| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information?I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?No it would do the opposite at my table.
Every player that bothered to get a lore at all would not have much fun if the tap into blood character got to roll at the same DCs on their specialties as they did.
How many players you think are going to be in a group with Tap the Blood and a bunch of lore skills? How big are your groups and how many are competing for making that lore check? This doesn't happen at my table.
If your players are worried about being outshown as they position against each other to be the one making that Lore check, then make the DCs what you think would be fun for your group.
If the Arcane Sorc takes Tap the Blood because they're the main RK guy in the group, I'm going to make it so they can make it so I can give the group the information. I figure a player spending a feat on Tap the Blood is doing because they like the RP of tapping into their ancient imperial blood to call upon the knowledge of their ancestors. I make that fun.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My table has 7 players.
There are 17 lore skills between them.
One player with one skill and a level 2 feat being able to RK for anything undermines the groups diversity and steals thunder from what others have invested in. (thats why I dont like the feat at all)
And it gets worse as they level and choose the skills they want to increase because an imp sorcerer with tap into blood is choosing arcana to increase and yet they basically are also now about as good at religion society nature and occult.
Thats the ability before throwing in this interpretation where they can use arcana as if it was a specific lore. Now throwing this imp sorcerer a swing of up to 5 on the DC in their favor over the characters that invested in other skills is over the top.
Lets say there is a werewolf the party wants to find out more about.
The imp sorcerer with this overly generous interpretation wouldn't even have to use the 18 DC below, they can pretend they have the specific werewolf lore needed to get the DC13 instead. So your saying a level 2 feat should give the equivalent of a +5 to RK checks? That undermines not only the balance of RK checks, is a bonus not seen anywhere else in the game, but also any player that gave up a skill or a feat to get that specific lore is also undermined.
This is what archives has for a werewolf RK check.
Recall Knowledge - Beast (Arcana, Nature): DC 18
Recall Knowledge - Humanoid (Society): DC 18
Unspecific Lore: DC 16
Specific Lore: DC 13
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oracles have Whispers of Weakness, a 1-action 1st-level feat that tells them unerringly without a check every weakness of a creature and its lowest safe. Oh, and you also get a +2 status bonus to your next attack against them. Just like that.
Why would any Oracle ever bother with Recall Knowledge again?
And I don't think I'm reading the ability as "too good to be true". Maybe that would be a fair point if you only looked at that single ability on its very own, but when you consider the entirety of the changes that came along with the PC2-Remaster, then it's no longer sticking out like a sore thumb. This looks much more like a new standard.
The entire Recall Knowledge mechanic was always just an additional safety layer to stymy the power of casters, as martials rarely ever benefited from it: To a Fighter, AC is always the lowest save.
The Recall Knowledge mechanic was already buffed back in PC1, and this looks like a continuation of intentionally eroding that anti-caster barrier, now that it's obvious that they're not OP and could use some buffs. I appreciate it especially because it buffs the one type of caster that has the biggest issues in PF2e, the Blaster. Support casters don't need buffs, they're already plenty strong, and they also don't care about Recall Knowledge.
This is even similar to the Swashbuckler changes, and all their new ways to get Panache compared to the skill-bound options before the Remaster. I think these are intentional decisions, for the main features of classes should no longer be hidden behind "skill-check walls".
And giving non-INT blaster casters ways to make them more efficient at repealing the RK-barrier and thus use their main class feature (blasting spells) is a welcome change!
After Paizo remastered (almost) all the books, it's now time for the community to finally be "remastered" as well, so give up on your dusty Premaster conceptions.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My table has 7 players.
There are 17 lore skills between them.
One player with one skill and a level 2 feat being able to RK for anything undermines the groups diversity and steals thunder from what others have invested in. (thats why I dont like the feat at all)
And it gets worse as they level and choose the skills they want to increase because an imp sorcerer with tap into blood is choosing arcana to increase and yet they basically are also now about as good at religion society nature and occult.
Thats the ability before throwing in this interpretation where they can use arcana as if it was a specific lore. Now throwing this imp sorcerer a swing of up to 5 on the DC in their favor over the characters that invested in other skills is over the top.Lets say there is a werewolf the party wants to find out more about.
