Clever improviser - totally worth it or questionable choice


Advice


Having just hit 5th level with my warpriest of Sarenrae I have to chose if I want to pick up the Clever Improviser ancestry feat (and probably also Incredible Improvisation later) or to sink my ancestry feat into something more tangible like Adapted Cantrip (Electric Arc) or General Training (Fleet).

On paper this acestry feat sounds really nice, but when looking at standard DC's accross all levels starting at 7, i.e. when this feat takes full effect, to level 20 it looks like the feat matters less and less, especially considering a bad attribute score (10 or less).

Level 7 / DC 23 / Roll of 16+ needed to pass a level appropriate check
Level 20 / DC 40 / Roll of 20 needed to pass a level appropriate check

I know that the feat will allow you to do checks like you were trained as an additional benefit, however I would like to have your input on the mathematics behind the feat as well as any ingame experience.

What can I expect as a benefit when I take this feat? Ability to pass easy checks and how often do those come by (my current experience about skill check DC's is more like ~50% chance to succeed even when trained and using a good ability score)? Ability to pass normal checks with a good roll? Ability to not critically fail as many checks in comparison to being totally untrained?

Also which do you consider the best applicable skills for this feat as I probably need to take into account my current skill selection too, i.e. if the majority of you recommends Athletics but I am already trained or better in Athletics?

Thanks!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

In published adventures there are a fair number of lower DCs even in later levels, you aren't always rolling against the DC-by-level table. I believe in the level 12 parts of Age of Ashes there's some DC 20 checks, for instance - the difference between +0 proficiency and +12 proficiency matters a fair amount for a check like that.

I don't think it gives you anything you can't live without, ultimately, but it should matter sometimes.

Design Manager

5 people marked this as a favorite.

It's not just for level-appropriate checks. The alchemist in my WftC game didn't have this feat or the general feat it grants, so when the party was doing a chase at level 17 with DCs around 30, significantly lower than the standard level 17 DC, nonetheless on one of the obstacles he still almost always critically failed, despite 20 Dexterity with an Acrobatics option on the obstacle (he needed a 16 not to critically fail). If he had the feat, he would have succeeded on a 6 instead, and critically succeeded on a 16.


In many ways I've considered this feat a must-have, except when I think it through, I'm not so sure. Maybe it's because I consider Trained in Acrobatics & Athletics to also be must-haves and those cover a majority of the in-world obstacles not tied to level.

If the feat isn't helpful patching up holes in the party (since the DCs are too high), or covering a personal lack of Acr/Ath, then when else does it come into play?
Are there story hoops to jump through that only need a token investment, yet you're screwed if somebody forgot (perhaps randomly in PFS) to cover a skill?


Castilliano wrote:
If the feat isn't helpful patching up holes in the party (since the DCs are too high), or covering a personal lack of Acr/Ath, then when else does it come into play? Are there story hoops to jump through that only need a token investment, yet you're screwed if somebody forgot (perhaps randomly in PFS) to cover a skill?

I don't think so. For example nobody would readily like to rely on this feat when making recall knowledge checks about monsters, even if you could theoretically use the most obscure lores to reduce the DC of the check. Or try to fool the kings inquisitor using Deception, or try to scare the fire giant chieftain using Intimidation (all examples are considering level appropriate challenges).

However as mentioned you can easily overcome lesser obstacles using Acrobatics or Athletics (as mentioned by Mark), tell a petty lie to a lower ranks city guard using Deception or sneak up on some commoners using Stealth without fully having to rely on chance. The question being if this kind of "low level convenience" is worth the investment.

Design Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also Stealth with this feat, plus since we're looking at level 7 Follow the Expert for a +3, can still have a chance of sneaking if your Dex is good. That said my whole group had Stealth so they didn't need it for that. And it's true that the alchemist's Intelligence was so high he had most of the other skills in the game, so that chase was the last time in a while he would have needed the feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find it useful fo being able to aid reliably across a range of skills as you get higher level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
andreww wrote:
I find it useful fo being able to aid reliably across a range of skills as you get higher level.

