| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, the reason those DCs haven't ever been in any bestiary or adventure is that they aren't real. AoN gives standard difficulty adjustment steps applied to the rarity-adjusted level-based DC. But remember, that is the starting point of setting RK DCs, and they can also be adjusted based on other factors, like fame.
Also, do remember that "Specific lore" and "Unspecific lore" written in AoN have never been real rules categories.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do also remember that Thaumaturge's Exploit Vulnerability does not use RK DC. It just uses standard DC by Level. They use it for Diverse Lore and for regular RK attempts but not for a core class feature.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Attempting to actually print every lore that can apply to a creature, when there is not a fixed list of valid lores in the first place would be Actually counterproductive. Printing the standard skills that apply based on creature type would be fine (though the ability to allow other related skills at adjusted DC, based on the narrative of the creature is something I value as a GM), but listing all lores doesn't make sense.
But it's a core feature of the Thaumaturge. To not provide a DC is just ... well, wrong.
Thaumaturge uses a standard DC based on the creature's level for Exploit Vulnerability. This may or may not actually be the Recall Knowledge DC (even for Thaumaturge just using Recall Knowledge). It's also already printed in GM Core on a table, so there's really little reason to print it on every creature for a single class feature. It's easy to calculate for Exploit using a standard GM tool.
It really needs to be listed and made an official rule because it's an important action that is used in every single fight that I'm in. Multiple times.
It needs the DCs, modified by rarity, and telling us which Lore is necessary.
Why fight including something that will be useful for a large audience?
I mean, it is an official rule. The official rule is just that "it can vary by a lot of factors" rather than "the DC is always X."
For a check about a specific creature, trap, or other subject with a level, use a level-based DC (adjusting for rarity as needed). You might adjust the difficulty down, maybe even drastically, if the subject is especially notorious or famed. Knowing simple tales about an infamous dragon’s exploits, for example, might be incredibly easy for the dragon’s level, or even just a simple trained DC.
The skill used to identify a creature usually depends on that creature's trait, as shown on the Creature Identification Skills table, but you have leeway on which skills apply. For instance, hags are humanoids but have a strong connection to occult spells and live outside society, so you might allow a character to use Occultism to identify them without any DC adjustment and make using Society harder. Lore skills can also be used to identify a specific creature. Using the applicable Lore usually has an easy or very easy DC (before adjusting for rarity).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The GM screens have the DCs by level printed on them and are one of the most essential purchases you can make. Even playing online they are worth having on hand to reference.
AoN is generally great, yes, but it has created this false understanding of how knowledgeable DCs (and even relevant skills) work. As Hammerjack pointed out at the beginning.
AoN is great as a reference, but I think the books work better for seeing the overall structure of the rules. With AoN you can dive right to the part you're looking for, but you might miss the stuff a little further around it that you should also know exists.
I typically provide links to Archives of Nethys when I post here in the Paizo forums, so that the readers can look up details. However, when we have an in-depth discussion about how rules interact and why certain rules were created, I will open the rulebooks themselves and read more than the isolated entries in Archives of Nethys. And strangely, I have an example of this triggered by this thread.
When I read HammerJack's second post in this thread on Wednesday, in which he mentioned the lower DC's for Specific Lore and Unspecific Lore, I realized I had forgotten that rule in my game session Tuesday evening. Let me quote what I posted in Discord to my players immediately afterwards. I erased real names and identified people by their characters and me as GM.
GM — 9/17/25, 7:25 PM
Your crazy GM is considering another houserule.I read a new Paizo forum thread today, "Please Add Monster Knowledge DCs," at https://paizo.com/threads/rzs7143j?Please-Add-Monster-Knowledge-DCs#1. Original poster Harles is disappointed that the Monster Core rulebook does not have the DCs for Recall Knowledge to identify https://2e.aonprd.com/Actions.aspx?ID=2367&Redirected=1. The Archives of Nethys has the DCs, but those are simply the DC by Level (https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=2629) for the monster's level. The Archives also give a DC for Unspecific Lore and for Specific Lore, calculated as the other DC -2 and -5 respectively.
I forgot about this when Jinx's player asked Cara about using Mwangi Expanse Lore to identify the Rompo ([rul="https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=1440"]https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=1440[/url]). Archives of Nethys says about the 5th-level Rompo.
