Ok, I've just been through a dozen old threads and my eyes are starting to hurt so I'm just gonna start a new one. Looking to discuss how different GMs handle Knowledge checks for things OUTSIDE of Monster Lore information.
This is an extension of a side conversation started in this thread about building "smart" lairs. In that thread I revealed the breadth of lore I deliver to my players when they succeed in knowledge checks and a couple of other commenters suggested I may be divulging too much.
B/c I'm me I'll lead off with an example from my last session: The Banner of Lord Thelkor.
Thelkor:
So the module I'm running lists Thelkor as the king of a small clan of ghouls that live in one of the lowest levels of the megadungeon. I've chosen to make this group a major faction in my version of the source material.
The backstory I came up with is that Thelkor was a traitor in service to a petty king generations ago. A force for evil was rising in the land and Thelkor sold out to this evil, usurped his king and took over the clan, leading them into the area where the current campaign takes place.
Here Thelkor and his forces took over an area of caves with designs on even grander conquest; they were going to try and sack the Imperial merchant city to their south. Unlike the Goths who sacked Rome however, Thelkor's attacks met with failure and he was driven back to the caves where he was sealed in. Eventually he and some of his followers fell to cannibalism, died, and rose again as ghouls.
Thing is, Thelkor still owed a debt to the greater evil which he'd failed. The ghoul lord soon discovered vast dungeons beneath his cavernous tomb. Some weird property of the place prevented his cruel patron from taking retribution upon him so Thelkor and his minions have been hiding away down here for centuries.
Most of the time they've just survived, eking out a meager existence but recent events caused a minor artifact to reveal itself in the dungeon, an artifact Thelkor has claimed. Now he is emboldened to send his ghouls out into the world once more and is making his move to dominate the full breadth of the dungeon.
At his disposal Thelkor has his main force of ghouls which has grown over the centuries. He also has elite solders (ghasts) and has learned how to enact a rite to turn some of his ghouls into his private "war dogs" (festrogs). Thelkor has been sending out teams of these units to probe the area, learn about his enemies and spread the curse that turns the dead into his minions.
Ok, so... the PCs fought several ghouls, a ghast and a festrog recently. Unlike 2 ghouls they fought months ago at level 1, these undead were tougher, well organized and had overtaken some areas of the dungeon's first level that the PCs had previously cleared. They found 4 of these banners in one of the areas the ghouls were defending.
The banners were on some kind of hide. They are painted like an old-fashioned coat of arms, featuring a round shield upon which is a fanged skull wearing a conical helm dotted with five red gems. Below the skull are two crossed hands.
Now when I made up the banner I actually followed some guidelines to heraldry. The crown represents that there is a ruler, the 2 hands means that the ruler possesses 2 unique units and the round shield as opposed to a kite shield along with the design of the helm dates the heraldry back to the petty kingdoms of old.
My players defeated the undead and after confirming they were secure they took a couple minutes to really inspect the banners. They asked what they were made of, (skin painted with natural pigments mixed with blood) and if they recognized the symbol. I allowed a Heal check (DC 20) to identify the material and composition, then onto the symbol.
Initially I assigned this a Knowledge: Nobility (DC 20) to know that this was an old fashioned style of heraldry, dating back to the Jarls from 400 years ago. That's enough to tie into the evil that rose in the land at that time that the PCs learned about 2 sessions ago.
The PCs managed a 33 on their check! Not only that but the ghast they'd fought screamed "FOR THELKOR!" while fighting the PCs, so as I started to tell them the banner related back to the old petty kingdoms they were already asking if they could also use Knowledge: History on "Thelkor."
I mean... 33. That beats the initial DC by nearly 15. In the end I told the players: 1. this is an old symbol relating back to the petty kingdoms 400 years ago, 2. the heraldry of the hands below suggests that along with primary units there are 2 elite units, and 3. the STYLE of the design suggests the kingdoms from the south.