Noted, but when do you really use this? 2 actions and a reaction for a single +1 bonus sounds rather weak unless you can use it out of combat where I can see its uses.


Yes, it is predominantly for out of combat.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Also Stealth with this feat, plus since we're looking at level 7 Follow the Expert for a +3, can still have a chance of sneaking if your Dex is good.

Doesn't Follow the Expert either duplicate or improve on Untrained Improvisor's effect?


So the feat's good for:
Acrobatics
Athletics
Stealth (generic guards; Follow the Expert)
Deception (generic guards), so likely Intimidation, Diplomacy, and other skills vs. low-levels/non-threats. Avoids messy situations w/ norms.
Aid Another (out of combat)
Token Recall Knowledge rolls (which may help w/ a disguise or scheme)

Really good on a Lizardfolk warrior, yet not for an Elf spy.


Luke Styer wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Also Stealth with this feat, plus since we're looking at level 7 Follow the Expert for a +3, can still have a chance of sneaking if your Dex is good.
Doesn't Follow the Expert either duplicate or improve on Untrained Improvisor's effect?

It duplicates, so at least for Follow The Expert this ancestry feat seems to have no benefit.

CRB page 479 wrote:
Thanks to your ally’s assistance, you can add your level as a proficiency bonus to the associated skill check, even if you’re untrained.


Castilliano wrote:

So the feat's good for:

...
Really good on a Lizardfolk warrior, yet not for an Elf spy.

Well, if you also have the follow up ancestry feat (Incredible Improvisation, level 9) that has a +4 bonus which kinda emulates expert proficiency level and a decent ability score you will have an emergency skill button once per day. Still not impressive but at least something.


Pathfinder Pawns, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I seriously consider taking it on any character that isn't already trained in nearly every skill.

It's great for coming off as "that one hero who can do anything" to the lower-level crowds. XD

Between the ease of getting a decent Intelligence score, feats like Skill Mastery and Natural Skill, and the ability to replace redundant skills with new ones, it's not too hard to get all the basic skills in the game (or come close to doing so) by the time you reach high level. That, I think, diminishes Clever Improviser more than anything.

But hey, if you didn't have a good Intelligence, didn't take any skill feats, AND have a class with poor starting skills, Clever Improviser is pretty gosh darn great!

Design Manager

Luke Styer wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Also Stealth with this feat, plus since we're looking at level 7 Follow the Expert for a +3, can still have a chance of sneaking if your Dex is good.
Doesn't Follow the Expert either duplicate or improve on Untrained Improvisor's effect?

Correct, you don't need it with Follow the Expert.


It’s decent, but not a must-have. If you want to increase your versatility to be able to hit low DC skill checks, it can be pretty neat. I think natural skill is better if you’re already trained in many skills to begin with. I’d probably prefer to pick up general training for a lot of character, getting extra speed or hp is pretty cool.

The utility is also fairly campaign-dependent, if the party is often getting into situations where someone less suited for a particular activity has to make a skill check, it gets a fair bit better.


You also have to question whether you should consider the pathfinder agent dedication instead. It has a similar effect (being pseudo trained), but it opens you up to other dedication feats.

Of course the ancestry feat opens you up to incredible improvisation. But that is a once per day effect.


Ubertron_X wrote:
Adapted Cantrip (Electric Arc) or General Training (Fleet).

Personally, admittedly mostly theorycrafted characters since I'm GM'ing, I tend to pick these up before level 5 anyway, so clever improviser looks a lot better at level 5.

However, by your posts in previous threads, I think I would recommend Adapted cantrip for another tactical option rather than a backup skill check option.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
You also have to question whether you should consider the pathfinder agent dedication instead. It has a similar effect (being pseudo trained), but it opens you up to other dedication feats.

Pathfinder agent is nice as it has 3 skill feats in it so you only have to spend 1 class feat to get your 3 feats to finish out the archetype.


graystone wrote:
lemeres wrote:
You also have to question whether you should consider the pathfinder agent dedication instead. It has a similar effect (being pseudo trained), but it opens you up to other dedication feats.
Pathfinder agent is nice as it has 3 skill feats in it so you only have to spend 1 class feat to get your 3 feats to finish out the archetype.