Recall Knowledge - Beast (Arcana, Nature): DC 20
Unspecific Lore: DC 18
Specific Lore: DC 15
Since the Rompo is a creature native to the Mwangi Expanse, it can be identified with Mwangi Expanse as an Unspecific Lore DC 18. A specific lore would be Beast Lore DC 15.Cara'sseth has Arcana +18, Mwangi Expanse Lore +14, and Nature +10. Under my current houserule that Recall Knowledge is not secret (because you players are so good about roleplaying failure appropriately) I told Cara to roll on either Arcana or Nature, and suggested Mwangi Expanse lore as an alternative. Since Cara has the highest bonus on Arcana, she rolled that and got 21, enough for a success. Rolling the same natural 3 for Mwangi Expanse Lore would have given 17 versus DC 18, a failure.
But having the lore and the rules not letting the PC take good advantage of it is not fun. And I forgot about the variable DC and will forget again. Thus, I want a more manageable rule for Recall Knowledge with Lore. What do you think of the following possibilities? The DC stays unchanges, such as a always DC 20 for the Rompo. ... <skipping houserule suggestions>
In inventing potential houserules, I read about Recall Knowledge in the Player Core and about Recall Knowledge in the GM Core. Lots of different rules, such as the Additional Knowledge rule mix together for the Recall Knowledge experience. And I have my own goals, such as enabling fun tactics while not cluttering the challenge with too many details. Rulebooks are better sources for synergistic thinking.
The weakness in the Archives of Nethys DCs for identifying creatures is that they are based solely on level with no consideration for the creature being familiar, common, uncommon, or never before seen. On the other hand, when I pull a creature out of Lost Omens The Mwangi Expanse or other source material, I don't know how well-known that creature is, either, beyond it not being marked Uncommon, Rare, or Unique. I just figured that the area near a limnic-eruption lake would favor corpse-eating scavengers.
In case you were wondering about the encounter with the rompo, it was a simple night encounter while the party was camped for the night along a road through the Mwangi Expanse and two party members Cara and Zandre stood watch. Cara was wondering whether the rompo spoke a language she knew, like the Blink Dogs they had encountered the previous day (they befriended the Blink Dogs instead of fighting them). Cara also sent their champion's elephant bird mount to safety with Command Animal. Zandre used Demoralize on the rompo and also woke up the others. The bard Stargazer awoke and began Courageous Anthem. The frightened rompo used Crooning Cry, but Stargazer used Counter Performance to neutralize the Crooning Cry. That further scared the rompo and it fled.
The weakness in the Archives of Nethys DCs for identifying creatures is that they are based solely on level with no consideration for the creature being familiar, common, uncommon, or never before seenWait, really? They don't include the Rarity in the AoN DCs? That's really unhelpful if true. EDIT: It does not appear to be true, or at least not universally so (I have only checked one example): The Tarrasque correctly gives the DC for a Unique level 25 of 60 (it would be 50 without the +10 Rarity modifier).
I was wrong. I performed a survey of the 5th-level creatures in Archives of Nethys and the common creatures had DC 20, the uncommon had DC 22, the rare had DC 25, and the unique had DC 30. Oddly, the unique creatures were often a single individual NPC with a name, so Ban-Niang "Granny" Hu, female human guard captain 5, with DC 30 is a lot harder to identify than Unsanctioned Sheriff with DC 20. Thus, making an NPC a named individual rather than an example of a profession makes them harder to recognize.
I was mostly thinking about the difference between the common creatures that everyone would recognize, such as Moose, versus the common creatures that seen much more obscure, such as Flynkett. On the other hand, maybe little children on Golarion learn about obscure common creatures, such as reading from an ABC book with F for Flynkett.
AoN is generally great, yes, but it has created this false understanding of how knowledgeable DCs (and even relevant skills) work. As Hammerjack pointed out at the beginning.I do not understand - in what way?
Take the Moose as an example. It has big antlers on its head, so an antler attack and the related Thundering Charge ability should be obvious. That the moose is a good swimmer is less obvious, but most players won't ask about its athletic skill anyway. I expect that most players won't bother with Recall Knowledge to identify a moose. To balance the creature better, a low DC on Recall Knowledge would make a PCs as likely to apply Recall Knowledge to a moose ("Hey, it has a Kick Back, too! Watch out for its hind hooves.") as they would for a flynkett.