But of course as we were wrapping up the game the player running the paladin started putting all of this together. He's termed these things the Banners of King Thelkor, knows that they're likely made of human skin and painted with blood, compared the fanged skull to that of a ghoul and found them similar so he (rightly) guessed that Thelkor is the king of the ghouls. They know he originally hails from the south, from about 400 years ago, and they're already planning on researching the name and southern kingdoms in the libraries back in the city which I'd previously established are quite extensive and the wizard paid a significant amount of gold to gain access to.
Sorry for the wall o' text there, but if you ground through enough of it to understand the example, let me know... did I reveal too much? Not enough? The right amount?
The baseline I try to follow when handing off info on Knowledge checks is to give players something ACTIONABLE. That is, give them some info that furthers the plot. I feel like I did that here, but the PCs also already know a significant amount of the intel they need to face their enemy. Coupled with monster knowledge checks they've made against the TYPES of foes they're likely to face if they confront the faction the banner implies, these PCs are basically fully armed to deal with this threat.
What do you think and what are your guidelines for info reveals?
I've read the other thread as well.
1. You're only running it wrong if both you and the players have issues or problems.
2. You seem concerned about how much they get from successful checks and/or from how easily they beat those check DCs.
It seems to me that you understand how different knowledge checks and skills interact and that History, Local, and Royalty checks could all give a different piece of the puzzle.
You put information out there so that the PCs will learn it. They have the skills on the character sheet because they view it as important and/or know your gaming style. You DO want them to learn it so that it reveals clues and rewards you for the work necessary in creating the lore.
If the problem is that they get it too quickly, just remember that some of these things will require research. They cannot REMEMBER everything they need off the top of their heads. They aren't carrying their library with them.
It seems simple enough to say that checks of up to DC20 are off the top of the head and 'remembering' but that checks beyond 20 require time and effort just to make.
If the problem is that they can get a check that is too high, then you either need to modify what you give at certain DCs, raise the DCs, or modify your own expectations. (Your characters can make DC 33 checks because they have been built that way. They've been built that way for a reason.)
I'd ask what is the goal in making them work for the knowledge?
Does it provide a new location or NPC to interact with? Does it contain other plot hooks that can lead them on further adventures or point to grander mysteries?
If it doesn't move the game, then I'd not bother with making research a thing, let them make the knowledge check and get on with the scenario you have planned.
If however, you do want to introduce new content when they have to research stuff, then still let them make the check, but limit the amount of information to just the starting place for actually library or more in-depth research.
So instead of the pretty full info-dump you gave, maybe you could have gone with; "Searching your memory you recall scraps of tales, stories of ancient kingdoms in Southern lands with similar themes and images, but the full details are beyond your memory."
I don't see anything wrong with what you or the players have done in your example. In fact well done to you and your players. You provided a wonderful and detailed background and lots of clues. The players have invested in the knowledge skills so you are able to legitimately provide information without giving freebies to progress the plot and they stoppped and thought about the information and clues provided. They have made some accurate deductions and will equip themselves appropriately. This is all great!
What it appears they don't know are the numbers of ghouls etc. The layout of the caves, what else they might encounter, what supernatural defences the cavern provides (you have stated that it has shielded Thelkor from the greater evil - does it interfere with all Detect and scrying spells?, what about Divine communication?). The players do not know about the artifact, nor about Thelkor's ritual, what other rituals does he have. Have you considered ghoul's insatiable hunger and it's effect on their ability to operate as organised units? If so what is their food source to stop them going mindless (EDIT: I mean purely driven by hunger, not int 0). If they are being regularly fed, do any of the elite beings have character levels?
One angle you could take with your group is to make the organised enemy far too powerful, but let them realise that if they disrupt the food supply then the ghouls will quickly become disorganised and easier to defeat.
Wow. I had not even CONSIDERED the effect of denying the ghouls their food supply. I hadn't even thought what that supply was. I guess the way I read ghouls in the Bestiary they don't HAVE to eat, it's more of a compulsion and there's no penalty for starvation, but I could definitely grab like the Ravenous template or something and say that as food becomes scarce they grow more and more feral/disorganized.
