, you get a bonus against that prey, because you just used Monster Hunter as a result of choosing a prey. It doesn't say "or until you designate a new prey." If that's what is intended, then it needs to be added.

Quote:

Doesn’t matter if you attack something else before you attack your prey, the first attack against that prey gets a circumstance bonus.

Yeah...that part isn't ambiguous.

Quote:

Mechanically, being sensed doesn’t seem to be necessary to share the benefits as far as I can tell, but I’d say your party would need to be told the flavor of your Recall Knowledge result to receive the benefits.

I agree it seems logical that there has to be communication of some sort, but it's oddly not required. Contrast that with Scout's Warning which explicitly attaches Audible/Visual labels to the action.

Scout's Warning wrote:

Depending on whether you use gestures or call out, this action gains either the visual or auditory trait, respectively.

Clearly Paizo is thinking about the consequences of communicating information that carries a mechanical benefit. Is Monster Hunter an oversight? Neither Monster Hunter or Warden impose a label.

So going back to the original question, a Ranger could track something, declare it Prey, crit success on Monster Hunter and impart the bonus to allies, but then go off in another direction. Technically this still conveys the bonus. The Ranger doesn't have to be seen or heard during the attack to get the bonus. That being the case, it doesn't logically follow that designating a new prey would cancel the previous bonus.

If we are going to attach an aspect of realism, we might say that the bonus conveyed is based on the Ranger identifying the weaknesses of the Prey. Those weakness remain known until they are exploited, at which point the creature is presumed to defend agains them. Sot it would make sense that if the Ranger doesn't have to be present for the bonus to be used, the bonus would persist even if a new prey is designated.

If Paizo is reading this, I would welcome a generous interpretation of this ability and the persistence of the bonus from MH and MW until they are used. This would really help improve an ability that has an exceedingly low chance of firing until level 10. Creature not only has to fall under Nature, but the Ranger has to crit succeed using a tertiary stat. Allowing the benefit to persist until used, does not seem to be unreasonable and is justifiable given the narrative.

If the benefit is lost upon setting a new target, then what happens if you circle back around?

Monster Hunter wrote:

]You can give bonuses from Monster Hunter only once per day against a particular creature.

This seems to suggest the Ranger can only use MH once against any creature. So it would help if that bonus, once conveyed, remains until used. That would alleviate the need for the Ranger to try and game the system about when to roll the RK check. It would make the benefit more useful to the party and alleviate the burden of the Ranger having to wait until everyone attacked his/her current prey before switching to a new one. Otherwise, you're further hamstringing this feat by requiring the Ranger sit around and wait until everyone gets their attack in.

If we consider Monster Warden, it makes less sense for the benefit to be lost upon a new designation.

Monster Warden wrote:

You understand how to defend yourself and others against your prey. When you grant bonuses from Monster Hunter, you and your allies also each gain a +1 circumstance bonus to your next saving throw against that particular creature and to your AC against that creature’s next attack against you.

As written, this seems to persist. I would think it would be less complicated if both for these work the same way with regard to duration.

**crossing fingers and hoping Paizo makes these work the same and until used***

[Castilliano]

Hunt Prey (the action) is required to activate Monster Hunter and designate which target for the Recall Knowledge & bonus.
But Monster Hunter is otherwise its own ability and does not specify the target having to remain "hunted" by you.

So you could target 2 different enemies, 1 for the frontliners and maybe 1 in back for you to shoot twice with your last action.

Funnily enough, this leaves the loophole that if the enemy flees, some of those bonuses by RAW remain forever (if unused). But as far as game balance goes, the Ranger paid a feat for a minor buff that works once per enemy for one action AND requires a Critical Success, as compared to a Bard's one-action minor (but better) auto-buff which works every round vs. any enemy repeatedly (and it tends to stack better).

The true benefit for Rangers is that they can combine two actions (ID & Hunt) into one, not that they're (occasionally) passing out bonuses. Given that a Ranger should be the martial that best IDs monsters and they're already burning an action with Hunt Prey, this feat option is necessary for Rangers to be thematic without eating up actions when they're also supposed to be good ambushers.

Now this got me contemplating a Bard/MCD Ranger who sings, hunts, then shoots twice. Use Bardic Lore to ID anything...though that'll seldom get you a crit, so maybe not. Maybe Ranger/MCD Bard at 10th though? Hmm...

[N N 959]

Castilliano wrote:

Hunt Prey (the action) is required to activate Monster Hunter and designate which target for the Recall Knowledge & bonus.

But Monster Hunter is otherwise its own ability and does not specify the target having to remain "hunted" by you.

I agree that this is a valid interpretation. However, it's not 100% clear that this is how it should work and I'd be great for Paizo to confirm this.

[Captain Morgan]

I certainly intend to let the bonuses persist, but that's based mostly on a belief that the feats are underpowered and need the boost. Well, Monster Warden is underpowered at least. This means that if a ranger scouts out a group of enemies ahead of time he could potentially give his entire party bonuses on all of them going into the fight.

I'd also consider allowing the ranger to retry the check to aim for a critical success or another critical success if the bonus has already been used. The rules support making additional Recall Knowledge attempts to recall additional information but suggest adjusting the difficulty upwards each time. I'd probably just allow the ranger to try again at the original DC because they should be able to note additional openings as the fight evolves.

These feats are thematic as all get out though. I'm converting the NPC leader of the Black Arrows and he's going to have these feats, favored enemy, Outwit, and Additional Lore. I'm hoping with all that he can critically succeed quite often.