The imp sorcerer with this overly generous interpretation wouldn't even have to use the 18 DC below, they can pretend they have the specific werewolf lore needed to get the DC13 instead. So your saying a level 2 feat should give the equivalent of a +5 to RK checks? That undermines not only the balance of RK checks, is a bonus not seen anywhere else in the game, but also any player that gave up a skill or a feat to get that specific lore is also undermined.This is what archives has for a werewolf RK check.
Recall Knowledge - Beast (Arcana, Nature): DC 18
Recall Knowledge - Humanoid (Society): DC 18
Unspecific Lore: DC 16
Specific Lore: DC 13
RK is mostly unnecessary and provides almost nothing. My group fought a group of werewolves and wasted them all with no problem without using silver. We didn't care. It's a minor bonus and werewolves are fairly weak.
Seven characters alone breaks the normal parameters of the game. Tap the Blood won't change that.
You really like to work hard to make something seem like a big deal that isn't at all.
Because the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information?I would always set the DC based on the most general applicable RK skill because it is even more unbalanced an ability to do otherwise.
Why should I as a GM let a person using arcana ever get the only benefit of picking a specific lore?Then we shouldn't be discussing whether Tap into Blood is overpowered or not. Because "the game is supposed to be fun and you want your players to get the information."
If you want players to get information, just tell them, don't hide it behind checks.
Tap into Blood isn't overpowered. Only reason some are bringing it up is because we hear how good the wizard is at RK checks as to a reason why they don't need some upgrades, then Tap the Blood comes along and suddenly the sorcerer who is a charisma class suddenly gets this ability that let's them RK using Arcane for everything. We all have to ask why? Why wasn't this a wizard ability? The intelligence class who many including myself see as an academic who should have a deep knowledge of a variety of subjects.
Tap the Blood isn't about power, it's about encroaching even on the fun aspects of the wizard like RK checks which "Wizards are perfect as is" proponents often push as a reason intelligence is a good casting stat.
As a mostly power gamer myself, I could care less about Tap the Blood. It isn't powerful to me at all. The first thing I use to find out about monsters is hitting them. 99% of the time my "RK" attack tells me all I need to know.
I let other players that enjoy the RK RP use it, while I just kill the thing and then give them a superfluous "thank you" after I kill the monster.
"Thanks for telling me how to kill it. I'll remember that next time I face it", as I think if I even bother to remember.
I used the wrong word. My point still stands though. If the game being fun means the players knowing more information, then it should be fine for the Sorcerer to have this ability. Why can't the Sorcerer also have decent knowledge gathering?
This is just a thought terminating cliché, which just ends all discussion.
Oracles have Whispers of Weakness, a 1-action 1st-level feat that tells them unerringly without a check every weakness of a creature and its lowest safe. Oh, and you also get a +2 status bonus to your next attack against them. Just like that.
Why would any Oracle ever bother with Recall Knowledge again?
And I don't think I'm reading the ability as "too good to be true". Maybe that would be a fair point if you only looked at that single ability on its very own, but when you consider the entirety of the changes that came along with the PC2-Remaster, then it's no longer sticking out like a sore thumb. This looks much more like a new standard.
The entire Recall Knowledge mechanic was always just an additional safety layer to stymy the power of casters, as martials rarely ever benefited from it: To a Fighter, AC is always the lowest save.
The Recall Knowledge mechanic was already buffed back in PC1, and this looks like a continuation of intentionally eroding that anti-caster barrier, now that it's obvious that they're not OP and could use some buffs. I appreciate it especially because it buffs the one type of caster that has the biggest issues in PF2e, the Blaster. Support casters don't need buffs, they're already plenty strong, and they also don't care about Recall Knowledge.
This is even similar to the Swashbuckler changes, and all their new ways to get Panache compared to the skill-bound options before the Remaster. I think these are intentional decisions, for the main features of classes should no longer be hidden behind "skill-check walls".
And giving non-INT blaster casters ways to make them more efficient at repealing the RK-barrier and thus use their main class feature (blasting spells) is a welcome change!
After Paizo remastered (almost) all the books, it's now time for the community to finally be "remastered" as well, so give up on your dusty Premaster conceptions.
Whispers of Weakness is limited in scope, and it progresses your curse. The two Mysteries that get it for free have the worst curse to progress.
Tap into Blood, if allowed to use the Specific Lore is easily a similar in power due to the scope of the ability. It also does in fact encroach on intelligence classes like the Wizard who notably do not have an easy way to do something similar.