As for some of the other tactical info, that's usually what they end up using Downtime to research. They won't ever get current numbers; for one, as GM I reserve the right to modify quantities of minions on the fly as part of my ability to adjust difficulties, and 2 no one has made it down to Thelkor's level and survived to make it back to town and report it so there's no way the PCs could learn that.
The layout, the shielding, the typical arms and equipment of the troops... a lot of that is stuff they CAN find from local rumors, talking to allied NPCs in the dungeon and research in the city's libraries. THAT's where I often fall down as a GM (as I've said in the other thread). I feel beholden to the info I give to the players, tactically, and they've invested so much of their character's ranks into the skills needed to FIND this info I feel its important to reward them with accurate data.
Problem is we're talking 4 adult players, three of which are extremely tactically minded. All 4 have also played TTRPGs for decades and PF1e since at least 2011. Once they GET accurate tactical knowledge they are very good at using it. I worry that I either make it TOO accessible for my players or that I don't limit enough of what I'm providing them.
As for general Knowledge checks, TRY to limit the info in the field to just actionable intel. Like with the tapestry example I try to keep things open but factual, doling out info that furthers the plot. Thing is, some things I just don't WANT my players to know.
However if you can know of a supposedly "secret" organization on just a Knowledge: Local (DC 20) and my players know that threshold, how do I just say "I don't care that you got a 33 on your Knowledge: Arcana; you don't KNOW about the ancients that built this place"?
I find it best to tell them just that. Some information just isn't available, no matter how learned one is. This can be due to obscurity, magical or divine intervention, networks of misinformation, etc...
I would not let players run over a game/campaign just because they rolled high on a knowledge check that I didn't have previously planned out. That doesn't sound fun for anyone involved. That is not to be confused however with making knowledge skills useless, just don't let them know that the archdemon has a severe peanut allergy on Ash Wednesdays with a DC 30 Knowledge Planar check.
Re: DC20 for a hidden organisation. If you take the monster knowledge approach, a DC20 tells you the basics, maybe the name, basic goal or motivation (criminal, political, religous, racist etc) and every 5 points thereafter alows you to provide one extra piece of information. So the DC of 33 rewards the player with the basic knowledge and two additional clues. Tell them OOC if necessary that's what the score equates to and then proceed to tell them in game what they know.
Re: Ghoul hunger. I just read the pathfinder bestiary and the hunger appears watered down. That doesn't mean that you can't make it a thing in your campaign. Perhaps a DC+1 per hour after eating 1/4 of their HP will save to avoid succumbing to the hunger. Once hungry they act as per the ghoul hunger spell until they eat 1/4 of their HP.
It should mean that the ghouls are routinely fed every 6 hours and should be able to last 15 hours on average.
Rolling enough to know about a secret organisation doesn't mean that you know very much about that organisation. I know various things about the Yakuza and N'dragheta and Scientologists and Aum Shinrikyo so on, but not enough to be useful. And half the things I think I know are probably wrong.
So you can feel free to chuck in some not-quite-true or might-be-true things about their Knowledge checks. For example, the two hands might mean he had two kingdoms, or two wives, or that he'd once had his hands chopped off but still conquered a kingdom, so there. And I doubt that "Thelkor" was the only thing shouted by the ghouls in their 400-year-old language. Others might have included "Lunch!" or "Finally!" or "Mine!" in which case (Sense Motive here?) the PCs might go looking for King Lunch instead.
And of course, this is King Thelkor III, not to be confused with King Thelkor the Invulnerable or Baron Thelkor the Mad. Or Thelka the sorceress. Or the obsolete Sarkorian ball game of the same name, the Vudrani parrot or a fungal inflammation of the toe.
Ultimately, knowledge gained should be driven by the speed of plot. How much do you want them to know? Or guess? And what do you want them to do with the information? It sounds like they want tactical information, but maybe they should be looking for strategic information like how to defeat the Big Bad that's behind Mr Thelkor.
If they go overboard with their knowledge checks, you can throw in red herrings on everything until they stop doing it. Such as that ghoul is wearing a medallion made in the Jistka Revival style popular in Taldor in the 4020s. Or that the cave contains an unusual peridotite mineral not known outside the Five Kings Mountains. Or that the Duchess uses Rahadoumi slang. It's junk and irrelevant, but they won't know. Could waste a lot of time, of course.
