I noticed the rules say for really obscure monsters you can make the dc 15+ Monster's CR or higher, which makes sense. However, it uses the Tarrasque as an example, which doesn't make sense to me, as even though it's a unique monster I would think it and the other Spawn of Rovagug would be pretty (in)famous. Even if they haven't been seen in centuries I would think most history books would mention them.
Well maybe dragons are (in general) commonly known enough that they wouldn't be 15+, they'd only be 5+.
Also let's be honest, by the time you're up to fighting an ancient red dragon you should be able to breeze past a DC:35 Knowledge check.
Re: The Tarrasque, we know it well as players, but how many people would have seen it in-game? Not many. How many of those would have lived to tell the tale? Even less. How many of those would have written about it? A very small number now. And finally how many of those who wrote about it were reliable? Anyone who's studied hostory knows that you can't always trust your sources.
There are plenty of other giant beasties on Golarion. Knowing that this giant beastie is the most recent spawn of Rovagug doesn't seem like a gimme.
It’s not impossible for history books to lack descriptions of things, or for depictions to be completely wrong... it might be that all written record of the terrasque are second or third hand, depictions based on retellings passes down by word of mouth so many times they are either more terrifying than the real thing or fail to encompass its true terror.
Either way, the creature may be known about, but to recognize one in reality may not be as simple as one might think.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
or that it's breath weapon can melt stone
The group I play with had one such encounter... and of course we didn’t roll on the knowledge to identify that aspect... hid behind a stone only for our stone wall to melt...
Re: The Tarrasque, we know it well as players, but how many people would have seen it in-game? Not many. How many of those would have lived to tell the tale? Even less. How many of those would have written about it? A very small number now. And finally how many of those who wrote about it were reliable? Anyone who's studied hostory knows that you can't always trust your sources.There are plenty of other giant beasties on Golarion. Knowing that this giant beastie is the most recent spawn of Rovagug doesn't seem like a gimme.
Well, think about it this way, not one person who is still alive today has met Caligula, yet your average person would know who he is and there are lots of books with info about him even though that was thousands of years ago. That said, I could see a bunch of misinformation forming around a creature so famous. Maybe if the player the check but only by a little they could get mostly right info but some weird false information mixed in.
|
I assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
I don't actually disagree, but it definitely shows why I think the system is wonky.
Try this one on for size - some crazy Vivisectionist has created a bizarre, one of a kind creature...with two HD.
DC to determine basically everything about it?
17 DC
Well, think about it this way, not one person who is still alive today has met Caligula, yet your average person would know who he is and there are lots of books with info about him even though that was thousands of years ago. That said, I could see a bunch of misinformation forming around a creature so famous. Maybe if the player the check but only by a little they could get mostly right info but some weird false information mixed in.
Yeah I think Caligular is a good example. Most people know the name, a lot will know some stories, but knowing any useful information isn't as likely. Then there's the problem of accuracy. How much of what you "know" about caligular is correct? I bet it's not as much as you think.
Then if we take that to the question of this thread, how likely would you be to recognise Caligular if you saw him walking down the street?
Exactly.17 DCI assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
I don't actually disagree, but it definitely shows why I think the system is wonky.
Try this one on for size - some crazy Vivisectionist has created a bizarre, one of a kind creature...with two HD.
DC to determine basically everything about it?
This doesn't seem right. Math us through it?
|
|
This doesn't seem right. Math us through it?Exactly.17 DCI assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
I don't actually disagree, but it definitely shows why I think the system is wonky.
Try this one on for size - some crazy Vivisectionist has created a bizarre, one of a kind creature...with two HD.
DC to determine basically everything about it?
15 for being rare/unique plus CR.
Of course when presenting the info on a successful check I wouldn't give the creatures whole backstory, but what makes it up as the PCs identify its parts and workings.
When I was playing a PFS PbP game, our DM let us ask 1 specific question about the monster for every 5 we defeated the DC to identify the monster, like AC, which Saves were high/low, the exact amount of one save, resistances/immunities, etc., and I thought it was a pretty cool way to incorporate high rolls for knowledge checks, so I implemented this in my own game and it's worked out really well. Happy PC's make Happy DM's.
I think the rule in the books is that the GM gives information, rather than the players asking for info. This means you wouldn't always be able to ask "what's it's worst save?", you'd be given the information that the GM thinks is worth giving (although remember GMs, it has to be "useful" information).
