Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 6673530" data-attributes="member: 5834">I don't allow general knowledge checks. I use the knowledge system as a tool for storytelling. It would hurt suspension of disbelief to allow everyone to roll knowledge checks because the RAW indicates they can. I would only allow a person, even with a knowledge skill, to roll a check concerning something they might know about. I was extraordinarily tired of knowledge checks from Pathfinder where everyone with a knowledge skill had an encyclopedic knowledge of numerous subjects and creatures without any organized school system or much time spent studying the subject matter. The only class I show some leeway with is the bard who might have heard a tale or something of the kind. I tend to frame any information given as a bit of a tale or song they might have heard. Knowledge skills allowing constant checks for creatures seemed cool at first. Now that I've experienced the effect, any such check has been excised from the game unless I think the player might have some knowledge of the subject such as coming from an area where a creature is common or having a family that might have passed down such information. That is why I expect my players to write a good background that includes the possibility of access to unique information about areas or creatures. If a player wants to half-ass his background, then he won't get much from knowledge checks. I'm ok with that.I have come to dislike knowledge checks, especially the expectation of general knowledge checks. I have reverted to the 1E/2E of dealing with knowledge: write it in your background or you don't know jack squat (said in an intense Chris Farley voice).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celtavian, post: 6673530, member: 5834"] I don't allow general knowledge checks. I use the knowledge system as a tool for storytelling. It would hurt suspension of disbelief to allow everyone to roll knowledge checks because the RAW indicates they can. I would only allow a person, even with a knowledge skill, to roll a check concerning something they might know about. I was extraordinarily tired of knowledge checks from [I]Pathfinder[/I] where everyone with a knowledge skill had an encyclopedic knowledge of numerous subjects and creatures without any organized school system or much time spent studying the subject matter. The only class I show some leeway with is the bard who might have heard a tale or something of the kind. I tend to frame any information given as a bit of a tale or song they might have heard. Knowledge skills allowing constant checks for creatures seemed cool at first. Now that I've experienced the effect, any such check has been excised from the game unless I think the player might have some knowledge of the subject such as coming from an area where a creature is common or having a family that might have passed down such information. That is why I expect my players to write a good background that includes the possibility of access to unique information about areas or creatures. If a player wants to half-ass his background, then he won't get much from knowledge checks. I'm ok with that. I have come to dislike knowledge checks, especially the expectation of general knowledge checks. I have reverted to the 1E/2E of dealing with knowledge: write it in your background or you don't know jack squat (said in an intense Chris Farley voice). [/QUOTE]

Verification