| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've got a ranger in the game I'm running who has taken Monster Hunter and its 2nd level upgrade, Monster Warden. He loves the flavor of these abilities, but in practice it's been abysmally useless. We've played a dozen or so sessions, and he's only successfully activated them a handful of times, despite attempting them almost every round.
Recall knowledge as part of the action used to Hunt Prey. On a critical success, you and your allies gain +1 circumstance bonus to your next attack against the creature, a +1 circumstance bonus to your next saving throw against the creature, and a +1 circumstance bonus to AC against the first attack from that creature.
The main culprit seems to be the fact that it requires a critical success to activate. I've been setting the DCs as an easy check for the creature's level for most enemies. (I thought I had read that suggestion somewhere in the CRB, but I can't for the life of me find it now, so maybe I made it up.) For enemies at their current 3rd level, that means a typical DC is 16. The ranger in question has a +7 to Nature, Religion, and Occultism, a +5 to society, and is untrained in Arcana. That means for most things, he can critically succeed only on a 19 or 20. 10% chance to activate his ability. Mind you, it's a bit better when they encounter things under level, and worse when they encounter things above level. Against a level 1 enemy, he still needs a 16 or better to critically succeed (25% chance).
The end result is that, to date, he's successfully used the ability maybe half a dozen times, despite attempting it nearly every turn in every combat. Of those successes, I don't think it's ever actually made the difference between hitting an enemy or not. Further, only twice has a party member benefited, because for most of those successes, he killed the enemy on his next hit or the party members were occupied fighting other things.
For something that costs two feats and lots of skill allocations to use at all, this seems just way too hard to activate. Am I setting the DCs wrong? The ability might be usable, if still not great, if I made the DCs Incredibly Easy, which would up the success rate by 40%.
At first I thought maybe the game was just valuing a whole-party combat buff very highly, but Bards get Inspire Courage for free, which has a similar action cost (1 action) and is better in almost every way.
There's something to be said for Inspire Courage being the Bard's iconic ability, so I don't have an issue with it being better. But it's just so much better.
Am I missing something? Running something wrong? Or do we need to resign ourselves to this being a bad feat line?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The main benefit of that feature is that it is giving the PC a free action in the form of Recall Knowledge when they use the most commonly used action at the very beginning of combat, the bonuses on a critical success is just frosting on the cake.
During the first round of combat for a Ranger Hunt Prey as a single Action is pretty standard but using it and ALSO learning more about the creatures strengths, weaknesses, and special attacks is fantastic, especially since Rangers typically have an edge over other Characters for Initiative and can let the rest of the group know what to use, avoid, and what to watch out for.
In effect, this saves you one Action per creature you target with Hunt Prey ... which will be pretty much every creature you choose to attack in any given combat giving you between 1-5ish actions saved. It's not stellar but after all, it's a low-level feature.
Should I be valuing recall knowledge that highly? It's true that I hadn't really thought about it during my comparisons, but I think that's because we've found that part of this to have sharply diminishing returns. Once you've learned the first couple details about an enemy there's not much reason to use it again.
Compared to, say, Crossbow Ace (which gives a +2 or +3 bonus to damage on crossbow shots for no cost), or Twin Takedown (which fairly reliably helps overcome physical resistances), I'm not sure that I'm convinced of the value.
|
|
It's highly GM dependent but I think the general consensus is that every time you succeed a Recall Knowledge check the party should be getting NEW information that they didn't already have prior to the check.
For my own games, I tend to just hand out what some might consider pretty "meta" type info such as the HP, AC, or damage dealt by their attacks in addition to any weaknesses or special defenses. Of course the amount of info I fork over depends on how well the PC did on the Check itself too. It could even reveal something such as a particular fear the monster might have if any apply. If the party discovers some of these things or already knows something I always provide them with a piece of info they don't know.
Since the combat has a much heavier tactical angle than previous editions of the game or its predecessors this kind of information can often be the deciding difference between knowing if your group is going to need to switch up the gameplan or perhaps even encourage retreat if things look particularly bad.
Crossbow Ace, Twin Takedown and Hunted Shot are way overpowered for first level feats. They enable the Ranger tactics. You are not supposed to compare Monster Hunter to them.
