Monster Knowledge Check, Monster Roles? Minion or not?

Shin Okada

Explorer

• Sep 13, 2009

• #1

By RAW, Monster Knowledge checks does not reveal monster roles nor if a certain monster is a minion or not. But those information are often very important for players to choose right tactics, or right power to use.

Do you DMs allow players to know those information by monster knowledge checks? If so, how much should be the DC?

 

log in or register to remove this ad

T

talarei07

First Post

• Sep 13, 2009

• #2

no. being descriptive of the monsters is more than enough for a player to figure out the minions from the non minions in the battle if they decide to bust off a daily on a minion its their problem they should have felt out the enemy before trying that

 

F

FurryFighter

First Post

• Sep 13, 2009

• #3

which is why the best DMs will throw in a fight where there are a small horde (10) of level -2 monsters, to appear to be minions, while the real minions are in a group of 6. Someone blows a daily to kill off all the "minions" at once, and surprise! Now naturally, the PCs will send the ranged units to the side closer to the "minions" and the melee to block the other smaller group of "normies".

The warning sign will be the daily not instantly killing them, and all of the sudden theres 3 guys each swarming the paper armor artillery PCs lol.

then of course, a DM could allow a percep check to determine who is who. I think goblins would be a good setup for this, since they look very similar to each other, and it would take a PC with a lot of experience (see insight or dungeoneering) to be able to passively tell who the tougher are, and perception as an active role to determine that otherwise.

 

Flipguarder

First Post

• Sep 13, 2009

• #4

personally I allow an insight or knowledge check to determine how "hearty" or "dangerous" an enemy looks. Knowledge checks can tell type affinities (red dragon-like things are usually fans of fire.), but not whether they have resistance or vulnerability to anything.

 

B

Blackbrrd

First Post

• Sep 13, 2009

• #5

In my game we just skipped the knowledge checks altogether. I tell the players what are minions, and who looks dangerous. If they hit something that is resistant/vulnerable, I tell them it is resistant/vulnerable.

The reason for this is mostly that I can't bother checking what skill matches what creature type and because I often have 3-4 different mobs and it would take a long time doing all the checks etc.

Just giving the players the information as they fight the monsters seems a lot more natural.

DM: "Yeah, you hit it and it cringes at your radiant attack"
Player: "It's vulnerable against radiant"
DM: "Yeah, 5 vulnerable against radiant"

OR

DM: "This guy seems really agile"
DM: "This mob looks like a ton of brick"
DM: "His armor looks really tough"
DM: "God damn, can there be a single mob with a decent will defense????"

 

T

teachamath

First Post

• Sep 14, 2009

• #6

I am liking this thread but am wondering how you do knowledge checks for monsters. I haven't played for a month now but right after gen con one of my least favorite dms told us that knowing anything about the enemy is now a STANDARD ACTION. That came from left field and pretty much pushed everyone away from ever wasting the time. Has anyone else heard this? errata anywhere?

 

F

FurryFighter

First Post

• Sep 14, 2009

• #7

uhh, that really doesnt sound right to me. Knowing about a creature either takes something totally passive if your skill in it is high enough, or an active roll. and as far as I know, active rolls to check a monster are either minor or free actions. A standard action to do that sounds like nonsense, from a gameplay or flavor perspective.

the rolls for knowledge are history, nature, dungeoneering, arcana, and religion.

Knowledge about a monster requires the relevant check, and this is what you get:

DC 15: name, type, and keywords.
DC 20: powers.
DC 25: resistances and vulnerabilities.
+5 = paragon tier creature.
+10 = epic tier creature.


so if a person hits, and does 0 damage with something thats radiant, it can be assumed the creature is resistant or immune to radiant. a roll will confirm numbers.

 

Last edited: Sep 14, 2009

Infiniti2000

First Post

• Sep 14, 2009

• #8

teachamath said:

I am liking this thread but am wondering how you do knowledge checks for monsters. I haven't played for a month now but right after gen con one of my least favorite dms told us that knowing anything about the enemy is now a STANDARD ACTION. That came from left field and pretty much pushed everyone away from ever wasting the time. Has anyone else heard this? errata anywhere?

Click to expand...

I didn't check the book, but the DDI says "No action required—either you know the answer or you don’t." Personally, I'd call shenanigans on the DM.

 

F

FurryFighter

First Post

• Sep 14, 2009

• #9

thats true, you're making passive DC10's as checks with no action required. Im pretty certain that rolling a knowledge check is a free action, and its limited by what in the book says "once it fails, you cannot make a knowledge check again unless new information comes to light".

So basically its a one shot unless the situation changes, such as your passive checking suddenly succeeding.

 

D

Dr_Sage

First Post

• Sep 14, 2009

• #10

Shin Okada said:

By RAW, Monster Knowledge checks does not reveal monster roles nor if a certain monster is a minion or not. But those information are often very important for players to choose right tactics, or right power to use.

Do you DMs allow players to know those information by monster knowledge checks? If so, how much should be the DC?

Click to expand...

I like the way its on Players Handbook plus flavor stuff from Monster Manual: ecology,vulnerabilities, powers etc (assuming DCs are beaten by trained characters).

I think roles and minions/standard are too metagaminsh. In my opinion "danger looking" is also an horrible way to deal with it, specially if the creature is a lurker/rogue that tries not to call attention to itself, while a brute/defender tries aways to be " the most dangerous looking".

If the elite is a lurker/rogue, does not make many sense for most scenarios if he draws atention for himself (oh! that small hafling on the back with that poke is way more dangerous tham all the others... eeeeck).

By the same tolken the minon brute/soldier/fighter in the front challenging/marking you seems harmless? Less important?

IMHO minions are minions story based. There should be no way of just rolling dice and identifying them. In some cases elites and solos may be identified by their name then by their importance (noone expect to fight a minion dragon for example).

Just my 2 cents.

 

Last edited: Sep 14, 2009