Oh, I had not noticed that. That further cements my opinion that it is just a big ol' ball of general 'decent' quality.

Now excuse me while I obsessively look through the list of archetypes to see if any of the rest can have this kind of cost saving.


graystone wrote:
lemeres wrote:
You also have to question whether you should consider the pathfinder agent dedication instead. It has a similar effect (being pseudo trained), but it opens you up to other dedication feats.
Pathfinder agent is nice as it has 3 skill feats in it so you only have to spend 1 class feat to get your 3 feats to finish out the archetype.

That sounds like one of those technically correct answers.

I'd probably still allow it though.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Garretmander wrote:
That sounds like one of those technically correct answers.

"Occasionally, an archetype feat works like a skill feat instead of a class feat. These archetype feats have the skill trait, and you select them in place of a skill feat, otherwise following the same rules above. These are not archetype class feats (for instance, to determine the number of Hit Points you gain from the Fighter Resiliency archetype feat)." Core Rulebook pg. 219

Fighter Resiliency Core Rulebook pg. 226
"You gain 3 additional Hit Points for each fighter archetype class feat you have."

Pathfinder Agent Dedication:
"Special You cannot select another dedication feat until you have gained two other feats from the Pathfinder Agent archetype." World Guide pg. 23

So those skill feats are "feats from the Pathfinder Agent archetype" but aren't "archetype class feats" so it seems pretty straight forward that they count for the "two other feats" before you can take another dedication.


IMO this Feat is a must have, to the point where several players in my 3 groups either have taken, or will take, Adopted Ancestry to get it around 9.

APs abound with DC 20 and 25 checks for a multitude of skills, at all levels.

The difference between this and trained is only +2. Literally no other ability in the game gives you bonuses anywhere near as large as this Feat. It really kicks off at 7. The real benefit is the Trained actions though. Separated from your healer and no ranks in Medicine? No problem! Locked in a room without your Rogue? Who cares! Need to track your kidnapped Ranger? I got this! Need to make some money? Craft away!

The two main components to the proficiency numbers are level and ability mod. Ranks are really more for overcoming gating. This Feat gives you the largest part of proficiency to everything.


Aratorin wrote:
IMO this Feat is a must have

It's pretty sweet even if it was just for Lore skills as they often have some nice reductions in DC. For instance, look at the library research rolls: "Research Checks DC 18 Academia Lore or Library Lore, DC 23 Occultism" so the 5 easier roll more than makes up for proficiency there. It gets you Driving Lore, Piloting Lore and Sailing Lore for the new vehicle rules: using a animal and cart is Piloting Check - Driving Lore (DC 16) or Nature (DC 18 to DC 26, depending on pulling creature) so it can be a 2-10 point DC reduction.

Adding other skills, research and influence subsystems offer various skills to roll and this feat allows you to pick the lowest one to use. For instance, with the influence subsystem you'll always get the lowest DC in discovery and that leads to the lowest DC in influence.

Example in book:
"Discovery: DC 13 Mercantile Lore, DC 18 Perception, DC 16 Society
Influence Skills: DC 16 Accounting Lore (noting how the theater could be made profitable), DC 16 Crafting (volunteering to repair the building), DC 20 Intimidation, DC 20 Performance, DC 22 Diplomacy, DC 24 Deception"

So you'd have the Discovery: DC 13 Mercantile Lore and the Influence Skills: DC 16 Accounting Lore (noting how the theater could be made profitable) or DC 16 Crafting (volunteering to repair the building).


Garretmander wrote:
Ubertron_X wrote:
Adapted Cantrip (Electric Arc) or General Training (Fleet).

Personally, admittedly mostly theorycrafted characters since I'm GM'ing, I tend to pick these up before level 5 anyway, so clever improviser looks a lot better at level 5.

However, by your posts in previous threads, I think I would recommend Adapted cantrip for another tactical option rather than a backup skill check option.