I'm not quite sure I agree with the entirety of Mudfoot's advice. To me it smacks a little too much of punishing the player for investing in the Knowledge skills. The player could, instead, have invested in Stealth or something similar, safe in the knowledge that at the end of the day the GM would provide enough information to keep the adventure running.
The way I see things, is if the player has invested in skills to gain intelligence about their opponent instead of in skills that are tactically useful then they should be able to acquire additional information because they have sacrificed tactical capability to do so.
Information is integral to the nature of tabletop roleplaying games.
Especially if metagaming is impossible or not an option, the players only have what the information that the GM tells their characters about what is around them in order to make a decision based upon their capabilities.
And even then, the person playing the character won't know, if, for example, everything on their character's person has suddenly disappeared unless the GM actually lets them know.
So I wouldn't sweat the PCs being well-informed about information that is out there available in the world, whether they get that information by hook or by crook.
Mysteries are mysteries. Puzzles are puzzles. Infamous orc hordes or mercenary companies are a different matter entirely.
I was being a bit hyperbolic about the volume of red herrings*, of course. But the point is that a knowledge check just tells you something you know. It doesn't necessarily tell you what you want to know, or even something particularly useful. Also, knowledge rolls can be secret.
* Herring is measured in Cran. There. I made a successful knowledge roll.
My whole thing with Knowledge checks is: I want them to yield useful information. When PCs look at a ghast for the first time ever and make a DC 12 Knowledge check I don't want to be like "that's a ghast… and more often than not, their skin is gray or green." Instead, even at the base level I want a successful monster knowledge check to at least reveal the basic useful info: "that's a ghast… a typically evil Undead type monster"
So too with non-monster Knowledge checks.
I do unto my players as I would want done unto me, if I were playing. I have a DM that runs 5e games who I've commented on before and he is... challenging with the knowledge he doles out even on successful checks. ALL successful checks mind you. Whereas I fear sometimes I might be giving out too much info this DM reveals little to none at all and what IS given does not help drive the plot forward.
So I'm trying to strike a balance between giving out an outline of the past 400 years' activity around the banner and "it's definitely a banner" as responses to knowledge checks concerning the device. I just wish there was an easy guideline I could put in place for non-monster lore checks, the same way I use one for monster lore.
My rule of thumb for monster checks is: hitting the DC reveals Monster name and type (subtype). Every 5 the DC is beaten by, I ask my players what they'd like to know about - offense, defense, special abilities, spells or SLA's, and so on. I don't just read off the ability but sum it up in some way.
I haven't figured out yet how to break down paragraphs of lore I've written for my game into a handy "stat block" so I can parse out the basic intro info and then ask if the PCs want to know about this part or that part.
Useful... yes. That doesn't mean that it has to be too specific.
(Everything that follows is simply a possible example...)
Banner of Thelkor
Various Knowledge skills (as appropriate)
Royalty DC 10: This is a primitive heraldic banner on painted on leather.
Local or Royalty DC 15: The banner is similar in style to banners used by modern humanoid tribes/clans. These types of banners haven't been used by Human kingdoms in at least a few centuries.
History DC 20: This banner's symbolism and age would indicate that it was originally created in an area to the south some 4 centuries ago. The petty kingdoms there did not survive long.
Geography DC 15: That area is littered with cave complexes used by local miners for 100 years. Locals believe them to be haunted.
Profession Soldier DC 15: Caves and Mines make a good place to stage an army out of... as long as it remains secret. Being discovered leads to a simple siege, and starvation for the trapped army.
Royalty DC 25: The banner's age, combined with the symbolism indicate that the Jarl who bore it was in league with, or paid homage to, a greater Force or Ruler. That ruler worshipped wicked Gods now long forgotten.
History DC 30: The banner belonged to Thelkor, a Tyrant Usurper who, along with his followers, took part in a war against the Imperium and lost. He was never heard from again.
History or Royalty DC 35: It is rumored among scholars of that study the History of the Jarls, that Thelkor attempted to seize an Imperial Trade City and was vanquished.