It is most definitely not the "new standard" when it is still an exception.
Do you think the intention of this ability is to allow you to use specific Lore on every RK skillcheck? Mind you, not even Thaumaturge is getting the specific Lore DC here, and people have been arguing that Diverse Lore is too powerful for a while now.
My table has 7 players.
There are 17 lore skills between them.
One player with one skill and a level 2 feat being able to RK for anything undermines the groups diversity and steals thunder from what others have invested in. (thats why I dont like the feat at all)
And it gets worse as they level and choose the skills they want to increase because an imp sorcerer with tap into blood is choosing arcana to increase and yet they basically are also now about as good at religion society nature and occult.
Thats the ability before throwing in this interpretation where they can use arcana as if it was a specific lore. Now throwing this imp sorcerer a swing of up to 5 on the DC in their favor over the characters that invested in other skills is over the top.Lets say there is a werewolf the party wants to find out more about.
The imp sorcerer with this overly generous interpretation wouldn't even have to use the 18 DC below, they can pretend they have the specific werewolf lore needed to get the DC13 instead. So your saying a level 2 feat should give the equivalent of a +5 to RK checks? That undermines not only the balance of RK checks, is a bonus not seen anywhere else in the game, but also any player that gave up a skill or a feat to get that specific lore is also undermined.This is what archives has for a werewolf RK check.
Recall Knowledge - Beast (Arcana, Nature): DC 18
Recall Knowledge - Humanoid (Society): DC 18
Unspecific Lore: DC 16
Specific Lore: DC 13RK is mostly unnecessary and provides almost nothing. My group fought a group of werewolves and wasted them all with no problem without using silver. We didn't care. It's a minor bonus and werewolves are fairly weak.
Seven characters alone breaks the normal parameters of the game. Tap the Blood won't change that.
You really like to work hard to make something seem like a big deal that isn't at all.
Werewolf was just to provide something specific to illustrate the point.
Arcana has a dc18 for the creature but allowing tap into blood to be a specific lore instead like werewolf would make the dc 13.I guess we have different experiences. RK should be providing entire changes in how players approach a problem. Information can and should make the difference in how hard the encounters end up being in a lot of cases. If they dont then in your games I would suggest trying it. See if your players feel rewarded when something they learned ahead of time made a difference. And as GM actually let it make a difference. (if they want to end up with a serious challenge then let the difference be between a particular approach going from impossibly hard to becoming a serious challenge instead)
All of my players want the skills they picked to matter. There is no such thing as a one RK character. They each want to have some moments when having picked a skill actually meant something in the game. Its up to me as the GM to make opportunities where different skills allow for those moments.
For example if fighting in a mine. I would allow a character with engineering lore to role RK to see if they can spot areas where they can deliver a hard enough blow to cause a controlled collapse.
The greater the effect they expect it could have in an encounter the harder the DC would be.
But its an example of skills getting a moment to shine and RK playing a role changing the approach a player can take.
A player attempting to cause a collapse by damaging support structures without engineering would probably hurt at least themselves with it along with other possible repercussions.
A particular lore skill is difference between a reckless move and an informed one in this example and its one where succeeding on that RK check could make a difference and provide a cool moment for a player that bothered to pick it up.
i dont know about you but if a player using arcana for anything can do this with it then the game just will be boring for everyone else at the table. Whats the point of character creation if we just allow one skill to do everything all other skills enable?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whispers of Weakness is limited in scope, and it progresses your curse. The two Mysteries that get it for free have the worst curse to progress.
Tap into Blood, if allowed to use the Specific Lore is easily a similar in power due to the scope of the ability. It also does in fact encroach on intelligence classes like the Wizard who notably do not have an easy way to do something similar.
It is most definitely not the "new standard" when it is still an exception.
Do you think the intention of this ability is to allow you to use specific Lore on every RK skillcheck? Mind you, not even Thaumaturge is getting the specific Lore DC here, and people have been arguing that Diverse Lore is too powerful for a while now.
I think RAW there is nothing stopping you from getting the lower DC, for either tap into blood or Diverse Lore, so long as it's for Recall Knowledge of course.
Keep in mind, Recall Knowledge is an Untrained skill action for the skills that have it as an action (Crafting, Lores, etc.). As a player, you can, if you want, when encountering a Zombie, use Zombie Lore to recall knowledge on it. But if you're actually Untrained, that's obviously a terrible idea.