Nice observations Dr. Watson. ;)

Being totally new to PF2 (i.e. not following any playtests before our session 0) and starting from scratch I simply chose the cleric class feat Healing Hands via Natural Ambition instead of going for an attack cantrip at level 1 because it was agreed that I would be playing the dedicated party healer. I have not regretted my selection in any way but nonetheless agree that I have found my standard options lacking, especially when it comes to ranged attacks.

Not wanting to dismiss Clever Improvisor from the get go I made this thread, calling for your feedback and advice because sometimes not entirely obvious benefits can easily be overlooked by any individual. So thanks to all of you who have already contributed to this thread.


Ubertron_X wrote:
Castilliano wrote:
If the feat isn't helpful patching up holes in the party (since the DCs are too high), or covering a personal lack of Acr/Ath, then when else does it come into play? Are there story hoops to jump through that only need a token investment, yet you're screwed if somebody forgot (perhaps randomly in PFS) to cover a skill?

I don't think so. For example nobody would readily like to rely on this feat when making recall knowledge checks about monsters, even if you could theoretically use the most obscure lores to reduce the DC of the check. Or try to fool the kings inquisitor using Deception, or try to scare the fire giant chieftain using Intimidation (all examples are considering level appropriate challenges).

However as mentioned you can easily overcome lesser obstacles using Acrobatics or Athletics (as mentioned by Mark), tell a petty lie to a lower ranks city guard using Deception or sneak up on some commoners using Stealth without fully having to rely on chance. The question being if this kind of "low level convenience" is worth the investment.

Emphasis mine.

Why would nobody really like to rely on this feat for Recall Knowledge checks?


Mythraine wrote:
Ubertron_X wrote:
Castilliano wrote:
If the feat isn't helpful patching up holes in the party (since the DCs are too high), or covering a personal lack of Acr/Ath, then when else does it come into play? Are there story hoops to jump through that only need a token investment, yet you're screwed if somebody forgot (perhaps randomly in PFS) to cover a skill?

I don't think so. For example nobody would readily like to rely on this feat when making recall knowledge checks about monsters, even if you could theoretically use the most obscure lores to reduce the DC of the check. Or try to fool the kings inquisitor using Deception, or try to scare the fire giant chieftain using Intimidation (all examples are considering level appropriate challenges).

However as mentioned you can easily overcome lesser obstacles using Acrobatics or Athletics (as mentioned by Mark), tell a petty lie to a lower ranks city guard using Deception or sneak up on some commoners using Stealth without fully having to rely on chance. The question being if this kind of "low level convenience" is worth the investment.

Emphasis mine.

Why would nobody really like to rely on this feat for Recall Knowledge checks?

I can certainly think of situations where it is useful. Such as a monster hunter ranger that doesn't want to invest into knowledge skills because they become obsolete (Since they can just use nature for everything starting at level 10). In that case, you are getting "free" recall checks, so you might as well roll something.

And that is not an obscure situation for a 'fake scaling on lore' discussion. The pathfinder agent archetype is a good choice for a knowledge centered build like that.


lemeres wrote:
Mythraine wrote:
Ubertron_X wrote:
Castilliano wrote:
If the feat isn't helpful patching up holes in the party (since the DCs are too high), or covering a personal lack of Acr/Ath, then when else does it come into play? Are there story hoops to jump through that only need a token investment, yet you're screwed if somebody forgot (perhaps randomly in PFS) to cover a skill?

I don't think so. For example nobody would readily like to rely on this feat when making recall knowledge checks about monsters, even if you could theoretically use the most obscure lores to reduce the DC of the check. Or try to fool the kings inquisitor using Deception, or try to scare the fire giant chieftain using Intimidation (all examples are considering level appropriate challenges).

However as mentioned you can easily overcome lesser obstacles using Acrobatics or Athletics (as mentioned by Mark), tell a petty lie to a lower ranks city guard using Deception or sneak up on some commoners using Stealth without fully having to rely on chance. The question being if this kind of "low level convenience" is worth the investment.

Emphasis mine.

Why would nobody really like to rely on this feat for Recall Knowledge checks?

I can certainly think of situations where it is useful. Such as a monster hunter ranger that doesn't want to invest into knowledge skills because they become obsolete (Since they can just use nature for everything starting at level 10). In that case, you are getting "free" recall checks, so you might as well roll something.