Geography DC 40: Some of those caves were artificially sealed. The collapses don't look accidental and are too complete to be circumstance. Local miners don't talk about those particular caves and get really nervous when they are mentioned.
History DC 40: The Governor of the Imperial Trade City, after the last battle against Thelkor's forces, ordered his sappers to seal the vanquished army inside the caves in an act of simple revenge. The Governor's son was killed during the early fighting and the Governor wanted the enemy to suffer as his family had suffered.
Knowledge that Thelkor and his minions turned to cannibalism, survived in a ghoulish state or served a specific BBEG during his coup attempt can not be learned through skill checks. The caves were sealed, forgotten, and left alone for centuries. Nobody goes in there and, if they did, they wouldn't come out again. Thelkor never told anyone that he had betrayed his ruler to the BBEG, that BBEG certainly didn't spread it around, so the knowledge that it happened simply is not recorded.
You mentioned not knowing how to parse your paragraphs of backgrounds into stat blocks. Try looking at every aspect of your backgrounds as characters. Ask yourself what are the most important elements of those characters. Break down the character/background info into tiers of importance, then start assigning DCs to obtain that knowledge based on its importance to the character and its value to your players.
Not sure how you build characters. Do you always follow the same format of class, race, mechanics? Or do you mix and match, maybe starting with a theme, a power, a backstory, or just a name? Approach your villains and lairs, artifacts, and organizations the same way. Knowing how you personally approach or value the info will help you to parcel out the info into manageable and earnable chunks. With your OP example I think it was pretty spot on, as your players made multiple checks and used reasoning to weave their knowledges together to draw further conclusions.
I'll second those above though, who say you don't have to give all the knowledge away. Always try and be able to answer for yourself how your PC could possibly know something, or at least have them give you a creative justification of their access to the more esoteric/hidden info. Also, it's kind of neat that you let your players choose categories of info with higher checks, but it's also fine if the specific info they're after isn't available at the check they made. If with that 33 they're wanting to know about specific fighting styles of the ghast special troops, but that info is at a higher threshold, then they don't get it. Let them know they're not sure, then give them a nugget that they do qualify for, so the check isn't a total loss.
1. You're only running it wrong if both you and the players have issues or problems.
That's a hard disagree for me. There's instantly a problem if the GM has an issue. The GM needs to have fun, or the game will be lackluster at best.
I'll agree that the example provided doesn't seem like anything bad in itself. You've built a world, they've paid enough attention to connect the dots. That's a good thing.
I think the most important thing here is that you talk with your players.
Tell them you feel like Knowledge has become too useful in your games, and that the Recon-Research-Prepare-Attack routine has become SUCH a routine that things feel stale.
Your players expect you to follow the rules super closely, by the sound of it. They also sound like they can be made to feel cheated or hard done by really easily. So I'd just be upfront about it. You want X? Give me Y. It's so simple.
In any situation where the rules fail to provide a satisfying means to an end, there's Rule 0. That's what it's for. And if there's any hemming and hawing about RAW, well. Rule 0 is RAW.
That's a nice breakdown by marcryser, certainly a better job than my approach.
I tend to atomise my backgrounds (I'm used to writing requirement specs) and make one fact per sentence - more likely as bullet points. The knowledge roll gets the base piece of information and extra bullets for every 5 pointsover the base DC.
Actually, what I do is start building the plot asking and answering my own who, where, when, what and how questions. Out of that I form the background, as above, and liberally sprinkle the hooks and clues as per the Alexandrian's rule of 3. I then add some red herrings and irrelevant content to provide a richer environment.
Plot hooks or clues, I'm not hurting for. Those are liberally sprinkled around. One complaint I've gotten from another campaign I'm running is that I have too many dangling plot threads.
That breakdown by the Cryser of Mar though is what I aspire to. Problem is, a lot of non-monster lore Knowledge checks are made on the fly. I prep for my games but not THAT much; oftentimes the stuff players make knowledge checks on are completely made up or only partially detailed in my game lore.