Monster Hunter is fine for a first level feat. Actually, it's one of the best first level feat in my opinion as it makes you gain one action during most fights, and there are very few first level feats giving you such advantage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monster Hunter is best used on the outwit ranger. It is the outwit rangers Iconic feat. With the exact same numbers your ranger is looking at, they will have a +9 to their recall knowledge checks against the target of their hunt prey. Of course it is not going to be as good on a precision or a flurry ranger, just as twin take down and hunted shot are not good choices if you are not a flurry ranger.
But even if your ranger has a different hunter's edge, if you really want to help your ranger out, you will remind them that if they take feats like additional lore in specific monster types, you will allow recall knowledge checks against reduced DCs as well, and you can easily have a character with a 25-30% crit chance against the monsters that they are focused on fighting. Circumstance bonuses to attacks, saves and AC are pretty valuable.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monster Hunter also leads eventually (at 10th level) into Master Monster Hunter, which allows identifying all creatures with Nature and gives the Monster Hunter bonus on a success as well as a crit.
So that's also a factor. The base Feat provides Recall Knowledge, which should be useful, and an occasional bonus, upgraded to a very common bonus at 10th, and increasing in magnitude at 16th when you can grab Legendary Monster Hunter.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
just as twin take down and hunted shot are not good choices if you are not a flurry ranger.
Uh, what? They absolutely are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Crossbow Ace, Twin Takedown and Hunted Shot are way overpowered for first level feats. They enable the Ranger tactics. You are not supposed to compare Monster Hunter to them.
Are they, though? Our champion's Ranged Reprisal lets him make many retributive strikes that he wouldn't otherwise. Our archer fighter's point blank shot is, most of the time, +2 damage on two attacks. Our rogue's nimble dodge has prevented quite a lot of attacks from hitting her. These seem at least as good. If three of the five 1st level ranger feats are on this level, plus a bunch from other classes... I dunno. That sounds like baseline, not "overpowered." But I think this is really besides the main point.
For the record, the ranger in my group took Flurry, not Outwit. He decided that the significant reduction in MAP was more valuable than a +2 to the recall knowledge checks. For what it's worth, Flurry has been very useful - even sacrificing so many actions to try and use Monster Hunter, he's been pulling his weight in fights, largely thanks to flurry. For my part, while I recognize that there is more he could do to optimize this ability, I wouldn't think it would require serious optimization to get the ability to activate at least semi-reliably. That said, you fine folks are saying that we should view the "free" recall knowledge checks as the main benefit, not the team buff. While I don't think that's what the feat advertises, I'm more than willing to entertain the idea.
But even if your ranger has a different hunter's edge, if you really want to help your ranger out, you will remind them that if they take feats like additional lore in specific monster types, you will allow recall knowledge checks against reduced DCs as well, and you can easily have a character with a 25-30% crit chance against the monsters that they are focused on fighting. Circumstance bonuses to attacks, saves and AC are pretty valuable.
This is an interesting idea, and I'd certainly allow it, but I don't think asking him to spend another feat to get more use out of the feat would be much consolation.
Monster Hunter also leads eventually (at 10th level) into Master Monster Hunter, which allows identifying all creatures with Nature and gives the Monster Hunter bonus on a success as well as a crit.
So that's also a factor. The base Feat provides Recall Knowledge, which should be useful, and an occasional bonus, upgraded to a very common bonus at 10th, and increasing in magnitude at 16th when you can grab Legendary Monster Hunter.
The higher level additions certainly seem like significant upgrades. Right now the bonus has been less "occasional" and more "incredibly rare." I suspect that the 10th level upgrade will reduce or solve that problem, but even playing almost weekly, that's likely six months to a year away for us. You'll forgive me if I say that "Don't worry, it gets better at 10th level!" isn't a very satisfying answer. It's something I'd consider more strongly if they were starting at those levels, however.
For my own games, I tend to just hand out what some might consider pretty "meta" type info such as the HP, AC, or damage dealt by their attacks in addition to any weaknesses or special defenses. Of course the amount of info I fork over depends on how well the PC did on the Check itself too. It could even reveal something such as a particular fear the monster might have if any apply. If the party discovers some of these things or already knows something I always provide them with a piece of info they don't know.
Can anyone else weigh in on this? I've been telling them one or two important pieces of information on the first success (usually either an iconic ability, or information about weaknesses and/or resistances). My group usually figures out the AC and HP fairly quickly on their own, but things like which save is lowest might be good to add to the list. What else do you folks do to make sure that recall knowledge feels like it's valuable?