And that is not an obscure situation for a 'fake scaling on lore' discussion. The pathfinder agent archetype is a good choice for a knowledge centered build like that.

Since it's a combat action, and given the low bonus, it could be a waste to expend one action out of 3 in order to try recall knowledge.

Let us consider a lvl 7 character ( when clever improviser finally starts working at full power ).

His monster range could be around 5 and 9 ( maybe some exception above 9, but let's be nice and just consider a -2/+2 level range ).

Quote:

-lvl5 DC 20

-lvl6 DC 22
-lvl7 DC 23
-lvl8 DC 24
-lvl9 DC 26

These would be the base DC, but we also have to remember that some monsters or simply recall knowledge checks could be slighly higher, depends the adventure or the task.

Mobs perception would be also more or less the same ( with exceptions ).

For an instance, a Dracolisk is a lvl 9 creature with DC 28 instead of 26

These are data.
What happens in terms of DC during an adventure.

Our lvl 7 character will have a +7 on his check, which could be enhanced by its stats.

A non wizard/alchemist class is unlikely to have 18 int by lvl 7, while many combatant classes ( as I happen to see ) will have 10, because they prefer to rely on different stats ( Str/Dex/wis/const/char ).

However, let's split the hair in 2 and say that our character has 14 int, so a +2 ( unlikely but even coming at a middle ground won't change that much in some situations ).

Now our character's bonuses against the previous dc levels would be

Quote:

-lvl5 | +9 | 50% success

-lvl6 | +9 | 40% success
-lvl7 | +9 | 35% success
-lvl8 | +9 | 30% success
-lvl9 | +9 | 20% success

Not extremely bad, but in a combat would be nice to have a higher modifier in order not to waste an action.

Now the same tasks performed by a wizard/alchemist/druid/cleric with expert proficiency ( or eventually a bard with bardic lore and 18 int )

Quote:

-lvl5 | +15 | 80% success /20% critical success

-lvl6 | +15 | 70% success
-lvl7 | +15 | 65% success
-lvl8 | +15 | 60% success
-lvl9 | +15 | 50% success

As you can see the difference is huge.

What I don't really get is if by unlocking trick magic item with one of the 4 knowledges then, with clever improviser, I'd be able to use the trick magic item with any of the others, or I have to be trained in those I want to use in order to trick.


Not wasting an action is one thing, however not rolling a critical failure and getting fed wrong information also adds to the mix, because wasting an action *and* probably getting false information is not very attractive.

Taking your example of +9 versus the different levels:

-lvl5 | +9 | 05% crit fail vs 50% success
-lvl6 | +9 | 15% crit fail vs 40% success
-lvl7 | +9 | 20% crit fail vs 35% success
-lvl8 | +9 | 25% crit fail vs 30% success
-lvl9 | +9 | 35% crit fail vs 20% success

And this is with +2 due to 14 intelligence. Without any Int bonus the chances drastically change.

-lvl5 | +7 | 15% crit fail vs 40% success
-lvl6 | +7 | 25% crit fail vs 30% success
-lvl7 | +7 | 30% crit fail vs 25% success
-lvl8 | +7 | 35% crit fail vs 20% success
-lvl9 | +7 | 45% crit fail vs 10% success


Ubertron_X wrote:

Not wasting an action is one thing, however not rolling a critical failure and getting fed wrong information also adds to the mix, because wasting an action *and* probably getting false information is not very attractive.

Taking your example of +9 versus the different levels:

-lvl5 | +9 | 05% crit fail vs 50% success
-lvl6 | +9 | 15% crit fail vs 40% success
-lvl7 | +9 | 20% crit fail vs 35% success
-lvl8 | +9 | 25% crit fail vs 30% success
-lvl9 | +9 | 35% crit fail vs 20% success

And this is with +2 due to 14 intelligence. Without any Int bonus the chances drastically change.