But the problem that made me talk to my players is that Lore skills are treated in a non-standard matter. Usually a DC is changed because of some feature of the target itself. For example, an Iblydan Hind is rare, so it should be harder to identify than a moose. A bandit is frightened 1, so his AC takes a -1 penalty. Those are features of the target. But when the feature is on the active character, such as wielding a +1 weapon, the character is given a bonus rather than the target taking a penalty. But using Lore for Recall Knowledge gives a penalty to the DC rather than a bonus to the roll, and I think that that is why I keep forgetting it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
[
AoN is generally great, yes, but it has created this false understanding of how knowledgeable DCs (and even relevant skills) work. As Hammerjack pointed out at the beginning.I do not understand - in what way?
Because level adjusted by rarity is not the only way to set the DC for monster identification. It is just the simplest way. People see the listed Recall Knowledge DCs and think they are as "canon" as the monster's AC and saves. Case in point, the OP, who not only misunderstood RK DCs but things like Exploit Vulnerability.
Here is what the rules actually say:
Recall Knowledge
Source GM Core pg. 54 2.0
On most topics, you can use simple DCs for checks to Recall Knowledge. For a check about a specific creature, trap, or other subject with a level, use a level-based DC (adjusting for rarity as needed). You might adjust the difficulty down, maybe even drastically, if the subject is especially notorious or famed. Knowing simple tales about an infamous dragon’s exploits, for example, might be incredibly easy for the dragon’s level, or even just a simple trained DC.The skill used to identify a creature usually depends on that creature's trait, as shown on the Creature Identification Skills table, but you have leeway on which skills apply. For instance, hags are humanoids but have a strong connection to occult spells and live outside society, so you might allow a character to use Occultism to identify them without any DC adjustment and make using Society harder. Lore skills can also be used to identify a specific creature. Using the applicable Lore usually has an easy or very easy DC (before adjusting for rarity.)
The problem is people don't spend as much time reading these rules as they do looking at stat blocks on AoN, so they start to think those DCs on AoN are scripture instead of baseline suggestions.
But using Lore for Recall Knowledge gives a penalty to the DC rather than a bonus to the roll, and I think that that is why I keep forgetting it.
It wouldn't be hard to use the penalty to DC as a roll bonus instead if that's easier to recall.
EDIT: the only thing I can think it'd mess with would be Assurance: Lore.
But using Lore for Recall Knowledge gives a penalty to the DC rather than a bonus to the roll, and I think that that is why I keep forgetting it.It wouldn't be hard to use the penalty to DC as a roll bonus instead if that's easier to recall.
EDIT: the only thing I can think it'd mess with would be Assurance: Lore.
And that is why I am talking to my players about a houserule.
The character Roshan has Automatic Knowledge, which does rely on Assurance, but she has Automatic Knowledge only for Nature and Society, not for Lore.
I already have three houserules on Recall Knowledge to encourage its use. I find combat more fun when the players know more details about the creatures they fight. For example, in a previous campaign they fought a Nuckelavee and succeeded at a Recall Knowledge check that revealed its Mortasheen disease spread by its melee attacks, including its sword attack. The party switched to a keep-away tactic. They did not succeed, because the nuckelavee is fast with Speed 40 feet, but I was entertained watching them adapt. In the current campaign, they prefer to negotiate rather than fight, so they rely on Recall Knowledge to find a common language.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The weakness in the Archives of Nethys DCs for identifying creatures is that they are based solely on level with no consideration for the creature being familiar, common, uncommon, or never before seenWait, really? They don't include the Rarity in the AoN DCs? That's really unhelpful if true. EDIT: It does not appear to be true, or at least not universally so (I have only checked one example): The Tarrasque correctly gives the DC for a Unique level 25 of 60 (it would be 50 without the +10 Rarity modifier).I was wrong. I performed a survey of the 5th-level creatures in Archives of Nethys and the common creatures had DC 20, the uncommon had DC 22, the rare had DC 25, and the unique had DC 30. Oddly, the unique creatures were often a single individual NPC with a name, so Ban-Niang "Granny" Hu, female human guard captain 5, with DC 30 is a lot harder to identify than Unsanctioned Sheriff with DC 20. Thus, making an NPC a named individual rather than an example of a profession makes them harder to recognize.