Everything on the statblock is good to give out on Recall Knowledge.
A somewhat common practice seems to be to let the player specify one of the 3 stat block sections (general/defense/offense) and give a bit of info from there.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The higher level additions certainly seem like significant upgrades. Right now the bonus has been less "occasional" and more "incredibly rare." I suspect that the 10th level upgrade will reduce or solve that problem, but even playing almost weekly, that's likely six months to a year away for us. You'll forgive me if I say that "Don't worry, it gets better at 10th level!" isn't a very satisfying answer. It's something I'd consider more strongly if they were starting at those levels, however.
True, but the fact that it eventually improves is worth noting in terms of its balance as a Feat. At low levels, the free Recall Knowledge really is the primary benefit.
Can anyone else weigh in on this? I've been telling them one or two important pieces of information on the first success (usually either an iconic ability, or information about weaknesses and/or resistances). My group usually figures out the AC and HP fairly quickly on their own, but things like which save is lowest might be good to add to the list. What else do you folks do to make sure that recall knowledge feels like it's valuable?
Recall Knowledge is an action, getting it free is good. I'm curious if this is your players first game of PF2, because it sounds to me like you're giving out good and useful information, and part of the problem might just be that they've never had to worry about spending actions to get it, and they are thus undervaluing it since they don't realize what it's like not to have it.
Recall Knowledge is an action, getting it free is good. I'm curious if this is your players first game of PF2, because it sounds to me like you're giving out good and useful information, and part of the problem might just be that they've never had to worry about spending actions to get it, and they are thus undervaluing it since they don't realize what it's like not to have it.
Haha, yes, it is. It took some time for me to convince my group to make the switch, so this is our first real foray into the new system. This is a useful insight. Certainly they've had access to the ability from the beginning, so the group has gotten used to him always checking for monster knowledge. That said, I think the other problem comes down to incorrect expectations. Bot the player and I read the feat as "party combat buffs," when it seems that's just not the function. Growing pains of learning a new system, maybe.
I'll lay out what you've all been saying here to him and see what he thinks. The second level feat, at least, still seems to be rather bad without the level 10 upgrade, so there may be some respeccing in for him.
Compared to, say, Crossbow Ace (which gives a +2 or +3 bonus to damage on crossbow shots for no cost), or Twin Takedown (which fairly reliably helps overcome physical resistances), I'm not sure that I'm convinced of the value.
Well, yeah, Crossbow Ace is better if you use a crossbow and Twin Takedown is better if you want to take people down with twin weapons. Alongside Hunted Shot they define how your ranger approaches combat. However, they are only really relevant if you actually use those weapons. If you want to wield a greatsword and don't care about switch hitting, then none of them are relevant. If you also don't want a pet, then why not?
Also, keep in mind you aren't limited to one first level class feat. Even setting aside going back for them, Natural Ambition is an extremely popular ancestry feat. If you went crossbow, for example, you're probably not taking any of the others.
eor what it's worth, Flurry has been very useful - even sacrificing so many actions to try and use Monster Hunter, he's been pulling his weight in fights, largely thanks to flurry.
...Why would you ever sacrifice actions to use a free action? He should be getting the knowledge check for doing something he needed to do anyway if he wants that flurry perk: hunt prey. Unless he's cycling targets rather than picking one, killing it, and then picking another? Because that is antithesis of how Ranger's are designed to operate.
The higher level additions certainly seem like significant upgrades. Right now the bonus has been less "occasional" and more "incredibly rare." I suspect that the 10th level upgrade will reduce or solve that problem, but even playing almost weekly, that's likely six months to a year away for us. You'll forgive me if I say that "Don't worry, it gets better at 10th level!" isn't a very satisfying answer. It's something I'd consider more strongly if they were starting at those levels, however.
Again, the bonus isn't really the key part. It is the free action Recall. That is absolutely worth a feat. Monster Warden, on the other hand? Pretty bad until level 10. He should just retrain into it once he has Master Monster Hunter. In the meantime he'd be better served by Quick Draw, which can further save him actions, especially if hes' trying to make lots of attacks.
Can anyone else weigh in on this? I've been telling them one or two important pieces of information on the first success (usually either an iconic ability, or information about weaknesses and/or resistances). My group usually figures out the AC and HP fairly quickly on their own, but things like which save is lowest might be good to add to the list. What else do you folks do to make sure that recall knowledge feels like it's valuable?
