Basically the title is the question here. What false info do you give players for combat? What is off-limits or too-far?
For me, I try to make the misinformation something that will quickly be discovered or have a small impact. Biggest way for that is giving fake weaknesses and resistances to specific kinds of damage.
I'll give a false weakness to a damage type the party doesn't typically use (but could), they'll try it and immediately see that the information was false, but they will then just switch back to normal. Not a huge effect, still an effect.
I'll give a false resistance to a damage type the party might use, but isn't reliant on. Them not using that damage type does affect them, but not hugely because they have another viable damage type available, it just limits the options they feel like using (until they spot the deception).
A big caveat however is that I don't do this if it is going to screw them over too much. For instance, if the party's only splash damage or aoe is acid splash I won't tell them a swarm is resistant to acid. If the creature is normally resistant I won't tell them the monster is weak or vice versa. That feels too punishing for my taste.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It can tough to think of on the fly, but I try and make it something that makes the fight more interesting and less frustrating. "It's weak to (it's immunity)!" for instance, isn't all that engaging.
But telling a group that black puddings are weak to slashing weapons makes the fight more challenging, but not in a way that's unaccounted for in the stat block. Misremembering that hags can only be wounded in the light of the moon, a mummy is tied to it's burial place and is weakened if it leaves, bulettes have a vulnerability on their underside... Things that change the texture of battle.
I'd rather my players attempt more interesting actions based on "half-heard rumors" or "stories they were told as children" makes a critical failure a part of the story rather than, "Oh... So we dealt less damage."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just wing it, though I try to give a line of reasoning.
Like if the monster resembles another, I might give a factoid about the other monster. Or I might think about how misinformation might have arisen naturally in taverns or stories.
So for a monster with mainly mundane abilities like a Hill Giant it can be harder than others, but I can toss in some Stone Giant lore or "Hill" magic re: earth that gives a false scare, but doesn't mislead too much.
Or you can be tongue-in-cheek, which I did with some skeletons, knowing that my players knew I was feeding them bad info re: using sharp weapons to cut their tendons or something. Funny thing is, the guy with the pointy stick got a critical so it really looked like great info.
"Everybody try to poke them!"
You can uncover your metagamers pretty fast. :)
I do remember in one temple where all the players except one crit failed a Religion check so each thought the temple was to a different god, with the guy who was right having a low Religion bonus so nobody believed him.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
They could learn:
1. That certain parts of the creature are valuable to the right buyer, delicious when cooked correctly or a potent aphrodisiac.
2. That they can not go near or are attracted to a certain substance.
3. That under the right conditions they can transform into another creature.
4. That they have some origin story related to a powerful entity or a force of nature.
5. That they are children/servitors of a larger, more legendary creature.
6. That some attack they do transfers a slow acting disease or curse, with a local cure (watch for the symptoms).
7. That they have some unique ritual associated with them.
8. That they have an odd reaction to a spell or item.
9. That among them is a shape-shifting caretaker.
10. That it's clearly a humanoid in a costume.
Most of these waste time after a fight or are quickly disproved by wasting a few action, an equivalent of one person being stunned 2. I based this list on folk stories, urban legends and fairy tales of common creatures.
They could learn:
1. That certain parts of the creature are valuable to the right buyer, delicious when cooked correctly or a potent aphrodisiac.
2. That they can not go near or are attracted to a certain substance.
3. That under the right conditions they can transform into another creature.
4. That they have some origin story related to a powerful entity or a force of nature.
5. That they are children/servitors of a larger, more legendary creature.
6. That some attack they do transfers a slow acting disease or curse, with a local cure (watch for the symptoms).
7. That they have some unique ritual associated with them.
8. That they have an odd reaction to a spell or item.
9. That among them is a shape-shifting caretaker.
10. That it's clearly a humanoid in a costume.
Most of these waste time after a fight or are quickly disproved by wasting a few action, an equivalent of one person being stunned 2. I based this list on folk stories, urban legends and fairy tales of common creatures.
This is an A+ list. Stealing some of these for sure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I can't come up with something inventive quickly, I go with flipping a resistance to a vulnerability(and flipping the energy/physical type) or vice versa (ie if its weak to fire, say its resistant to ice). It tends to be believable, but costs at most 1-2 actions for the PCs to disprove it.
If the creature looks likely to have AoO's but doesn't I'll say it does. (I don't like to do the opposite though . The misinformation should cost about 1-2 actions to disprove, but generally speaking shouldn't put the character in extreme danger. Being told something doesn't have an AoO only to be hit by it, feels too gotcha to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They explode violently upon death, inflicting acid damage upon anyone within ten feet of them.
Anyone who eats their raw still-beating heart gains their powers.
They turn into undead after being killed and seek vengeance unless give a proper funeral.
They can be tamed and ridden by anyone sufficiently firm and charismatic.
If they can get within five feet of anyone unconscious or otherwise helpless, they will devour their soul.
If they strike you in combat, they will also implant eggs in your body, which must be surgically removed.
If you give them a gift, they are compelled to give you a more generous gift in return.
They are scared away by naked people.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of these are fun, but telling them a fake reaction is my favorite just because you can get a lot of mileage out of it.
The thing I tend to gloss over for critcal failures on Recall Knowledge is for checks in Exploration mode, especially when they just give flavor text and are low level. If the party isn't trained in all the skills they become quite likely to crit fail things that I'd normally just tell everyone to roll. And feeding players bad plot information just seems like a bad move. Many players have hard enough time keeping things straight in their heads is.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think as a rule of thumb, it's more fun to give false information that will come to light because it makes the PCs do something, than false information that will stay false because it prevents the PCs from trying something.
"Slashing halves its hit points" about a black pudding can be hilarious.
"It splits if you deal lightning damage" will just stop the party from using bottled lightning on the pudding, so the falsehood will never come to light and nothing funny will happen.
So hinting at false weaknesses is better than giving out resistances it doesn't have.
|
I think some of it should be tailored to the PC who just crit-failed. Bookish wizard? "This monster was the result of a fleshwarp done by a drow transmuter, whilst drunk."
Cleric who'd rather learn by debate than endlessly re-reading the ancient texts? "This monster is favoured by that religion, so we should fight it respectfully, lest we become targets for that faith's ire."
Cheerfully experimental alchemist? "I heard this thing tastes great when boiled with some nutmeg! It might also make you stronger for just eating it!"
Fighter who's read up on bunches of monsters so as to avoid things like curses and diseases? "I'm fairly certain this thing's eggs will all hatch upon its' death, and its newborn young will swarm over us. So make with the acid splashes or get ready to run."
A draconic being was actually a type of servant to primordial God of a race of monsters that lived in the location (and one player was a part of).
|
|
Also, Dubious Knowledge is a thing I really like, even though I accept a lot of people won't like it. As the GM, I like adding one lie into multiple truths and watching the PCs figure out which one it is. As a player, I'm totally fine with my character jumping to conclusions about that creature that's currently trying to eat them. But yeah, you need a GM who won't trick you into getting killed because of a crit-fail at the beginning of the fight.