A Sorcerer could use Tap into Blood and say "I will attempt a Zombie Lore check to Recall Knowledge, replacing it with Arcana." and that is perfectly by the rules.
Similarly, if a Thaumaturge with Diverse Lore encounters something like a weird statue depicting Sarenrae in strange ways, they could go "Alright I will use Recall Knowledge with Sarenrae Lore, replacing it with Esoteric Lore at -2 thanks to Diverse Lore".
A Bard could do the same if they had Bardic Lore, a Loremaster with Loremaster Lore, a Dandy with Gossip Lore, etc.
The only way you can prevent this is ruling Recall Knowledge to be a Trained or higher action in that Specific Lore, which is also supported by the rules, it's just not baseline.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whispers of Weakness is limited in scope, and it progresses your curse. The two Mysteries that get it for free have the worst curse to progress.
Tap into Blood, if allowed to use the Specific Lore is easily a similar in power due to the scope of the ability. It also does in fact encroach on intelligence classes like the Wizard who notably do not have an easy way to do something similar.
It is most definitely not the "new standard" when it is still an exception.
Do you think the intention of this ability is to allow you to use specific Lore on every RK skillcheck? Mind you, not even Thaumaturge is getting the specific Lore DC here, and people have been arguing that Diverse Lore is too powerful for a while now.
I think RAW there is nothing stopping you from getting the lower DC, for either tap into blood or Diverse Lore, so long as it's for Recall Knowledge of course.
Keep in mind, Recall Knowledge is an Untrained skill action for the skills that have it as an action (Crafting, Lores, etc.). As a player, you can, if you want, when encountering a Zombie, use Zombie Lore to recall knowledge on it. But if you're actually Untrained, that's obviously a terrible idea.
A Sorcerer could use Tap into Blood and say "I will attempt a Zombie Lore check to Recall Knowledge, replacing it with Arcana." and that is perfectly by the rules.
Similarly, if a Thaumaturge with Diverse Lore encounters something like a weird statue depicting Sarenrae in strange ways, they could go "Alright I will use Recall Knowledge with Sarenrae Lore, replacing it with Esoteric Lore at -2 thanks to Diverse Lore".
A Bard could do the same if they had Bardic Lore, a Loremaster with Loremaster Lore, a Dandy with Gossip Lore, etc.
The only way you can prevent this is ruling Recall Knowledge to be a Trained or higher action in that Specific Lore, which is also supported by the rules, it's just not baseline.
No it does not work that way.
The player is not the one choosing which lore is used ever.The player asks a question. The GM determines which lore is appropriate.
Ques the player in so they understand if they kinda have a chance with the skills they have and the player confirms if they want to continue allowing them to take it back if it wasnt what they were expecting. The player can make a suggestion but its still the GM deciding.
Then the GM does a secret roll with the appropriate bonus against the DC they set.
The player doesnt ever get to decide they are asking the question with Undead lore.
The GM looks at thier skills and decides if undead lore is sets the best DC for their question.
With arcana and tap into blood the best I would ever give is the standard DC. I would not treat it as if they were using undead lore or even zombie lore.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No it does not work that way.
The player is not the one choosing which lore is used ever.
The player asks a question. The GM determines which lore is appropriate.
Ques the player in so they understand if they kinda have a chance with the skills they have and the player confirms if they want to continue allowing them to take it back if it wasnt what they were expecting.
Then the GM does a secret roll with the appropriate bonus against the DC they set.
The player doesnt ever get to decide they are asking the question with Undead lore.
The GM looks at thier skills and decides if undead lore is sets the best DC for their question.With arcana and tap into blood the best I would ever give is the standard DC. I would not treat it as if they were using undead lore or even zombie lore.
That is absolutely not how Recall Knowledge works, Recall knowledge is specifically a back and forth between GM and player:
"You attempt a skill check to try to remember a bit of knowledge regarding a topic related to that skill. Suggest which skill you'd like to use and ask the GM one question. The GM determines the DC. You might need to collaborate with the GM to narrow down the question or skills, and you can decide not to Recall Knowledge before committing to the action if you can't don't like your options."
If the party runs into a rotting corpse, the following interaction is how it should go down according to the description:
Player: Ok, I want to Recall Knowledge on the creature to know what it is, and I want to use Zombie Lore for it.