[N N 959]

Captain Morgan wrote:

This means that if a ranger scouts out a group of enemies ahead of time he could potentially give his entire party bonuses on all of them going into the fight.

At level 10, that's very possible. Until then, s/he'd have to hope the group was all low level animals.

The only caveat with this, however, is the GM overhead in managing who still had active bonuses and who didn't. I have been contemplating a change to the rule. It might be more manageable for the Ranger to only give a bonus on the next attack, not to every ally. Let the Ranger use this ability as Single action as often as desired on the prey. I'm still tinkering.

I would also consider letting Monster Hunter use Nature to identify all prey, but those outside of Nature are at -4. Monster Warden could reduce that to -2 and MMH eliminates it.

Nevertheless, I agree with you that it is a fairly abysmal feat at Level 2 that skyrockets at lvl 10. This just compels people to retrain into it, which feels broken.

[Captain Morgan]

I built a level 7 ranger with +18 on his most applicable monster identification skills, which gives him a 25% chance to Crit on an equal leveled opponent. Also, if you're scouting a large group of enemies they are almost certainly of a lower level, because throwing a large number of equal level creatures at your party is how you get into coin flip TPK territory. And if you are just watching the enemies you can keep rolling and hope for that crit. Your odds of doing so get harder with subsequent attempt by RAW, but I don't see any reason not to go for it and fish for twenties. (As a house rule to avoid excess rolling and throw a bone to the feat, you might just assume that given sufficient time to study someone they will eventually observe a weakness. The feat's flavor is more about observation than knowledge anyway, IMO.)

I dabbled with making it a single feat that scales with Nature proficiency in the playtest, but that wound up feeling a little OP for a single feat once Masterful kicked in. Especially now when the difference between trained and untrained is so much. I think if anything I'd make those bonuses apply on a normal success out the gate and maybe double the bonus or its duration on a crit. Being able to use Nature to identify all creatures would STILL be worth a class feat on its own.

I feel like tracking who you still have the bonus on should be the player's responsibility, not the GM, although speaking as a GM who tracks that stuff a lot better than my players do I feel the pain of a GM who winds up having to do it anyway.

[N N 959]

Captain Morgan wrote:

I built a level 7 ranger with +18 on his most applicable monster identification skills, which gives him a 25% chance to Crit on an equal leveled opponent.

That skill would most likely be Nature, so at level 7, you're still only identifying "creatures of natural orign and natural planes." Considering there are five monster groups, you're looking at a 25% chance on 20% of a creature you might encounter if the distribution was uniform. That's a 5% chance your going to benefit from MH through 9 levels against any specific creature...if the animals you encountered were random.

[Captain Morgan]

N N 959 wrote:

Captain Morgan wrote:

I built a level 7 ranger with +18 on his most applicable monster identification skills, which gives him a 25% chance to Crit on an equal leveled opponent.

That skill would most likely be Nature, so at level 7, you're still only identifying "creatures of natural orign and natural planes." Considering there are five monster groups, you're looking at a 25% chance on 20% of a creature you might encounter if the distribution was uniform. That's a 5% chance your going to benefit from MH through 9 levels against any specific creature...if the animals you encountered were random.

Skills, as in multiple actually. Nature was one, but Giant Lore is the other. Additional Lore is a great skill feat if you have any sort of guidance as to the direction of the campaign, which is exactly what a player's guide to an AP tells you for example. Very few adventures are actually random with their encounters. There's almost always a thematic tie and some types wind up as more common. That's why things like Favored Enemy or Favored Terrain were worth the paper they were printed on in PF1.

Giant Lore is great for Rise of the Runelords or Giant Slayer. Dragon Lore seems like a great pick for Age of Ashes. Undead Lore for Carrion Crown. Hogoblin Lore for Ironfang Invasion Pirate lore for skulls and shackles, etc.

Once you factor that in, Additional Lore becomes a very tempting choice indeed to get your proficiency in an extremely relevant skill scaling to legendary. Particularly because an applicable lore skill gets a lower DC. So my ranger actually has a 35% chance at least against Giants of his level. A REALLY applicable lore skill might do even better. Picking Ironfang Legion Lore actually fits very well with one of the background traits in the AP’s player's guide, and would probably lower the DC to very easy for a 50% chance of a critical success.

And given downtime and a little retraining you can probably keep that Lore score maxed for any given chapter. For example, Ironfang Legion lore is great for chapter 2, but there's enough foreshadowing to warrant getting Darklands lore for chapter 4 and Blighted Lore for chapter 5.

All that being said, I still think the feats are weaker than they need to be. I dedicated an awful lot of resources and planning to make this build work. (Not all, he's still going to be a decent Archer, very sneaky, and quite intimidating.) But it's definitely a character who is good at his schtick and whose allies will appreciate having him around.

[UndeadViking]

Captain Morgan wrote:

I certainly intend to let the bonuses persist, but that's based mostly on a belief that the feats are underpowered and need the boost. Well, Monster Warden is underpowered at least.

Monster Hunter definitely seems underpowered, especially at low levels where you are probably better off choosing a different feat.

I agree with a previous post that the Recall Knowledge check for Monster Hunter should require a normal success vs. a critical success, or at least give the ranger a +2 bonus or something on this check because the chances of getting a critical success are too small to make the feat worth taking.

I play a level 1 ranger archer with the Monster Hunter feat, Trained in Nature with a 14 Wisdom, so he has a +5 bonus, and it was disappointing. The GM set the Recall Knowledge Nature DC at 13 vs. 4 troll opponents and this meant rolling an 18-20 on the dice to _critically succeed_(a 15% chance), which never happened.