D&D 5E knowledge rolls and monsters N Stuff

So I am a old school kind of guy. I grew up playing classic D&D and AD&D and some of that permanently imprinted on my gaming psyche.

Back in the day a huge part of our fun was fighting a brand new monster(to us) and having to figure out how to beat it. Who knew to burn trolls? Not us! Not till it just wouldn't die and after chopping it up someone decided to burn it.

Fast forward to our Pathfinder games and it's use of Knowledge rolls (along with a player that specialized in knowledge skills) and every fight began with instant checks to see what a monsters weaknesses were and how best to beat them(ugg). No mystery,no having to figure it out, just slam bam burn trolls got it.

Now with 5E in some ways reverting back to older style play(at least in some ways) I had hoped perhaps for a return to the old figure it out yourself type play. However they still allowed for some of the same type checks that Pathfinder had.

Last night in a game the party wizard asked to be able to roll to figure out what a monster was. After all she stated "I have read and studied over thousands of books on monsters". When I laughed and said "no you have not! you are from a small village and only taught magic by a hedge wizard with exactly one book and that was his spell book!" She got upset and pointed out that her character did indeed have the arcane and other skills one could use to recall information on monsters.

Now the matter with that player was resolved to everyone's satisfaction but I am trying to figure out just what the rules say about it all and then based on that,come up with how I want to handle it.

What do you guys think? How do you handle knowledge checks ect?

I do take character skill and background into the context of a knowledge skill check, but I also take monster rarity and notoriety into account. Trolls are rare, thus realizing what you're fighting IS a troll is not a high chance. Maybe Dc 20. But knowing, once you realize it, that you can use fire is almost a given, seeing that trolls are notorious monsters. And certainly, trying it out is always a good idea. Fire may not be the weakness of these orange-skinned, desert trolls, after all...

If a player feels like making a knowledge check about a monster is would fall under Arcana, History, or Religion for the most part and the DC would be based on monster rarity in the world. But I find a player stating that there character has studied a vast library of books on monsters a very viable and cool bit of background, I try and encourage stuff like that instead of telling them how their character grew up, I mean it's their character after all and everyones game not just mine.

Ditto. Proficiency in a skill doesn't entitle the character to know everything about that topic- it may, however, allow for a roll to figure out information about the monster. In my book, "information" can mean a lot of stuff, and doesn't necessarily mean "my character can read the stats of the monster!".

Also, I'd say Arcana doesn't include the broad category of "monster", and different Skills should allow for different type of monster knowledge rolls (Nature for both natural and magical beasts, for instance).

Her character was level 1 and grew up in Homlet having studied under a hedge wizard (her background not mine).

But it isn't limited to this character. Every character she makes has this world class library background knowledge. Now to be fair she just likes to be able to know what she is fighting and how to beat it. That is fun to her.

In pathfinder I just lived with it and accepted it as the way that game worked. Perhaps I will end up doing the same thing in 5E,I'm just not sure yet.

In my head, knowing just how to defeat every monster you come across is like starting the game off with a Superpower or a Artifact at level 1.

Maybe it's like I said earlier and just a byproduct of growing up playing D&D when you could not do that. Also there is the world factor.

In a world where books are rare and only a few libraries have over a dozen books how can you just assume at 18 years old and level 1 that you have read thousands of books on monsters?

Putting all that aside though....there is still the fun factor. That is a huge and fun side of the game(at least to me). To me it's like having a player tell you they find combat boring and can you guys just assume they won all their combats and just skip to the fun treasure part.

Paraxis said:

If a player feels like making a knowledge check about a monster is would fall under Arcana, History, or Religion for the most part and the DC would be based on monster rarity in the world. But I find a player stating that there character has studied a vast library of books on monsters a very viable and cool bit of background, I try and encourage stuff like that instead of telling them how their character grew up, I mean it's their character after all and everyones game not just mine.

Click to expand...

Right. As DM, you largely play it by ear and take into consideration a few factors, set a DC, and let 'em roll.

Edit: And I just realized there's the chance of horribly misidentifying something, which could result in hilarity.

Just remember that this

GameOgre said:

Every character she makes has this world class library background knowledge. Now to be fair she just likes to be able to know what she is fighting and how to beat it. That is fun to her.

Click to expand...

is just as important if not more so than this

GameOgre said:

Putting all that aside though....there is still the fun factor. That is a huge and fun side of the game(at least to me).

Click to expand...

The player through building her characters is telling you she has fun being the know it all in the game, she wants to be the Hermione Granger, Willow, or Velma. You like the discovery part, the exploration of things, a balance has to be made for both of you to have fun.

As far as how the knowledge is gained remember word of mouth, campfire stories, and traveling bards. I imagine most kids in a D&D world grow up hearing the stories of brave adventurers and horrible monsters. The fact trolls need fire to kill, that gemmed skulls are demi liches, that vampires can't enter a home without being invited first, and all kinds of other stuff. Now the knowledge roll is to see if they remember it right, if it was told to them correctly in the first place, and how much information they might have.

Well, assuming I decide to work this into my game.

The information on it in the books is pretty vague. what factors do you guys use in deciding the DC? Do you look at creature rarity? CR? How do you decide what they remember if they make it? What kind of subsystems do you guys use for this?

Seems like it could easily turn into something complicated and messy.

GameOgre said:

In a world where books are rare and only a few libraries have over a dozen books how can you just assume at 18 years old and level 1 that you have read thousands of books on monsters?

Click to expand...

Does her character have the Sage background? That would mean she has spent her life extensively studying every piece of lore available.

I had one player who took the Guild Artisan (Alchemist) background & played it as if they were a Skyrim Alchemist, hunting troll fat and vampire dust. We agreed that character knew the physical attributes of a creature (weakness to sunlight, etc.) but had no specific knowledge of what those creatures were capable of in a fight.

In the play test, there were skills that corresponded to earlier-editions' monster-knoweldge skills (there were many versions of the skill system). Then they were removed. That, to me, means one of two things:
A. they were "rolled into" existing skills; or
B. they were consciously removed, so that monster knowledge was all experiential (emerging from role-play, etc.).

Since the descriptions of Arcana, History, and Religion skills do not call out monster knowledge in their descriptions (i.e. A; and since we would expect it to be an Int-based skill), then I suggest that there is no specific monster-knoweldge skill (i.e. B).

That doesn't mean that a DM can't allow a roll, with a DC of 15 for common monsters and 20 for rarer ones (I could actually make a case for reversing those DCs, too, since rare monsters might be more likely to be part of storytelling; most people know much more about avoiding vampires and zombies than they do bears or mountain lions). But it would be a straight Intelligence check.