Knowledge: Favored Enemy

[White_Drake]

It seems kind of ridiculous that a Ranger may not have the proper knowledge skill to identify, or learn about their favored enemy, so what if they got a special knowledge skill that was usable only on creatures of the Ranger's favored enemy's type? Am I missing some rule somewhere that makes all of what I just typed obsolete?

[nedz]

Well they get +2 on a number of skills, but they have no idea why :smalltongue:

[Kalmarvho]

Wait, this is a 3.X question, right?

Because the RAW reads


At 1st level, a ranger selects a creature type from the ranger favored enemies table. He gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Knowledge, Perception, Sense Motive, and Survival checks against creatures of his selected type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon attack and damage rolls against them. A ranger may make Knowledge skill checks untrained when attempting to identify these creatures.

So, yes, they get a free Knowledge check.

In pathfinder, at least.

[Acanous]

Yep, Rangers can make the associated Knowledge check untrained, with a bonus.

Sadly, in mid/late game, this means they STILL can't actually identify the creature without taking cross class ranks.

[Kalmarvho]

That's mostly because the skill system is borked.

[mattie_p]

Most skills aren't too bad, but I think most people who look into it acknowledge that knowledge skills are borked. Here is a recent thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=247417) on the subject from a few months back. Maybe it might help you house rule something?

[TuggyNE]

Yep, Rangers can make the associated Knowledge check untrained, with a bonus.

Sadly, in mid/late game, this means they STILL can't actually identify the creature without taking cross class ranks.

3.5 doesn't seem to have the same provision, sadly.


Most skills aren't too bad, but I think most people who look into it acknowledge that knowledge skills are borked. Here is a recent thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=247417) on the subject from a few months back. Maybe it might help you house rule something?

Yeah, there's some decent ideas in there, although it never quite settled down on a finished correction. (There's also a fairly thorough discussion of just what's wrong with the existing system, obviously.)

[Kalmarvho]

3.5 doesn't seem to have the same provision, sadly.


It should. There's a good reason they call Pathfinder 3.75.

[KillianHawkeye]

Nope. Here is the 3.5 version:


The ranger gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, and Survival checks when using these skills against creatures of this type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon damage rolls against such creatures.

Notice the lack of Knowledge skill (also no bonus to attack rolls, just damage).

[Kalmarvho]

I meant that '3.5 should have had that provision from the start', not that '3.5 does, in fact, have that provision and perhaps you have just missed it'.

Hence the reference to Pathfinder as 3.75, since in many ways it's a rules patch for 3.5, fixing oversights and whatnot

[Spuddles]

Yep, Rangers can make the associated Knowledge check untrained, with a bonus.

Sadly, in mid/late game, this means they STILL can't actually identify the creature without taking cross class ranks.

It's worse than that, as anyone can make a knowledge check untrained. The only problem is that no matter how high he rolls, he only gets DC10 information.

[Andezzar]

Unfortunately the DC for identifying a creature is 10+ the creature's hit dice.
In many cases, you can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s HD. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster.

[LordBlades]

I meant that '3.5 should have had that provision from the start', not that '3.5 does, in fact, have that provision and perhaps you have just missed it'.

Hence the reference to Pathfinder as 3.75, since in many ways it's a rules patch for 3.5, fixing oversights and whatnot

And bringing in a whole new set of oversights and whatnot:smallamused:

Back to the topic, yeah, Knowledge skills are somewhat retarded as written. It's a DC 17 knowledge check to know a wyrmling red dragon is immune to fire, but a DC 50 knowledge check to know the same thing about a great wyrm. Similar, 1 HD totally obscure monsters are apparently easier to find out about than iconic creatures like ilithids or beholders.

[TuggyNE]

Back to the topic, yeah, Knowledge skills are somewhat retarded as written. It's a DC 17 knowledge check to know a wyrmling red dragon is immune to fire, but a DC 50 knowledge check to know the same thing about a great wyrm. Similar, 1 HD totally obscure monsters are apparently easier to find out about than iconic creatures like ilithids or beholders.

DC 11 to know about vargouilles, DC 17 to know about griffons. DC 11 brain mole, DC 14 centaur. DC 13 allip, DC 22 hill giant. I could go on and on.

Basically, HD is a nigh-useless basis for scaling knowledge checks, since it has no intrinsic relation to the spread of knowledge about a creature, and little direct relation to the danger a creature poses. CR works a little better, and adjusting by type and so on as well is better yet, but a full solution would probably require hand-assigning base DCs for each monster based on a given setting. Tedious, but that's what we pay setting designers for. :smallwink:

[Zovc]

Hence the reference to Pathfinder as 3.75, since in many ways it's a rules patch for 3.5, fixing oversights and whatnot

I just choked on my coffee so I could die so I could roll in my grave.