My group usually lets the players ask for info, it gives us a little more for knowledge checks and saves the GM some mental energy.
I generally make charts for whatever is the main monster in an adventure. I include the Strengths and weaknesses but also some ecology and mentality stuff.
For Example Giant Wood Spiders of Spinner's Wood
DC: 6 Nature test
Basic Success lets you know they are Hunting Spiders not Trap laying, but they still use Webs for their lairs(Special Ability #1), but also includes their size (about the same as a Small Dog)and eating habits (Sheep from the local farms)
11: tells players about their paralytic poison (Ability #2), but also that it is not normally lethal.
16+ I'm out of special abilities so from here it's just ecology stuff, like how they form colonies to hibernate through the winters and collect prey for the larder to get then through the cold months, before turning on each other when the food runs out. Come spring the last survivor leaves the nest to go hunting.
I mean, you could get to that point with knowledge checks in PF, you'd just have to roll ludicrously high.
Exactly.17 DCI assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
I don't actually disagree, but it definitely shows why I think the system is wonky.
Try this one on for size - some crazy Vivisectionist has created a bizarre, one of a kind creature...with two HD.
DC to determine basically everything about it?
It would probably actually be 16 as most 2 HD creatures are only CR 1
This doesn't seem right. Math us through it?
15 for being rare/unique plus CR.
Of course when presenting the info on a successful check I wouldn't give the creatures whole backstory, but what makes it up as the PCs identify its parts and workings.
It would actually probably be 16, as most 2 HD creatures are only CR 1.
|
I just recently tackled this topic on my blog. The rules that resulted from a series of posts are listed here.
General gist is that knowledge checks to learn monster lore shouldn't be based on CR. If you're interested, have a look.
This doesn't seem right. Math us through it?Exactly.17 DCI assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
I don't actually disagree, but it definitely shows why I think the system is wonky.
Try this one on for size - some crazy Vivisectionist has created a bizarre, one of a kind creature...with two HD.
DC to determine basically everything about it?
15 for being rare/unique plus CR.
Of course when presenting the info on a successful check I wouldn't give the creatures whole backstory, but what makes it up as the PCs identify its parts and workings.
Wouldn't hitting DC 15 + CR only provide "a bit of useful information about this monster" (e.g., "its scales were clearly engineered from those of a red dragon; you suspect it is impervious to all but the hottest flames") rather than "basically everything about it"? I suppose if it's a really boring monster that might be enough.
|
|
Wouldn't hitting DC 15 + CR only provide "a bit of useful information about this monster" (e.g., "its scales were clearly engineered from those of a red dragon; you suspect it is impervious to all but the hottest flames") rather than "basically everything about it"? I suppose if it's a really boring monster that might be enough.This doesn't seem right. Math us through it?Exactly.17 DCI assumed the default of 10, but sure, 5+, so only a DC 30, but if it was merely a baby, DC 11.
Just how strange do dragons get, as they mature?
Honestly you don't usually need a roll for players (and their characters) to recognise a dragon as a dragon.
The knowledge check here would be to determine if you know anything about them mechanically, and in this sense they DO get weirder as they age. Knowing that this particular dragon has a fire aura, or that it's breath weapon can melt stone are things you may not know unless you identify it's age category.
I don't actually disagree, but it definitely shows why I think the system is wonky.
Try this one on for size - some crazy Vivisectionist has created a bizarre, one of a kind creature...with two HD.
DC to determine basically everything about it?
15 for being rare/unique plus CR.
Of course when presenting the info on a successful check I wouldn't give the creatures whole backstory, but what makes it up as the PCs identify its parts and workings.
Derp.
My eyes glazed past "basically everything", it would be DC 15+CR to learn basics, then 1 additional piece of useful information for every +5 you beat it by.
I often do, in situations like that, but do get grumbles.
And so you should. You have just said, "Your abilities don't matter."
I often do, in situations like that, but do get grumbles.And so you should. You have just said, "Your abilities don't matter."
That's not really true for the example case in which it's a brand-new creature that nobody's ever encountered before. In the case of a truly new discovery, I'd allow the knowledge check to identify type and subtype, and perhaps things that are evident from external physical characteristics of the creature ("it's fangs drip with venom"), but that's it. Knowledge skills still rely on having had an opportunity to learn about something *somewhere*.