The trick is you need to give them something actionable on a success. Knowing a creature has poison bites isn't helpful if you can't keep out of its bite range. But it is if you have an alchemist who can get antitoxins ready ahead of time. But knowing that a gaze attack only works if you end your turn within 30 feet of the enemy? Very relevant indeed.
My usual approach: Read the creature's flavor text until you reach something the party can use. Then stop and add any mechanical emphasis that might be needed to understand what the ability actually means in game terms. Also, I reveal the monster's type or traits and make sure the players are aware of what that means. IE, all demons have a weakness to cold iron and good, and many have a weakness related to their sin.
I think this is a superior approach to offering the players a menu where they might make a bad choice, especially because a success is supposed to get you its most well known feature. And if you get an exceptionally plain stat block or your players have rolled enough checks to exhaust distinct abilities,* then you can offer stuff like lowest save. If a player specifically wanted to request that as their first bit of info, I'd probably allow it as well.
*Usually this only happens out of combat. If players find evidence of a creature or try and figure out what they just fought, they will sometimes dog pile on the rolls. Otherwise, players won't usually spend that many actions in the middle of a fight, especially since the DC keeps going up on subsequent checks.
But yeah, Monster Hunter is only as valuable as the information the GM provides. So if you want your players to appreciate the feat, give them good info!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh! I just noticed this new APG focus spell that seems relevant. Hunter's Luck lets you roll twice and take the better result on a knowledge check, which is kind of great if he keeps Monster Hunter. Much better than Monster Warden, IMO.
Also, keep in mind you aren't limited to one first level class feat. Even setting aside going back for them, Natural Ambition is an extremely popular ancestry feat. If you went crossbow, for example, you're probably not taking any of the others.
Yeah, he's done exactly that. He picked up Twin Takedown as well, which has gotten some use. I didn't mention it earlier because it wasn't overly relevant to my questions about Monster Hunter & Monster Warden.
...Why would you ever sacrifice actions to use a free action? He should be getting the knowledge check for doing something he needed to do anyway if he wants that flurry perk: hunt prey. Unless he's cycling targets rather than picking one, killing it, and then picking another? Because that is antithesis of how Ranger's are designed to operate.
He liked the idea of a role as party buffer. That's the reason he picked up Monster Hunter. To that end, he's been using Hunt Prey even when he wouldn't normally need to in order to make more attempts to grant the Monster Hunter bonuses. Again, his effectiveness in combat isn't really an issue here. He's been doing fine. Obviously he'd do more if he stopped trying to activate the extra MH bonuses, but I'll reiterate my earlier comment about incorrect expectations. I think the way the feat is presented lends itself to those bad expectations, so I doubt we're the only ones who've made this mistake, but I'm glad to know, regardless.
The feedback has been clear and universal here: recall knowledge for "free" is good enough for a feat. The level 2 "upgrade" is pretty bad, for now. I'll lay all this out for him, offer him retraining if he wants it (and straight recommend it for the 2nd level feat).
My usual approach...
This seems like as good an approach as any, to me. I prefer this style to letting them pick from a menu, as well.
Lastly, the new focus spell you mentioned does look pretty nice, though it looks like acquiring it is a 4th level feat. Not a bad thing necessarily, but it does mean you can't just swap out Monster Warden for it. Thanks for pointing it out.
I've had a think about this and suspect I'd personally house rule the feat chain to make it effective earlier. Given the bonuses only work 1/day for a given monster, and only last for one attack this doesn't seem unreasonable.
The key changes are making the bonuses trigger on a success from 2nd level. This in turn weakens 10th level, so I added a critical success bonus at 10th level. It could have been double the bonuses - but that might make things to good, so instead suggest the bonuses last a round (rather than just for the next attack).
What do people think?
Monster Hunter (1st) Unchanged
Hunt Prey -> Recall Knowledge
Bonus to allies on a critical success:
+ 1 circumstance bonus to next attack
Monster Warden (2nd) Modified
Bonus to allies trigger on a success
Additional bonuses on recall knowledge trigger:
+1 circumstance bonus to next save
+1 circumstance bonus to AC against next attack
Master Monster Hunter (10th) Modified
Use Nature for identifying all monsters
Bonuses last 1 round on a critical success
Legendary Monster hunter (16th) Unchanged
Bonuses increase from +1 to +2
I like it!
From the perspective of an optimizer who focuses on combat, none of us take Monster Hunter.