Wizards of the Green Hand:
For example I like to really embellish the description of art objects I give in my loot. Early on in this game I handed the PCs 2 Arcane scrolls inside an ornate scroll case. The case was carved from Darkwood with "elven flourishes" and was inlaid with jasper and moonstone. One PC is half-elven from a real cosmopolitan free elf city while the another is full elf from a very dense, dark woodland with a lot of Darkwood trees.
The full elf is a u-rogue and started with an Appraise on the box, which she succeeded at, so I rattled off what it was worth. Then she asked if she could find an elven buyer and sell it for more. I shrugged and said maybe. Enter the wizard PC who immediately inspects it with Knowledge: Arcana and Knowledge: History. Is the box significant? Did it belong to a prominent caster or cabal of casters? Do the "elven flourishes" tie it to either the high elves of the city or the wood elves where the rogue is from?
When I saw the player had rolled a 26 on the Knowledge check for Arcana and 21 on History I kind of panicked. I blurted out that the box's style was definitely more high elven, dating back several decades and that the arcane significance of the stones used in the box's design most likely aligns it with a sect of elf wizards known as The Green Hand who were active a century ago but vanished. I think at the time also embellished something about how the wizards were big into item crafting and were known for special techniques in Item Creation.
That was a year ago now in real life. The player still has a note in his character sheet to research and find the Elven Wizards of the Green Hand to study with them and gain insight into item creation.
Folks... there are NO Wizards of the Green Hand in the source material. There aren't any in my game lore either. I just thought it sounded cool at the time. The only reason this hasn't been a plot point yet is because the player has it on his SHEET but hasn't actually pursued it at all yet. Plus the PCs have been preoccupied with other things.
I didn't have a breakdown like Marcryser's examples above. I didn't even have lore prepped for the box. I just thought of a description that sounded cool when I added it to the treasure, then because their rolls were so dang high I made some stuff up about the scroll case.
Point is: I don't always have a clearly laid out history, arcane tradition, secret society and so on prepared and broken down into bites for player knowledge checks. In these instances or when a request for a Knowledge check catches me off guard I think I fumble and improvise more than I should.
you're being too hard on yourself. It was an insignificant item (to any plots currently in play) that you gave a rich backstory to on the fly that piqued the interest of one of the players, possibly laying groundwork for another adventure later on. Or, if nothing else, it adds a tidy little bit of world lore.
I think the biggest point I was trying to make, and one that will help you the most is 'it doesn't matter how high the skill check is if there's nothing else to learn.'
A really high check on an insignificant object does NOT make it significant. If I give a pretty scroll case to a group as part of treasure and they get an appraise roll of 15, I'll tell them that they have found a darkwood scroll case decorated with elven motifs, worth 50gp.
If they roll an appraise check and get (with bonuses) a 55, I'll tell them they have found a darkwood scroll case decorated with eleven FLORAL motifs and is similar in style to work done in Kyonin 75 years ago. It's worth 50 gp.
Don't let the rolls create a story plot where none exists. Even if you start talking about Wizards of the Green Hand and the arrangement of the stones, it doesn't give the scroll case any more GAME significance nor does it up the value. It is a scroll case, worth 50GP. If someone fixates on the possible importance of the Wizards of the Green Hand, allow another skill check to reveal that the Sect fell apart due to scandal some 120 years ago. There are almost certainly Wizards around still who WERE members of the Green Hand, but not a single one of them will admit it or talk about it to a stranger.
If that doesn't work, just say... "It's a pretty scroll tube worth 50GP! That's ALL it is."
The Green Hand is exactly what I was getting at. If they want to know about everything, they'll find things out. Those things don't have to be relevant, and they'll come to realise that. You're lucky that they do bother to find out about your world.
But as marcryser says, sometimes there is nothing to know. Ask about a pebble on the ground and you'll learn that it's a piece of yellowish limestone, somewhat chipped. It's 1.6 x 0.9 x 1.4 inches and weighs just under an ounce. There are many other pebbles like it nearby. That's it.
Plot hooks or clues, I'm not hurting for. Those are liberally sprinkled around. One complaint I've gotten from another campaign I'm running is that I have too many dangling plot threads.