GM: I'm sorry, Zombie Lore wouldn't apply here. It'd need to be Religion or Undead Lore.
There are problems with this too, of course. The player, without rolling, has learned this creature is Undead but not a Zombie. That's minor, but what you describe is worse because it would be:
The party runs into a rotting corpse:
Player 1: Alright, I want to Recall Knowledge to know what it is (they have Occultism and Zombie Lore).
GM: You can, but you're not trained in any of the appropiate skills.
Player 1: Oh. Bummer.
Player 2: Can I try? (They have Religion)
GM: Sure, let me roll d20.
- The GM then rolls and compares, adding the player's own modifier and seeing if they succeed/crit succeed, etc.
The problems with this approach are much worse. The players are never really sure which of their skills contributed to the Recall Knowledge. The GM has to be aware, at all times, of their player's Recall Knowledge skills and their modifiers, which is extra mental load that serves no purpose. And it's a question of putting more trust in the GM being truthful. Of course if you don't trust your GM to be truthful you have bigger problems, but it is another poit of contention.
Also, we need to keep in mind that for Tap into Blood to work the Sorcerer needs to benefit from a Bloodline ability, which is only activated by casting a spell that consumes resources (slot, or one of their focus spells). That means, in the best case scenario, spending a focus point for -5 to the DC of the Recall Knowledge check (if the GM decides that even applies. It very well might be it doesn't). That can be a pretty big ask depending on the situation, especially since it's not like the Sorcerer gets any bonuses from RKing the enemy at all.
No it does not work that way.
The player is not the one choosing which lore is used ever.
The player asks a question. The GM determines which lore is appropriate.
Ques the player in so they understand if they kinda have a chance with the skills they have and the player confirms if they want to continue allowing them to take it back if it wasnt what they were expecting.
Then the GM does a secret roll with the appropriate bonus against the DC they set.
The player doesnt ever get to decide they are asking the question with Undead lore.
The GM looks at thier skills and decides if undead lore is sets the best DC for their question.With arcana and tap into blood the best I would ever give is the standard DC. I would not treat it as if they were using undead lore or even zombie lore.
That is absolutely not how Recall Knowledge works, Recall knowledge is specifically a back and forth between GM and player:
"You attempt a skill check to try to remember a bit of knowledge regarding a topic related to that skill. Suggest which skill you'd like to use and ask the GM one question. The GM determines the DC. You might need to collaborate with the GM to narrow down the question or skills, and you can decide not to Recall Knowledge before committing to the action if you can't don't like your options."
If the party runs into a rotting corpse, the following interaction is how it should go down according to the description:
Player: Ok, I want to Recall Knowledge on the creature to know what it is, and I want to use Zombie Lore for it.
GM: I'm sorry, Zombie Lore wouldn't apply here. It'd need to be Religion or Undead Lore.There are problems with this too, of course. The player, without rolling, has learned this creature is Undead but not a Zombie. That's minor, but what you describe is worse because it would be:
The party runs into a rotting corpse:
Player 1: Alright, I want to Recall Knowledge to know what it is (they have Occultism and Zombie Lore).
GM: You...
Bonuses? what about learning weakest save? Thats often a huge bonus.
Also me not going into step by step of the back and forth detail doesnt mean I wouldnt tell players what skill is the one that was best for them and that it was that that provided the knowledge.
Also in some situations being trained or expert or master or legendary can just mean they know a thing without rolling. are you suggesting the Tap into Blood gets that benefit as well with Arcana?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bonuses? what about learning weakest save? Thats often a huge bonus.
Also me not going into step by step of the back and forth detail doesnt mean I wouldnt tell players what skill is the one that was best for them and that it was that that provided the knowledge.
Also in some situations being trained or expert or master or legendary can just mean they know a thing without rolling. are you suggesting the Tap into Blood gets that benefit as well with Arcana?
Yes, but that's something anyone using RK can get? I meant stuff like the Wizard's Knowledge is Power feat, or Monster Hunter, or Exploit Vulnerability.
Knowing a creature's saves or ac or whatever isn't a bonus from RK, it's the thing you're doing the action for. And it's something that can be of 0 use to you anyway (for example, you learn it's weakest save is Reflex, and you're all out of Reflex targeting spells for the day.)
Also me not going into step by step of the back and forth detail doesnt mean I wouldnt tell players what skill is the one that was best for them and that it was that that provided the knowledge.