I was mostly thinking about the difference between the common creatures that everyone would recognize, such as Moose, versus the common creatures that seen much more obscure, such as Flynkett. On the other hand, maybe little children on Golarion learn about obscure common creatures, such as reading from an ABC book with F for Flynkett.
Take the...AoN is generally great, yes, but it has created this false understanding of how knowledgeable DCs (and even relevant skills) work. As Hammerjack pointed out at the beginning.I do not understand - in what way?
Unique is another case where people desperately need to read all the rules about rarity and RK, and not blindly use those AoN DCs. It is very important that the Unique DC is only used for what is actually Unique about the individual, not for information about any base creature type that they are a special individual of.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unique is another case where people desperately need to read all the rules about rarity and RK, and not blindly use those AoN DCs. It is very important that the Unique DC is only used for what is actually Unique about the individual, not for information about any base creature type that they are a special individual of.
I think it's more a case that the game shouldn't use the same tag if it's not meant to be used in the same way. The literal rules for Unique tell you to increase the DC of Recall Knowledge checks related to Unique creatures. The rarity system itself is to blame here with it having double or tripple duty [hard to find vs game disrupting vs unique creature vs unique npc...].
The rules also tell you that Unique doesn't apply to the DC to recall about the general creature type.
The rules also tell you that Unique doesn't apply to the DC to recall about the general creature type.
It does say something like that in one of the books [Gamemastery]: it notes it's Unique for "discern specific information about" a Unique NPC but when "encountering" such an NPC, their Ancestry follows the rarity for that Ancestry.
This means that if you're trying to recall if an NPC is an orc, it's a Unique DC, but if you mean them, it's a Common DC.
Let's be honest; if this is something players/DM's are expected to know, it should be spelled out in a Main core book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rules also tell you that Unique doesn't apply to the DC to recall about the general creature type.It does say something like that in one of the books [Gamemastery]: it notes it's Unique for "discern specific information about" a Unique NPC but when "encountering" such an NPC, their Ancestry follows the rarity for that Ancestry.
This means that if you're trying to recall if an NPC is an orc, it's a Unique DC, but if you mean them, it's a Common DC.
Let's be honest; if this is something players/DM's are expected to know, it should be spelled out in a Main core book.
It is also in GM Core. That is a core book.
It is also in GM Core. That is a core book.The rules also tell you that Unique doesn't apply to the DC to recall about the general creature type.It does say something like that in one of the books [Gamemastery]: it notes it's Unique for "discern specific information about" a Unique NPC but when "encountering" such an NPC, their Ancestry follows the rarity for that Ancestry.
This means that if you're trying to recall if an NPC is an orc, it's a Unique DC, but if you mean them, it's a Common DC.
Let's be honest; if this is something players/DM's are expected to know, it should be spelled out in a Main core book.
You are right, I didn't remember it being reprinted in the GM core.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel fundamentally, adding rarity modifiers to RK was a bad idea. Most of the time the monster you really want knowledge about is 1-3 levels above you so the level-based DC is already tough. So it makes RK just really hard.
It's worse with bosses because the boss monster is the most likely not to be common. A level +2 rare boss is about 8-9 above the normal level based DC for your level. For example, a level 1 party trying RK about the rare level 3 boss monster is rolling against DC 23. If the boss is unique then it's actually DC 28 which even on a nat 20 a level 1 character (+7 mod) will still fail.
I don't think the game becomes more fun when RK is extra hard. Because it means RK often just doesn't work. So you don't have special information about how to fight the monster and the most important fights are the most likely to be "I dunno, have you tried just rolling really high on to hit and damage?"
Actually finding actionable information on monsters and changing how you fight them is more fun than not doing that. So RK really shouldn't be facing some of the highest DCs in the game.
If you just ignored the rarity modifiers to RK it would still be tough just by the monsters you really care about being higher level than you.
I don't think the game becomes more fun when RK is extra hard.
If you just ignored the rarity modifiers to RK it would still be tough just by the monsters you really care about being higher level than you.