That breakdown by the Cryser of Mar though is what I aspire to. Problem is, a lot of non-monster lore Knowledge checks are made on the fly. I prep for my games but not THAT much; oftentimes the stuff players make knowledge checks on are completely made up or only partially detailed in my game lore.
** spoiler omitted **...
Wow! Your improvisation there sounds amazing! One of the best GM's I ever had was an improv master like this. He'd pull stuff out of his *** tie it together with whatever assumptions or observations the player's made, and build it into continuing world elements. It was great.
Now, that was all homebrew, and if your running mostly AP's, that complicates things a bit. However, the players have no idea what you do and don't have prepped, or what you do or don't know. When you do an amazing improv like that, make a note. Use those fresh seeds you laid for story elements later, if the players pursue them. On the other hand, if someone makes a super high check, and/or you just don't have a super creative brain wave in that moment, it's perfectly fine to say that there's nothing to know. You can even jazz that up as the lore is lost to history, or some other flowery or mysterious language that you seem to be way better at than me. Depending you how you phrase it, even basically non-information could add flavor or red herrings.
If it helps, you could also delay knowledge checks a bit. Not sure how good you are at multitasking, but if you can swing it, let multiple players make there checks and action declarations. Process that all and nararate as necessary, giving yourself a few minutes between the random knowledge checks and your answers, so that you have time to compartmentalize the info you want to give. If you work from a computer or GM screen, you could even make some quick notes of highlight points, under the guise of making quick calculations or "finding the right page/tab".
I'll echo the sentiments above that you're being too hard on yourself.
You've expressed on several threads that you're starting to burn out a bit, and it seems pretty clear that you don't wish to. With that in mind, maybe you need to have a non-game social night, and have a frank conversation with your players/friends. I've had several GM's over the years, and dabbled at it myself a time or two. Mayber I'm a touch to blunt or straight forward, but something that has worked well with all of my GM's and friends has been discussing the strength's and weaknesses of one and other, both as GM's and players.
It's absolutely true that some folks are more gifted, talented, of happy GM's, but I found something to enjoy and praise with every individual who took up the burden of GM. Maybe if you can hear from your players what it is they enjoy, and also where they think maybe you aren't as strong, you can get a better perspective. It's entirely possible that you're worried about things they haven't even thought of. At the same time, you can let them know, what your issues or concerns are. Then you can all share the burden a bit more of finding ways to make the game, and everyone's experience, better. This open conversation, may also help to mitigate some of their random, and hopefully not fully meant, complaints. We're all guilty of saying stupid crap we don't really mean in the moment.
I very much appreciate the help and support in this thread from everyone. To all of you who have suggested here and elsewhere that I be more selective with info handed out in Knowledge checks... I channeled all of you today.
I ended last game session with an ogre skeleton spontaneously animating from a funeral pyre as a Large sized flaming undead. I started with the Burning Bones skeleton, gave it extra HD and Large size, a couple extra special abilities and made it CR 8.
The wizard PC rolled a Knowledge check for monster lore and even though this is a unique, one-time monster he rolled super high so I worked with the player and summed up some of the powers.
That's not where you guys came in though.
After the fight wrapped the player running the wizard was like "I got a Nat 20 on my monster lore check; can I tell, was it animated by a spell or something in the area or was it an effect of the ghouls that previously killed the ogre or what?",
I thought about it, thought about all the advice on these forums and said "You... don't have enough info to make that conclusion. The only thing you know for certain is that there was no obvious spellcaster in the area animating them."
There was dead silence for a minute on the Zoom.
See, normally I'd have at least hinted at how the undead had animated, if not revealed it outright since the player managed a 36 on their PC's Knowledge check but frankly I just didn't want to this time. I wanted this effect to remain a mystery they have to solve so I didn't give much of anything.
I'm pretty sure the wizard's player was non-plussed in the moment but by the end of the game he was all smiles and said it was a good session. I'm saying we call it a win. Going forward, I'm going to keep building my confidence at being even more selective on controlling info despite high skill checks.