I mean, ok. But Bardic Lore, Loremaster Lore, Tap into Blood, etc work by replacing the normal skill for the RK check with their particular skill. It doesn't change the DC. If you decide Zombie Lore is an appropiate skill, they get to roll it instead of Zombie Lore, that's the rules. That's what I mean. Whatever skill and DC you decide for a Recall Knowledge check they get the same DC with their special skill. Doing otherwise is simply nerfing the ability.
Also in some situations being trained or expert or master or legendary can just mean they know a thing without rolling. are you suggesting the Tap into Blood gets that benefit as well with Arcana?
Tap into Blood specifically requires you to supplant a Recall Knowledge check. It would be up to you as the GM to decide if the information you're giving for free could be learned with a Recall Knowledge check. If it can, then Tap into Blood applies. If it can't, then it doesn't.
EDIT: Just to clarify my last point, when I say "Tap into Blood applies" I mean the Sorcerer can use it to attempt the relevant RK check with Arcana, not that they get the info for free by using Tap into Blood.
Bonuses? what about learning weakest save? Thats often a huge bonus.
Also me not going into step by step of the back and forth detail doesnt mean I wouldnt tell players what skill is the one that was best for them and that it was that that provided the knowledge.
Also in some situations being trained or expert or master or legendary can just mean they know a thing without rolling. are you suggesting the Tap into Blood gets that benefit as well with Arcana?
Yes, but that's something anyone using RK can get? I meant stuff like the Wizard's Knowledge is Power feat, or Monster Hunter, or Exploit Vulnerability.
Knowing a creature's saves or ac or whatever isn't a bonus from RK, it's the thing you're doing the action for. And it's something that can be of 0 use to you anyway (for example, you learn it's weakest save is Reflex, and you're all out of Reflex targeting spells for the day.)
Also me not going into step by step of the back and forth detail doesnt mean I wouldnt tell players what skill is the one that was best for them and that it was that that provided the knowledge.I mean, ok. But Bardic Lore, Loremaster Lore, Tap into Blood, etc work by replacing the normal skill for the RK check with their particular skill. It doesn't change the DC. If you decide Zombie Lore is an appropiate skill, they get to roll it instead of Zombie Lore, that's the rules. That's what I mean. Whatever skill and DC you decide for a Recall Knowledge check they get the same DC with their special skill. Doing otherwise is simply nerfing the ability.
Also in some situations being trained or expert or master or legendary can just mean they know a thing without rolling. are you suggesting the Tap into Blood gets that benefit as well with Arcana?Tap into Blood specifically requires you to supplant a Recall Knowledge check. It would be up to you as the GM to decide if the information you're giving for free could be...
Ok i see where your coming from but thats not how i would do it.
I wouldnt say zombie lore is the only appropriate skill. Its just an appropriate skill to get specific. Undead would be the -2 DC category and Religion would be the standard DC category. I will always give the standard DC category. Edit: i mean the standard category is what I will always let the arcana be used for on the subject of the question.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok i see where your coming from but thats not how i would do it.
I wouldnt say zombie lore is the only appropriate skill. Its just an appropriate skill to get specific. Undead would be the -2 DC category and Religion would be the standard DC category. I will always give the standard DC category. Edit: i mean the standard category is what I will always let the arcana be used for on the subject of the question.
I get that, and that's a fair way to run your game. The problem I think arises more specifically with Tap into Blood than the others.
Bardic Lore, Gossip Lore etc simply say "Use this Lore to Recall Knowledge on any topic". Ok, saying "the topic is Zombies, so you can use Religion, Undead Lore, Zombie Lore or Bardic Lore" and setting the DCs accordingly. Maybe Bardic Lore gets the nonspecific lore reduction, maybe it doesn't. That's fair.
But Tap into Blood says "Attempt to Recall Knowledge; you can use Arcana instead of the skill normally needed for that subject." That's...a bit of an issue. What is the skill normally needed for this subject? Religion? Undead Lore? Zombie Lore? Any of them? And depending on how you as a GM answer the question is how it would work. It's perfectly ok to say "The skill normally required is Religion, so you substitute Arcane for Religion and get the appropiate DC" but you could say "Well any of the 3 are normally required, so you can use Arcana instead of Zombie Lore and get the lower DC."