Agreed. Personally in the rare situation of my DMing, I go with a sliding scale with the 'normal' DC giving basic info and higher rolls [uncommon, rare, unique mods] allowing for more detail. This give people that invested in the right Lore a chance for some nice benefits while allowing for the safety net for everyone else. This way, the PC's with investments in the skills for Recall at least don't have a much higher chance of crit failing than succeeding.
I was wrong. I performed a survey of the 5th-level creatures in Archives of Nethys and the common creatures had DC 20, the uncommon had DC 22, the rare had DC 25, and the unique had DC 30. Oddly, the unique creatures were often a single individual NPC with a name, so Ban-Niang "Granny" Hu, female human guard captain 5, with DC 30 is a lot harder to identify than Unsanctioned Sheriff with DC 20. Thus, making an NPC a named individual rather than an example of a profession makes them harder to recognize.The weakness in the Archives of Nethys DCs for identifying creatures is that they are based solely on level with no consideration for the creature being familiar, common, uncommon, or never before seenWait, really? They don't include the Rarity in the AoN DCs? That's really unhelpful if true. EDIT: It does not appear to be true, or at least not universally so (I have only checked one example): The Tarrasque correctly gives the DC for a Unique level 25 of 60 (it would be 50 without the +10 Rarity modifier).
This is definitely a case where reading the rules is important, as others mention in the thread already. Because it's a Unique DC to recognize whats unique about that person, but not their common ancestry/etc. People who just use the unique DC verbatim wind up in silly situations where you can't recognize an Orc because that Orc has a name.
Foundry is guilty of this as well, especially when using the Recall Knowledge macro. It's a great tool, but it's just following these numbers and sometimes these numbers aren't the ones you should be using.
The rules also state that if something is famous or well known you can lower the DC. AoN never does that, but a unique NPC who is extremely famous and well known should have a significantly lower DC than a unique NPC no one has ever heard of.
This rule passage is very important but doesn't tend to get a lot of attention in my experience because the DCs shown in the tools don't know when its appropriate to use it:
You might adjust the difficulty down, maybe even drastically, if the subject is especially notorious or famed. Knowing simple tales about an infamous dragon’s exploits, for example, might be incredibly easy for the dragon’s level, or even just a simple trained DC.
I assume that would apply to level as well. A high level unique orc shouldn't just be treated as common to know things about orcs, but you should also be rolling against the base Orc DC, not the one boosted for this individual's level.The rules also tell you that Unique doesn't apply to the DC to recall about the general creature type.It does say something like that in one of the books [Gamemastery]: it notes it's Unique for "discern specific information about" a Unique NPC but when "encountering" such an NPC, their Ancestry follows the rarity for that Ancestry.
This means that if you're trying to recall if an NPC is an orc, it's a Unique DC, but if you mean them, it's a Common DC.
Let's be honest; if this is something players/DM's are expected to know, it should be spelled out in a Main core book.
I don't agree as ancestries have abilities [feats] that they get from levels. A level 1 DC can't tell you about a high level unique orcs Spell Devourer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't agree as ancestries have abilities [feats] that they get from levels. A level 1 DC can't tell you about a high level unique orcs Spell Devourer.I assume that would apply to level as well. A high level unique orc shouldn't just be treated as common to know things about orcs, but you should also be rolling against the base Orc DC, not the one boosted for this individual's level.The rules also tell you that Unique doesn't apply to the DC to recall about the general creature type.It does say something like that in one of the books [Gamemastery]: it notes it's Unique for "discern specific information about" a Unique NPC but when "encountering" such an NPC, their Ancestry follows the rarity for that Ancestry.
This means that if you're trying to recall if an NPC is an orc, it's a Unique DC, but if you mean them, it's a Common DC.
Let's be honest; if this is something players/DM's are expected to know, it should be spelled out in a Main core book.
That's fair, I guess, but you should be able to get the basics of the ancestry.
PC style ancestries are weird anyway, since unless you know something about the individual, you wouldn't know which feats they'd taken
There are other examples of this without touching PC ancestries. Dragons are a big one. It shouldn't really be harder to recognize a red dragon based on its age. I always use the lowest level version of species to determine whether PCs know the basics like temperament, fire breath weapons, or a weakness to cold. If an ancient red dragon has abilities the younger versions lack, you'd need to hit the higher level DC to be aware of it.