Why not just ask your DM if you can apply your favored enemy bonus to knowledge checks related to your favored enemies?


Similar, 1 HD totally obscure monsters are apparently easier to find out about than iconic creatures like ilithids or beholders.

I can at least see the designers' line of reason here. Lower HD creatures are supposed to be more common than high HD creatures.

No reason why each monster shouldn't have their own little table regarding knowledge checks. You know, a table that says what knowledge check identifies them, and what each DC threshold tells you about them. That way, knowing stuff about red dragons means you know stuff about red dragons of all ages (in general), and dragons can be more well known than--I don't know--something weird.

[mattie_p]

I do like how nearly every prestige class published has DC checks for various tidbits of lore. Honestly, what DM (besides possibly Curmudgeon) makes his players make a successful Knowledge:local or history check before they can take a PrC? Yet WoTC failed to do so for every published monster.

[LordBlades]

I do like how nearly every prestige class published has DC checks for various tidbits of lore. Honestly, what DM (besides possibly Curmudgeon) makes his players make a successful Knowledge:local or history check before they can take a PrC? Yet WoTC failed to do so for every published monster.

That would pretty much add a hidden requirement of 'X ranks in Knowledge (whatever)' to all PrCs. Not really a good idea IMO.

[mattie_p]

I don't know what the lore DC is supposed to represent, what PCs are able to find out about the BBEG? Oh, he's a Disciple of the Eye (to choose one at random). Well, I roll a 16. I guess if you strictly enforce IC/OOC knowledge, but that is difficult to pull off, as a PC and as a DM.

PC: I just happened to but some +1 Humanoid:dragonblooded Bane arrows at the last town.

DM: Yeah, right

[Andezzar]

How would a PC even know that the villain is a Disciple of the eye? Why would the GM tell the players?

If the villain however displayed signature class abilities or even told them, the players could of course make appropriate knowledge checks. Then the PCs could of course act upon that knowledge.

Hint for the metagamers: Dragon Bane weapons are much less conspicuous and would produce the same result.

[mattie_p]

I was tossing out an example at random. Maybe some kind of divination that gives class levels but nothing else?

I honestly don't know why all those PrCs have Lore DC attached to them, or under what circumstances they'd be of use. I'd be interested to hear a theory of anyone who actually uses them.

Considering all the effort that the designers put into them compared to the effort they put into monster knowledge DCs (that being none) that would have been far more useful to PCs.

[Andezzar]

I honestly don't know why all those PrCs have Lore DC attached to them, or under what circumstances they'd be of use. I'd be interested to hear a theory of anyone who actually uses them.I think they are for Bardic Knowledge and/or Gather Information checks.

[mattie_p]

I think they are for Bardic Knowledge and/or Gather Information checks.

So the PC can make up a song about the Disciple of the Eye?

Sorry, I don't want to get on you about this, but once the PC's know this information, what are they supposed to do with it, mechanically? Knowing this stuff about an organization would be useful, it could be an ally, a nemesis, or just plain significant and politically powerful in the campaign.

But about a PRC tied to no organization, I just don't see the mechanical benefit of knowing some of this stuff.

[Andezzar]

Sorry, I don't want to get on you about this, but once the PC's know this information, what are they supposed to do with it, mechanically? Knowing this stuff about an organization would be useful, it could be an ally, a nemesis, or just plain significant and politically powerful in the campaign.

But about a PRC tied to no organization, I just don't see the mechanical benefit of knowing some of this stuff.Depending on the Information, they might get a tactical advantage. Either they might find out or deduce who the prestige class's traditional enemies are (who might be recruited/asked for help) or what to expect from such an opponent. In the case of the disciple of the eye the PCs can expect the opponent to be a melee character (DC 10), who will be difficult to sneak up on (DC 15) and who will probably use fear effects (DC 20). DC 30 will even give you information about the specific Disciple that opposes them.

BTW I was wrong with the choice of skills. At least for the disciple of the eye the skills in question are Knowledge (local) and Knowledge (History). Looking over the other PrCs in Races of the dragon, each class seems to get its own set of applicable skills, some even bardic knowledge.

[White_Drake]

Unfortunately a friend of mine and I are running/playing (he DMs, I play) in a game of 3.5 with mostly newcomers, so he has limited us to core, to expand into more rules when he feels the newcomers are prepared to delve into the baffling world of 3.5 splatbooks. Normally we allow all 3.5 material, reasonable homebrew, and PF blend, so it's a bit of a step down. So far, it hasn't really been necessary for me to roll and say, yup, that's a black dragon, so I don't really mind, but it seems a bit odd.