If your GM makes it useful, could be fun. If not, then pick something else.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It really depends on what you want out of your character.
If your only interest is damage. Obviously don't take it.
But if you are more interested in a support martial. Maybe your group has no real recall knowledge characters and you want to play a ranger. It is a great option.
Now for me, I'm also a bit biased. I'm a sucker for action economy hacks. And I loathe being a damage turret. But some people love it
I like to build to do 2-3 things in my combat loops. More if I can manage it.
So for me precision and outwit are vastly more appealing.
Also before level ten. The benefit of outwit is going to be held to the campaign setting a bit.
So imo flurry was the least synergistic choice for this feat line. As flurry heavily encourages damage turret
It depends very heavily on the kind of information you give on a recall knowledge, my understanding is that the player can choose what they attempt to recall, and that the rules for creature identification only ever apply when they are attempting to identify a creature-- so when the player uses it they might say:
"Hey, I already know this is a young green dragon because I figured that out when we found evidence of its breath weapon earlier, so I want to recall its lowest save."
or
"We fought some of these in the last encounter and I found out they're Brimoraks and they're super weak to water, now I want to Recall what they're immune to"
Note that the examples discuss using this procedure for the magical defenses of a golem, or its resistance to physical attacks, so this procedure CAN get statblock info, and logically, you'd need to know what the player is trying to recall to determine what stat they would use.
The reason people try and force every use of monster-directed recall to be creature identification, as far as I can tell, is cultural inertia and the lack of a clear procedure outline in the book, but as far as I know this is raw. Note that even though Monster Hunter mentions an extra effect for crit success on a creature, you don't have to use the recall knowledge it provides on identification.
It depends very heavily on the kind of information you give on a recall knowledge, my understanding is that the player can choose what they attempt to recall, and that the rules for creature identification only ever apply when they are attempting to identify a creature-- so when the player uses it they might say:
"Hey, I already know this is a young green dragon because I figured that out when we found evidence of its breath weapon earlier, so I want to recall its lowest save."
or
"We fought some of these in the last encounter and I found out they're Brimoraks and they're super weak to water, now I want to Recall what they're immune to"
Note that the examples discuss using this procedure for the magical defenses of a golem, or its resistance to physical attacks, so this procedure CAN get statblock info, and logically, you'd need to know what the player is trying to recall to determine what stat they would use.
The reason people try and force every use of monster-directed recall to be creature identification, as far as I can tell, is cultural inertia and the lack of a clear procedure outline in the book, but as far as I know this is raw. Note that even though Monster Hunter mentions an extra effect for crit success on a creature, you don't have to use the recall knowledge it provides on identification.
I'm not following you here. Can you clarify?
In my games, when players get a successful recall knowledge check I don't just give them what info I want them to have. I tell them the monster, the type, the traits (though if it's uncommon or rare I might withhold some of that), and I let them ask me a specific question. I won't give them solid numbers, but they can ask stuff like: "what is the highest save", "is their AC higher or lower relative to <insert party member>", "what are they immune to", "what are they weak to", "how does it like to fight" etc. On a crit I let them ask 2 questions. Each successful recall knowledge check after the first lets them ask new questions.
On the whole my players enjoy being able to ask these questions and they feel like recall knowledge is impactful especially because they get to target the information that they most desire. Maybe, as others have pointed out, if you want to 'fix' how your ranger feels you could address how recall knowledge works in your game so as to highlight that aspect of your ranger's ability. It will also make recall knowledge a more interesting option to all your other players too.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my (mostly PFS or home games with PFS players) experience what information you get varies HUGELY with the GM. Which means that the value of something like Monster Hunter also varies HUGELY.
Some (probably most) give out a fair bit of information for free "That blow did a bit less damage than you expected" when hitting resistance or "That blow seemed to do more damage than expected" when hitting a weakness.
Some GMs will give substantially lower DCs for Lore skills, some won't. Almost none give a substantially lower DC for any of the various "All Lores rolled into one (eg, Bardic Lore)" abilities that now exist.
Some GMs let you ask questions, some don't. Some give you lots of information (eg, all weaknesses) some less (eg, only 1 weakness).
Some will tell you blindingly obvious things on a success "That creature made of fire, well fire might not be the best attack option".
My personal approach in PFS is to make sure that the character is NOT primarily focused on knowledges. It just gets too frustrating. Having some knowledges as a secondary thing is fine (doesn't matter anywhere near as much if it gets nerfed).
