Bardic Knowledge, when to use it?

[dshai527]

Patryn's were better than mine, but if you think I am bad you should hear the guys I game with....the cheese factor is high my friend. Bring Crackers.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Patryn's were better than mine, but if you think I am bad you should hear the guys I game with....the cheese factor is high my friend. Bring Crackers.

And whine *pun*

 

[Deset Gled]

My 2 cents on the issue...

I don't see allowing Bardic Knowledge to highly flexible as problematic in terms of balance, but I have seen it become a major annoyance. I once watched a group of people playing, one of which was a bard. The bard wanted to make BK checks on everything, litterally. BK check on every person and monster they came across, on locks to help pick them, on architecture to try and determine what might be inside a building, etc. Two rolls for every knowledge check also puts a certain amount of pressure on a DM to come up with two answers for every check (an academic one and a fairy tale one).

Using a broad interpretation of BK might work out very nicely in certain campaigns with certain people, but there are also situations where a stricter reading is necessary just to move the game along.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

My 2 cents on the issue...

I don't see allowing Bardic Knowledge to highly flexible as problematic in terms of balance, but I have seen it become a major annoyance. I once watched a group of people playing, one of which was a bard. The bard wanted to make BK checks on everything, litterally. BK check on every person and monster they came across, on locks to help pick them, on architecture to try and determine what might be inside a building, etc. Two rolls for every knowledge check also puts a certain amount of pressure on a DM to come up with two answers for every check (an academic one and a fairy tale one).

Using a broad interpretation of BK might work out very nicely in certain campaigns with certain people, but there are also situations where a stricter reading is necessary just to move the game along.

Going off some thigns that were said earlier...

The bard might be able to make a check on a paticular structure to see if there was any lore behind it, or if it had some specific weakness ( a switch that made the whole thing collapse) but again... Bardic Knowledge isn't Knowledge. The bard is basing his/her information off of lore, not off study, speculation, or science.

I wouldn't be afaraid to tell characters, in some instances, that there just isn't ANY information availible to them via Bardic Knowledge on certain items. If there is a plain, ordinary mundane lock, and the player tries to roll BK, I'd just say "it's a lock. nothing special." There's USING the ability, and there's ABUSING the ability...

Don't be afraid to tell a character that tehy can't use their BK on something, if you don't feel that it is applicable.

 

[pawned79]

I am the "bard" in question. I would like to clarify my stance in the discussion. I have "Lore" from Ardent Dilettante. This keeps coming up in our game. I ask all the time, “Do I get a Lore check on that?” but to be denied. Last game we had some planar race mentioned that I (even as a player) hadn’t heard about. I inquired about a Lore check with the hope of receiving some type of informative flavor-text to the disposition of the race like, “You have heard they consume entire worlds!!!!” or “They are soft and made of flowers!” I don’t know. Something! My intention is not to get any ‘combat’ info on them, but just to be flavorful. Basically, it has come down to just person, place or thing (and that being a SPECIFIC person, place or thing). Like drow for example. If my character had never encountered drow before in the game, I would ask, “Oh drow huh? Do I get a Lore check on that?” Well, the answer is no, because a drow is not a SPECIFIC person, place or thing.

“Drow! Some say they used to be surface elves long ago, but now they live underground.”

“Oh! Really? Why did they leave?”

“Oh! Noone knows for sure, but some believe they were tainted by EVIL!!!!!!!”

“Ahhh!”

Nope. Nothing.

But DRIZZT!! No problem!

“Drizzt? Yes, you know he is a drow living on the surface who fights with two swords and a big black magical cat.”

“Wow, really? What is a drow?”

“You don’t know!”