-lvl5 | +7 | 15% crit fail vs 40% success
-lvl6 | +7 | 25% crit fail vs 30% success
-lvl7 | +7 | 30% crit fail vs 25% success
-lvl8 | +7 | 35% crit fail vs 20% success
-lvl9 | +7 | 45% crit fail vs 10% success

Yeah I totally agree ( I was too focused on the success range that I forgot about the critical failure chance ).

Even if... i really like when it happens ( or when a player has dubious knowledge ).

Liberty's Edge

It's definitely not worth it on level-appropriate Recall Knowledge if you can't use it for specialized Lores.

That said, specialized Lores do, per p.506, reduce DCs by between 2 and 5. Which makes all those numbers a whole lot better (if not quite on par with the real expert), so if you can use it like that and have decent Int I'd say it's a very reasonable option.


I think you can't use it like a bardic lore with a -4.

Liberty's Edge

HumbleGamer wrote:
I think you can't use it like a bardic lore with a -4.

Sure, and that's a valid choice to make as a GM...but the comment that provoked this digression was that it wasn't worth it on knowledge even if you could use it for obscure Lores.

I disagree with that. It's worth it on knowledge if you can use it for the -2 to -5 DC from virtual Lores, though not worth it if you can't


Deadmanwalking wrote:
HumbleGamer wrote:
I think you can't use it like a bardic lore with a -4.

Sure, and that's a valid choice to make as a GM...but the comment that provoked this digression was that it wasn't worth it on knowledge even if you could use it for obscure Lores.

I disagree with that. It's worth it on knowledge if you can use it for the -2 to -5 DC from virtual Lores, though not worth it if you can't

Lores imho are in a not so good spot currently.

- They take 1 skill feat
- You can't select your BG lore to improve ( unless gnome ancestry feat )
- You will eventually become legendary in any lore you took as additional lore ( because reasons. this is very good but it forces your character to continue learning even if it wouldn't have decided to pursue that path till the end ).
- They are too specific ( it could have been a good thing, but given the system and their spot it's not ).

To me they should be outside the skills.

Something you can learn by spending time and golds, and something which can force you to look for an expert instead of resolving everything through knowledge checks ( because some checks would require lores and not knowledge checks ).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
HumbleGamer wrote:
I think you can't use it like a bardic lore with a -4.

Sure, and that's a valid choice to make as a GM...but the comment that provoked this digression was that it wasn't worth it on knowledge even if you could use it for obscure Lores.

I disagree with that. It's worth it on knowledge if you can use it for the -2 to -5 DC from virtual Lores, though not worth it if you can't

I don't think you can invent lores that suit your need.

Otherwise, at level 1, anyone could invent a lore to get the +5 bonus when rolling any Recall Knowledge instead of using the relevant skill.
You can only roll a Lore check if you have the Lore or if it's specifically asked to use that Lore.

Liberty's Edge

SuperBidi wrote:

I don't think you can invent lores that suit your need.

Otherwise, at level 1, anyone could invent a lore to get the +5 bonus when rolling any Recall Knowledge instead of using the relevant skill.
You can only roll a Lore check if you have the Lore or if it's specifically asked to use that Lore.

I'm pretty sure you can indeed invent Lores. There are rules for it in the book. The big restrictions are that you need to invest a Skill in it and Lores are explicitly not allowed to be as broad as other Skills.

Clever Improviser, by RAW, gets around both those restrictions.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:

I don't think you can invent lores that suit your need.

Otherwise, at level 1, anyone could invent a lore to get the +5 bonus when rolling any Recall Knowledge instead of using the relevant skill.
You can only roll a Lore check if you have the Lore or if it's specifically asked to use that Lore.

I'm pretty sure you can indeed invent Lores. There are rules for it in the book. The big restrictions are that you need to invest a Skill in it and Lores are explicitly not allowed to be as broad as other Skills.

Clever Improviser, by RAW, gets around both those restrictions.

In my experience in PFS across quite a few GMs bardic lore only rarely gets a reduced difficulty. I'd think that Clever Improviser would be even LESS likely to get that benefit


pauljathome wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:

I don't think you can invent lores that suit your need.