Ok i see where your coming from but thats not how i would do it.
I wouldnt say zombie lore is the only appropriate skill. Its just an appropriate skill to get specific. Undead would be the -2 DC category and Religion would be the standard DC category. I will always give the standard DC category. Edit: i mean the standard category is what I will always let the arcana be used for on the subject of the question.I get that, and that's a fair way to run your game. The problem I think arises more specifically with Tap into Blood than the others.
Bardic Lore, Gossip Lore etc simply say "Use this Lore to Recall Knowledge on any topic". Ok, saying "the topic is Zombies, so you can use Religion, Undead Lore, Zombie Lore or Bardic Lore" and setting the DCs accordingly. Maybe Bardic Lore gets the nonspecific lore reduction, maybe it doesn't. That's fair.
But Tap into Blood says "Attempt to Recall Knowledge; you can use Arcana instead of the skill normally needed for that subject." That's...a bit of an issue. What is the skill normally needed for this subject? Religion? Undead Lore? Zombie Lore? Any of them? And depending on how you as a GM answer the question is how it would work. It's perfectly ok to say "The skill normally required is Religion, so you substitute Arcane for Religion and get the appropiate DC" but you could say "Well any of the 3 are normally required, so you can use Arcana instead of Zombie Lore and get the lower DC."
Yeah I think you put it well there.
I get the bard being the i know a bit of everything cause it fits the fantasy and keeping it general also fits the fantasy.You know I think I just thought of a cercumstance where I would give a more specific DC rather than the general. It would be only where the specific background of the imperial sorcerer's bloodline has a reason to.
Like if the specific bloodline was of an apprentice of Tar Baphon. Now undead lore kind of could make sense as a specific lore the specific imperial bloodline would have known and passed on through blood.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is a difference between “ Using an applicable Lore to Recall Knowledge about a topic, such as Engineering Lore instead of Crafting to find structural weaknesses in a bridge, typically comes with a lower DC.” and using a skill to recall knowledge about that topic. Using arcana to recall knowledge about a zombie is never using an applicable lore skill to RK on a zombie.
Notice that the GM core on page 54 never lists a lore topic as the needed skill to recall knowledge on any creature.
Personally, I do not even allow any of the broad lore skills (bardic/gossip/loremaster) to work in place of a specific lore either, since the lore master archetype has feats that later grant specific lores on top of lore master lore, which would be completely pointless.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whispers of Weakness is limited in scope, and it progresses your curse. The two Mysteries that get it for free have the worst curse to progress.
Tap into Blood, if allowed to use the Specific Lore is easily a similar in power due to the scope of the ability. It also does in fact encroach on intelligence classes like the Wizard who notably do not have an easy way to do something similar.
It is most definitely not the "new standard" when it is still an exception.
Do you think the intention of this ability is to allow you to use specific Lore on every RK skillcheck? Mind you, not even Thaumaturge is getting the specific Lore DC here, and people have been arguing that Diverse Lore is too powerful for a while now.
I think RAW there is nothing stopping you from getting the lower DC, for either tap into blood or Diverse Lore, so long as it's for Recall Knowledge of course.
Keep in mind, Recall Knowledge is an Untrained skill action for the skills that have it as an action (Crafting, Lores, etc.). As a player, you can, if you want, when encountering a Zombie, use Zombie Lore to recall knowledge on it. But if you're actually Untrained, that's obviously a terrible idea.
A Sorcerer could use Tap into Blood and say "I will attempt a Zombie Lore check to Recall Knowledge, replacing it with Arcana." and that is perfectly by the rules.
Similarly, if a Thaumaturge with Diverse Lore encounters something like a weird statue depicting Sarenrae in strange ways, they could go "Alright I will use Recall Knowledge with Sarenrae Lore, replacing it with Esoteric Lore at -2 thanks to Diverse Lore".
A Bard could do the same if they had Bardic Lore, a Loremaster with Loremaster Lore, a Dandy with Gossip Lore, etc.
The only way you can prevent this is ruling Recall Knowledge to be a Trained or higher action in that Specific Lore, which is also supported by the rules, it's just not baseline.
I disagree that the Lore skills like Bardic Lore and Esoteric Lore can be specific, when they are very clearly general Lore skills. I don't know where you are getting that reading.
Perhaps Tap into Blood works RAW, but I doubt the intention is for it to work the way it is written.