DCs for Knowledge checks about monsters too dang high

[IanB]

I don't see how that has anything to do with it.

It's DC X to learn a fact about a low-hd, low-CR creature.

It's DC X+Y to learn the same fact about an advanced low-hd, low-CR creature.

The creature's presence in the room is immaterial.

I see no reason why the character can't just roll against the non-advanced version, though. We're not talking about adding a template here, we're just adding a HD. Would you make a character trying to remember the characteristics of aasimar roll against DC 30 if the aasimar at hand happens to be a level 20 paladin?

 

[Jack Simth]

Buzz -> OK, how's this: until Darwin came along, people (even scholars!) were absolutely certain that dirty rags left in the dark for a while, undisturved, would spawn rats.

Very minor nitpick, but.....
Darwin wasn't actually the one that discovered that wasn't the case - shucks, Aristotle knew better, he just couldn't prove it....

 

[LostSoul]

The alternate question: it this check even worth bothering with? Does it add anything to the game to forbid player knwoledge from being character knowledge w/r/t monsters?

I don't think so. I think that the Knowledge mechanic for extra information should be used to get information that you, as a player, don't already know. But you should be able to use your player knowledge here, since player skill & ability is a big part of the game.

So if I'm fighting a gelugon, I know that they devils so they can see in darkness. They probably have some good SR. DR is probably Good and Lawful. They probably have some special magical abilities, one of which I bet is a killer, and I bet they do cold damage as well.

If I want to nail down any one of these particulars, I should be able to make a Knowledge check.

Without the Knowledge check, I should be able to go to town on them instead of holding myself back and doing stuff I know won't work. That's no fun. Unless you enjoy playing like that rather than kicking ass. Me, I like to kick ass.

Again, a question: Is the CR built in with the assumption that players don't have this knowledge? Is gaining this knowledge a type of metagame reward that allows you to punch over your weight?

 

[buzz]

Again, a question: Is the CR built in with the assumption that players don't have this knowledge? Is gaining this knowledge a type of metagame reward that allows you to punch over your weight?

Very good point. AFAIK, CR has nothing to do with player knowledge. If anything, the CR system makes assumptions about the equipment and abilities to which PCs have access. I.e., that at certain levels they will have what's needed to defeat monster X.

At the start of this thread, I was fully in the "metagame all you want" camp. Now I'm not so sure. While I obviously don't like the current rules for Knowledge checks, I can see a certain amount of flavor being lost if players are effectively allowed to reference the MM during a combat. In some situations, encountering a monster about which the PCs know nothing is an interesting plot point.

Basically, sometimes it's fun (for everyone) to keep PCs in the dark, sometimes it's just silly, IMO.

 

[LostSoul]

At the start of this thread, I was fully in the "metagame all you want" camp. Now I'm not so sure. While I obviously don't like the current rules for Knowledge checks, I can see a certain amount of flavor being lost if players are effectively allowed to reference the MM during a combat. In some situations, encountering a monster about which the PCs know nothing is an interesting plot point.

Basically, sometimes it's fun (for everyone) to keep PCs in the dark, sometimes it's just silly, IMO.

I'm pretty much with you here. I don't think that players should be allowed to crack open the MM - that just rewards them for having shelled out the bucks! - but if they have committed it to memory, I've fine with that.

I can see the loss of flavour, but there's not much you can do about that. If I know it's a troll, I can pretend I don't, but I can't change the fact that I know what it is.

If you want to make it a plot point, I think it's better to bring in a new monster. One from an esoteric monster book or a home-made one. OR, you could tack on a different look to a current MM monster. (There was a great example of this years ago, using an undead Dryad who jumped from grave to grave instead of tree to tree.)

 

[buzz]

If you want to make it a plot point, I think it's better to bring in a new monster. One from an esoteric monster book or a home-made one.

Or templates! Doing some research and recon on the wacky creature would then be part of the adventure.

 

[LostSoul]

Or templates! Doing some research and recon on the wacky creature would then be part of the adventure.

Ah yes, good point! So when the players hear about the unkillable "demon" with the life-draining touch, they won't know exactly what it is. They might think it's some kind of undead monstrosity, but really it's a Half-Fiendish Troll Fighter1 using Poison. (CR 8)

That would involve some Heal checks to identify the cause of death (maybe a trek to get one of the bodies out of the undead-haunted woods) and then some Knowledge checks to figure out what kind of creatures can Poison. If they don't have this knowledge, they'll be in for a surprise when they come up against its Fire resistance 10.

 

[Bryan898]

I always used the knowledge check for monsters as learning information about a monster you've never encountered or had heard about. If my character has fought a troll and had to deal with it's regeneration, he shouldn't have to make a Knowledge check to determine if a troll has regeneration.

If Joe Blow the Fighter level 2- with a knowledge (arcane) +2 gets told by Elmunster- with a knowledge (arcane) +40, that great wyrm red dragons are immune to most physical attacks, he now knows this, even if he couldn't make the check.

The people in laketown knew Smaug's abilities because they had witnessed them firsthand. They didn't need to make a knowledge check to know something they previously had not, they probably were only aware of Smaug's ability to breathe fire before he attacked the village.

People know about Red Dragon's breathing fire because a red dragon is a terrifying creature that people tell stories of encounters with in the bar. It then is passed by word of mouth, and though some parts of the tale are mucked up in translation the basics of it are still passed- big red scaly winged creatures breath fire. And if they ever run into a red scaled wyvern, they'd probably expect it to breath fire, because as all adventurers know- commoners as a whole are stupid and only good for selling phat lewt too at outrageous prices. (It's a knowledge check DC 20 to know that commoners are stupid because of flaws in the system)

 

[Cheiromancer]

I would think that for dragons the base CR would be that of a hatchling. The properties and attacks would be for the lowest, simplest form of the creature. What adventurers might actually have encountered and survived.

Details of Great Wyrms (like their last spell like ability) would be much more difficult.

 

[Testament]

Here's how I treat it. Knowledge checks are always based off the BASE HD of a creature, basic 10+HD. For a tiered monster, like a Dragon, the DC to get information on an ability is based on the lowest possible HD to get that ability.

The basic check tells you name, type and subtype, and 1 piece of information. I allow PCs to ask me questions at different degrees of success. A rough guide follows.

1st success allows them to ask about presence special attack forms, or presence of DR, or SR, or regeneration.

2nd success gives allows them to ask what the attack forms are, or what the amount of SR is, or what the amount and condition on the DR is. They can ask one, and asking about DR at this tier, for example, doesn't use up the first tier question.

3rd success onwards allows more specific questions about things such as SLAs.