And this is the reason sometims us players ignore RK rules and just beat the monster to death. It's too difficult to roll a secret roll, wasting actions every round just to maybe learn something useful.
Whispers of weakness for the win.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And this is the reason sometims us players ignore RK rules and just beat the monster to death. It's too difficult to roll a secret roll, wasting actions every round just to maybe learn something useful.This has long been my feeling as well. Recall Knowledge often seems to be treated as an "I win" button by many, but both I and my players rarely make use of it. There's usually something better to do and it's never clear how to be sure to get something actually useful out of it.
I have a group that is like this. For the most part it worked for them. But occasionally they'd run into something where it has an ability like "strikes deal 2d10 more damage if they are fighting one-on-one" and the PCs were getting absolutely shredded.
After dropping a few hints, someone finally did the RK, realized what was going on, and they clustered up. Turned the whole fight around.
We've also run into "weird trolls" where fire didn't turn off the regeneration and had to figure out what did, a creature with Grab and also "if it starts its turn with a creature grabbed, it can attempt to devour its soul" that can straight up kill (great time for Symphony of the Unfettered Heart!), and the infamous-at-my-table "this creature has an aura that stacks Doomed, and your instincts are telling you that you are in mortal danger" (aka: you should run, which was free info when someone decided to think about it, though finding out about the Doomed aura was probably enough).
Funny thing is in the second campaign with that group, the most "I hate spending actions to RK" player is now playing a Thaumaturge. He's gotten them some clutch info... but also rolled a nat 1 to identify the Merfolk PC and is convinced she's actually a water elemental in disguise lol. (The fact that she got confused and KO'd him with a single sneak attack Fist crit has only reinforced that belief.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And this is the reason sometims us players ignore RK rules and just beat the monster to death. It's too difficult to roll a secret roll, wasting actions every round just to maybe learn something useful.This has long been my feeling as well. Recall Knowledge often seems to be treated as an "I win" button by many, but both I and my players rarely make use of it. There's usually something better to do and it's never clear how to be sure to get something actually useful out of it.
The way I run it, the player asks a question and I'll answer it. If the player doesn't know what they want to ask, they can say "Something interesting", and I'll pick something about the creature that they remember. Random facts vs targeted facts, if you will.
If they succeeded (or have Dubious Knowledge), that's going to be something relevant. So they don't need to try and figure out what they should be asking to make the skill useful. Sometimes there absolutely is something they want to know, but not always.
I have one player in particular (my wife, in fact) who is not really comfortable with the metagame aspect of figuring out what good questions are, so this helps her feel more comfortable trying it.
If it helps anyone, my list of information categories for my players is as follows:
-One weakness (This includes unique, non-numeric weaknesses; BPS weaknesses are grouped as one weakness)
-One resistance or immunity (BPS resists are grouped together as one resistance)
-One special attack (I prioritize information about reaction abilities unless told otherwise)
-Half of the creature’s innate spells (or 3 innate spells, if 3 would be more)
-Best Save (player can choose to include AC)
-Worst Save (player can choose to include AC)
-Senses
-Movement types
Additionally:
-Identifying a creature gives all type-specific immunities and traits automatically (e.g. Undead traits)
-Identifying a creature may also give certain defining, exceptionally well-known abilities for free—a dragon’s breath attack, for example.
-Players are given no information if they select a category with no information to give.
-When a player rolls a failure with Dubious Knowledge, they are given a true and false statement about the category they inquired about conjoined by “or.” E.G., “The creature’s worst save is either reflex or will.” If the category contains no information, it’ll be something like “the creature either has a reactive strike with its claws, or has no special attacks.” ("It has none" is always a possible false clause, as well.)
This list is from a houserule variant that makes RK a free action, which is why some of this looks stingy.* But the categories themselves should work just fine for vanilla RK. If I were running vanilla RK, I'd adjust the amount of information you get from each category upward, though. E.G., you should get all weaknesses if you ask for weaknesses.
===
*Under the houserule, you can't repeat the action, but you do get an additional piece of information for every 5 you exceed the DC. To prevent everyone trying to RK everything, anything above DC 15 requires you to be at least Trained in the relevant skill. And since it came up earlier, I also don't use rarity modifiers that increase the RK DC on creatures at all; that stuff is anti-player in a way I strongly dislike, especially with this system.