PC knowledge of Monsters?

[Rifter]

I agree with d12

I am the one that Friadoc was speaking about. I run a game, as well as play in a few. It seems like a lot of people were almost looking to hose their players over. Certain creatures, have known weaknesses. Trolls = fire. I would NOT say their acid vulnrability would be well known. They would probably also know how to take down a vampire, though, they would probably go a bit further than is really needed. The medusa I also agree with. More exotic monsters, you probably don't know that well. And island with monsters that look like one thing, but are totally another, that almost sounds like it is directly targetting the players, to hose them over. The first time I had a gold dragon turn on my party, and blast us all with fire, and kill us, I would get rather angered, myself.

The nice part of rules, is they allow you to run the story, with known varriables. When you really start messing with that system, you really throw CRs and other known things out the window. I would say a troll, is a higher CR, if you have no clue how to keep it down.

That is not to say, you can't send the party up against a surprise, here and there, but if you have a character that looks like an orc, smells like an orc, and feels like an orc, and then give him a petrefying gaze, and immunity to all but silver, you have just really hosed your party over. Especially, if they attack an orc encampment like this.

I like the ideas of the knowlege monster. With the more specific knowlege giving you more information easier. Say a 15 check for a knowlege monster, would be only a 10 if it was an undead, and you had knowlege undead. Of course, I think the bardic knowlege should also kick in, here... which, I agree with Friadoc, it makes the Bard class, that much more powerful.

 

[Kilmore]

I don't always descibe the monsters as what they are out of the book, but it never takes the players long to figure it out. I figure any monster that's in the Monster Manual is an open secret as far as the players go. That's why I enjoy cooking up new monsters. I love the look of "What the hell was THAT?" they get.

 

[-Warlord-]

It's fun to use a monster in a disguise now and then.

I once had my party face a Displacer Beetle.
Because they didn't instantly connect the fact that they hit through an apparation one time and hit on another time with displacement, it had them quite confused.
Would it have used the six-legged cat, they'd known instantly.

And of course the old trick of disguising Zaratans as islands is fun.
Although my zaratan was so big that it had a tribe of humans living on him, intent on sacrificing the players to their god by throwing them off the cliffs at the zaratans mouth-end.

 

[jdavis]

Using discriptions instead of names helps, and having players who actually play the characters knowledge instead of there own is a big, big help. I know it sort of sounds odd to tell the players to pretend they don't know a Trolls weakness is fire, but good players will want to play it out instead of jumping in with knowledge the characters wouldn't have. It's hard to suprise players who have been gaming for a long time, but having a large arsenal of Monster books, or sometimes making your own monsters (using templates can help here too) can add alot of excitement and has a chance at fooling the players. I don't think I would care for the "Island of monsters that look like other monsters." but I thought the displacer beetle was a good idea.

 

[Destil]

I try, when players make a new characters to have "What your character knows" handouts ready before the first session. These include lost of information, but it can also include information you specifically don't know. If I wanted to run a game where the PCs had no knowledge of monsters and their abilities, I'd include this there.

Also, I find Knowledge: Monsters very clunky and tacked on. Not that it won't work, but the Core Rules assumed there was no such skill to leave the decisions of just what players know about creatures up the DM. Therefore I use other knowledge skills, instead. Knowledge (Religion) covers undead, some elementals and many outsiders, for instance. The rest of the outsider and elementals being under Knowledge: The Planes.

 

[TeaBee]

How fair is Knowledge (Monsters), when a common skill is Knowledge (Undead)?

I think you'd have to choose "monster" Knowledge skills like Rangers pick their FEs.

Depending on how you work out the DCs, this is a fair way...

 

[Ranes]

I like some of the other suggestions here (applying regular knowledge skills, for example) but I disagree with one point, that (to paraphrase) a troll's CR should be higher if you don't know how to take it down. How does that work with new players? The troll's CR is what it is regardless of how much the player knows. Making a creature something entirely different to what it appears to be is clearly a cheap trick (the odd, exceptional gotcha notwithstanding). But subtly tweaking a creature just slightly to short-circuit player familiarity with basic creature types is not. And it does not scupper the CR system, if done conservatively, IMO. I make this assertion with the caveats from my earlier post, about player characters having some knowledge - perhaps extensive knowledge - of the nature of creatures common in their campaign world. Anything else is fair game for DM ingenuity, as long as the goal is to keep the game fresh for the players and not to 'hose' them.

 

[hong]

I let the characters know all the MM stats about monsters with CR up to their level. I figure this is the sort of thing that goes on in downtime, where people get together to talk about past battles, compare notes, visit sages, etc. It shouldn't be that hard to figure out an orc is a dumb brute with a liking for greataxes, but only experienced (read: high-level) adventurers would know that demons can teleport without error.

Mind you, I also reserve the right to change the actual in-game stats from what's in the MM....

 

[Ranes]

I like that approach too, Hong. In my new campaign there is a very resourceful bard (the first time I've had a bard in a party) and I think I may borrow that idea and possibly mesh it with what another poster said earlier about bardic knowledge rolls for CRs that are slightly higher than the party's.

 

[jasper]

honorable hong very generous with his players.
Arcana and legend lore stats
But only if normal appear monster.
Dc for trolls 15
dc for 10 growing higher for there abilities dc 15 breath weapon One not both if has 2. etc.
But if something from the deep blue sea or frozen north and the character have spend all their time in downtown Atlanta Ga.
I up the dc real high with mixing monster information.

I use to include Monster Manuals imc. list 2 to 10 monster then they could read the manual. They never did find the one with demigorgan in it.