~ Patrick ~

 

[Synthetik Fish]

I am the "bard" in question. I would like to clarify my stance in the discussion. I have "Lore" from Ardent Dilettante. This keeps coming up in our game. I ask all the time, “Do I get a Lore check on that?” but to be denied. Last game we had some planar race mentioned that I (even as a player) hadn’t heard about. I inquired about a Lore check with the hope of receiving some type of informative flavor-text to the disposition of the race like, “You have heard they consume entire worlds!!!!” or “They are soft and made of flowers!” I don’t know. Something! My intention is not to get any ‘combat’ info on them, but just to be flavorful. Basically, it has come down to just person, place or thing (and that being a SPECIFIC person, place or thing). Like drow for example. If my character had never encountered drow before in the game, I would ask, “Oh drow huh? Do I get a Lore check on that?” Well, the answer is no, because a drow is not a SPECIFIC person, place or thing.

“Drow! Some say they used to be surface elves long ago, but now they live underground.”

“Oh! Really? Why did they leave?”

“Oh! Noone knows for sure, but some believe they were tainted by EVIL!!!!!!!”

“Ahhh!”

Nope. Nothing.

But DRIZZT!! No problem!

“Drizzt? Yes, you know he is a drow living on the surface who fights with two swords and a big black magical cat.”

“Wow, really? What is a drow?”

“You don’t know!”

~ Patrick ~

I'd say in that case, you'd know that drow exist, probably roughly what they look like, and maybe some mytic-based information from there. However, I wouldn't give you any of their weaknesses, favored classes or anything like that. That would be strictly a Knowledge check.

EDIT<< Something like this: "You have heard tales of a race of elves that long ago fell of the face of the earth. It is told that these drow are now merely vile, twisted reflections of their old kindred, whose skin has darkened from their sunless recluse and black hearts."

 

[Arravis]

As before, all I can do is point to the exact wording of the ability:
"local notable people, legendary items, or noteworthy places."
I find that clear and specific. It doesn't discuss any kind of general knowledge or even where the knowledge comes from (taking into account the varied sources for this ability, having it be strictly through "bardic" sources doesn't work). Different DM's might give different leniency and interpretations on the ability as they wish, but as written in the rules are very clear.

I do not wish to see the skill system abused or undermined by a rule that is clearly written not interfere with it. The skills are there and exist for a reason.

So yes, a bard might have heard that Drizzt is a drow but have no knowledge of the drow beyond what the common populace know. I have no problem with that and it seems quite feasible.

There are lots of names and places referred to in the music I listen to. They don't come with a glossary of terms defining all the things mentioned. Drizzt and the fact that he's a drow might be mentioned in some poem or song, but that doesn't give any specifics about race. It seems clear that someone with the Bardic Knowledge ability would simply have a hodgepodge of random factoids about things, but very little overall cohesive knowledge.
That's what knowledge skills are for.

 

[pawned79]

We have had a really funny "bardic knowledge" running through our game for a long time. It is the rumor that drow eat babies. This all started when we were first starting to get introduced to drow and one of the players said unprompted, "Hmm, I hear they eat babies." Ever since then we have made it a point to ask a drow during any type of discourse to whether they eat babies or not. So far, all drow have looked at us cross.

~ Patrick ~

 

[Arravis]

I thought of this last night... I actually have a real-life example of "Bardic Knowledge".

Ted, a musician friend of mine at work asked me what a "John da Conqueroo" was. It was a lyric in a old blues song he played from time to time. A friend of Ted's asked him what it was, but all he knew that it had something to do with voodoo, it was something you could carry, and that the song was based out of Louisiana.
He had made his Bardic Knowledge on "John da Conqueroo"

Ted asked me because he knew I had lived in Baton Rouge for many years and sometimes had knowledge of such things. I explained that it was a John the Conqueror Root, a charm that is thought to bring luck and other things (for those interested, check http://www.luckymojo.com/johntheconqueror.html)
I made my Knowledge (Local Louisiana) skill.

Hope that helps clarify the issue a bit.

And drow do eat babies , well, that's what my character believes...

 

[pawned79]

So, what you are saying then is that if someone was talking about herbs once and mentioned this root, and had neither Knowledge Nature or Knowledge Local Louisiana, you would give him a Barbic Knowledge check to know AT LEAST, "Oh, I heard that in a song once. Something about voodoo I think. I'm not sure though, the song was from Louisiana?"

I gotcha this time, Pablo! Ha! :-D

~ Patrick ~