Oh, and Thaumaturges now absolutely ROCK the Monster Knowledge game. You wanna play that game, consider strongly playing a Thaumaturge :-)
Edit : Usually when I post this or similar I get several posts pointing out what the RAW say (often disagreeing with each other :-)). Doesn't matter. The reality is that there is HUGE GM variance, even within a single group that has alternate GMs.
just as twin take down and hunted shot are not good choices if you are not a flurry ranger.Uh, what? They absolutely are.
They are not only good choices, they are best in slot as long as you fulfill the weapon requirement regardless of edge.
From the perspective of an optimizer who focuses on combat, none of us take Monster Hunter.
If your GM makes it useful, could be fun. If not, then pick something else.
Monster hunter Outwit is a good party buffer at levels 10+, great even if the rest of the party relies on single hits to deal damage (Like a party with a Starlit Span Magus, a Precision Crossbow Ranger and a Bard), as the buff it gives is a circumstance bonus and thus stacks with Heroism or Inspire Courage/Heroics. Issue is that pre level 10 Outwit is very subpar and its monster identification niche is eclipsed by the Thaumaturge, that does its job ten times better.
It technically has a place in optimised scenarios, but that place is very obscure.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some (probably most) give out a fair bit of information for free "That blow did a bit less damage than you expected" when hitting resistance or "That blow seemed to do more damage than expected" when hitting a weakness.
PF1 specifically told the GM that they should tell players when an attack was not quite effective due to damage reduction. That instruction isn't explicitly in PF2 as far as I can tell.
I think it should be - when a player does a thing in the world, the GM describes how it pans out. If you attack a devil with a non-silver sword and it barely does any damage, you should be able to tell that your solid hit was weirdly ineffective. And if your axe is causing massive extra damage to the weak to slashing zombie, the GM ought to describe that.
The point here is that Recall Knowledge is a way to get information, but it was never said that it was supposed to be the only way. I'm a big fan of "I don't exactly know what that is but I have a lot of different types of attacks, let's do some experiments".
---
And to circle back to The Magic Sword's comments;
There's a bit of a mis-match in the book between how exactly RK is used. In some places it's used to just look at a creature and "tell me useful stuff". In other cases it's "oh what was the name of the king's great-grandfather again" asking specific questions that might have nothing to do whatsoever with monster identification. All of that is Recall Knowledge.
It's worth looking at the results description for RK;
You attempt a skill check to try to remember a bit of knowledge regarding a topic related to that skill. The GM determines the DCs for such checks and which skills apply.
Critical Success You recall the knowledge accurately and gain additional information or context.
Success You recall the knowledge accurately or gain a useful clue about your current situation.
Critical Failure You recall incorrect information or gain an erroneous or misleading clue.
Notice that it allows both for "you recall THE knowledge" and "gain a USEFUL clue about your current situation".
In other words, this skill use can be done in multiple different ways.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the frustrating things is that the rules for Creature Identification and the rules for Recalling Knowledge in general are contradictory.
The general rules for RK say you try to remember something specific and if you succeed you recall "the knowledge" etc. etc.
The rules for creature identification however are much less friendly to the player and instead encourage the GM to give one specific piece of information related to something notable about the creature.
I think one of the frustrating things is that the rules for Creature Identification and the rules for Recalling Knowledge in general are contradictory.
The general rules for RK say you try to remember something specific and if you succeed you recall "the knowledge" etc. etc.
The rules for creature identification however are much less friendly to the player and instead encourage the GM to give one specific piece of information related to something notable about the creature.
There's an easy way to respect both rules: give players something both notable and useful. Even the Identify example out of the book is give them the troll's regeneration (and how to disable it.)
I don't object to players asking for specific info, but I think giving them useful info is more important if you're mid-battle. I like that the rules let the GM use something useful to either replace (on a normal success) or supplement (on a critical success) the requested info.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah that's what I do too, I allow players to prioritize what they want to know, but reserve the right to give them something else I think is more useful.
In all cases I aim to give something that is useful for the players.
And during creature identification I give a lot of "fluff" for free, because I actually want my players to know that this thing they're fighting is quite different from that other thing they were fighting (even though, being the same creature level, the stats are not too far apart).
I also give out general type-trait info for free. "It's a devil, so typically you want silver weapons, good damage, and hell is hot so fire won't work".