Otherwise, at level 1, anyone could invent a lore to get the +5 bonus when rolling any Recall Knowledge instead of using the relevant skill.
You can only roll a Lore check if you have the Lore or if it's specifically asked to use that Lore.

I'm pretty sure you can indeed invent Lores. There are rules for it in the book. The big restrictions are that you need to invest a Skill in it and Lores are explicitly not allowed to be as broad as other Skills.

Clever Improviser, by RAW, gets around both those restrictions.

In my experience in PFS across quite a few GMs bardic lore only rarely gets a reduced difficulty. I'd think that Clever Improviser would be even LESS likely to get that benefit

Yeah, but that is PFS, where they don't tend to go too far out there with interpretations. The key here is how well you can trick convince your own GM into making it +5 across the board without thinking about things too much.

But yeah. Just going off of examples from the backgrounds, have specific examples, such as orc lore, and general type based identification such as dragon lore or undead lore.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
pauljathome wrote:


In my experience in PFS across quite a few GMs bardic lore only rarely gets a reduced difficulty.

Well yeah. The whole premise is that highly specific lores sometimes get bonuses to their specialty compared to general checks. Bardic Lore is the ultimate general check.

But rolling "Vampire Lore" when dealing with vampires or "Hellknight Lore" when researching the history of that organization are the exact kinds of things that the reduced DC mechanic is designed for.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:

I don't think you can invent lores that suit your need.

Otherwise, at level 1, anyone could invent a lore to get the +5 bonus when rolling any Recall Knowledge instead of using the relevant skill.
You can only roll a Lore check if you have the Lore or if it's specifically asked to use that Lore.

I'm pretty sure you can indeed invent Lores. There are rules for it in the book. The big restrictions are that you need to invest a Skill in it and Lores are explicitly not allowed to be as broad as other Skills.

Clever Improviser, by RAW, gets around both those restrictions.

If you allow that, then at level 1 when facing a construct instead of rolling Arcana at Intelligence+3 you invent a Lore (Broom that walks on his own) and you can roll Intelligence+5.

I know, per RAW, you can. But I don't think any DM will accept it as it's clearly an abuse.


I agree, nobody would allow such an exploit.


SuperBidi wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
SuperBidi wrote:

I don't think you can invent lores that suit your need.

Otherwise, at level 1, anyone could invent a lore to get the +5 bonus when rolling any Recall Knowledge instead of using the relevant skill.
You can only roll a Lore check if you have the Lore or if it's specifically asked to use that Lore.

I'm pretty sure you can indeed invent Lores. There are rules for it in the book. The big restrictions are that you need to invest a Skill in it and Lores are explicitly not allowed to be as broad as other Skills.

Clever Improviser, by RAW, gets around both those restrictions.

If you allow that, then at level 1 when facing a construct instead of rolling Arcana at Intelligence+3 you invent a Lore (Broom that walks on his own) and you can roll Intelligence+5.

I know, per RAW, you can. But I don't think any DM will accept it as it's clearly an abuse.

I think a more realistic lore would be that you roll construct lore in that example.

Specific examples would only come up if the topic was already in the air due to the campaign. If you go to a drow city, and you already go the keyword "fleshwarp" from an out of battle recall check (probably from drow lore), then using fleshwarp lore whenever you see something freaky seems fairly logical.

This could help to reward people paying enough attention to the story that they know the keywords to use.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, when it comes to lore it is indeed a little fishy.

Instead of either rolling Religion or Society when encountering a vampire count in Ustalav you could just conveniently come up with Lore (vampire nobility of Ustalav) and phish for the easier check.

Astrophysics? Yep.
Biology? Covered.
Quantum mechanics? Ask your question.
What is the air speed of an unladen swallow? Yes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ubertron_X wrote:

Well, when it comes to lore it is indeed a little fishy.

Instead of either rolling Religion or Society when encountering a vampire count in Ustalav you could just conveniently come up with Lore (vampire nobility of Ustalav) and phish for the easier check.

Astrophysics? Yep.
Biology? Covered.
Quantum mechanics? Ask your question.
What is the air speed of an unladen swallow? Yes.

African or europiean?

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Advice / Clever improviser - totally worth it or questionable choice All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.