How would you react to this?

[Jon_Dahl]

You're running a game. Whenever there's a monster and you mention its name or someone mentions it ("An ochre ooze? That must be an Ochre Jelly!"), one of the players takes the Monster Manual and reads the monster description and its statistics. He does this everytime.

How would you react to this?

[Daefos]

Either tell him that he needs to stop if he wants to keep playing with you, or start straight-up lying about what monster they're fighting. That's meta-gaming so hard that I'm not sure if the term "meta-gaming" is even applicable anymore.

[frogglesmash]

I'll often re fluff/rename them, or use some of the more obscure mobs, often stuff from third party sources.

[Deophaun]

Such meta knowledge has the unfortunate habit of damaging space time. That makes it the responsibility of the quaruts. They're on page 102 of the Fiend Folio, in the event you wish to deal with more than one.

[Gruftzwerg]

You're running a game. Whenever there's a monster and you mention its name or someone mentions it ("An ochre ooze? That must be an Ochre Jelly!"), one of the players takes the Monster Manual and reads the monster description and its statistics. He does this everytime.

How would you react to this?

DM Books (DMG, MM...) are for DMing while you have a session. It is out of question that players takes a look into DM tools while you play. Even if it is a Master of Many Forms. You prepare before you play. As DM I would allow the players only to look things in books designed for the players. For everything else they need to ask if they may look something up in the MM as example.

The reason is quite simple:
Players need to behave "in character". He doesn't have the knowledge of the player. If a player starts to behave out of his regular routine, ask him why and for a good reason for doing so. If it fits the characters knowledge and background, its fine. If not, than you just have to tell him that his character "doesn't have to experience to do so", next time buddy. Next time you know how to fight Ooze, but not this time ;)

Edit: you can also encourage that player to take INT 18, able learner and a bunch of knowledge skill, if he really wants to play the wise guy :smallbiggrin:

[Jallorn]

Option B: Ban player access to the MM during play.
Option C: Get other MMs, and never use monsters from the MMs the players have.
Option D: Remix the monsters' stats a bit. Mix and match, create new and unique challenges, and make your world unique as well. Make their resource useless.
Option F: Specialize in humanoids and Low LA monsters that all have classes. More work than using the pre-generated monsters, but you can create templates of your own and eventually it won't be more work.

Option A: Explain to your players why you have a problem with this, why you think it makes the game less fun, and ask them to stop.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Tell him in no uncertain terms, "That sort of metagaming is unwelcome at my table. You can either knock it off, be the DM, or find another group." If he wants to metagame like that he better damn well memorize the monster manual and keep that stuff to himself.

Seriously, put your foot down. You don't have to DM for a player that won't respect the table's rules or you as the DM.

[Rangô]

Unthinkable! As DM or PC I woudn't permit that behavior. My players aren't allowed to browse through monster's manual (excepting summoning spells or wildshape), even less during the role session (prepare your transformation at home before playing). As DM you should describe how the monster looks like, how is developing the fight letting the party to find a way to defeat it, what is totally ruined by that action (Hey wizard, don't waste the fireball, it's inmune). Also you could enhace or nerf the monster fitting it to the party, so the raw stats might not be the same.
My advise, stop him quickly and without hesitation, it's not funny to hear your party complaining about how high AC your monster has, if they want info they must invest skillpoints in knwoledge and properly pass the test DC, in that case DM will provide the info according whatever he thinks reasonable.

[Troacctid]

First, I would politely remind him that his character requires a Knowledge check in order to have access to that kind of information. Any trained check is enough to tell him that it's an Ooze. DC 10 tells him some common knowledge about Oozes. DC 15 means he knows all the general Ooze traits (a basic question for someone who knows the field), but not necessarily anything about this specific Ooze. DC 16 means he can identify the monster as a typical Ochre Jelly, and he knows about its Split (Ex) ability. For each 5 points above 16, he gets an additional piece of useful information about Ochre Jellies. That's how the rules work. It's okay for players to know things their characters don't, because there's no reasonable way to prevent that. However, I expect them to respect the separation of in-character and out-of-character knowledge.

Second, I would suggest that he check out the Urban Savant prestige class from Cityscape. It would fit well with his playstyle and I think he would enjoy it.

Third, I would start using custom monsters, monsters that are advanced in HD or class levels, monsters with templates, and monsters from more obscure sources. Maybe not in every fight, but with a higher frequency than I normally might. The game will be more fun for everyone involved if this player is kept on his toes. He'll enjoy the minigame of trying to guess what it is, I'll enjoy the satisfaction of successfully surprising him, and because fun is contagious, the enjoyment should spread to everyone else at the table as well.

Note that this is how I would deal with a player who's referencing the Monster Manual during play. If the player is peeking at my actual DM notes during a game, then it's time to bring out the balding devils, because there will be hell toupee.

[Coidzor]

Probably time to break out the How to Play D&D 101 lessons.

[Crake]

Probably time to break out the How to Play D&D 101 lessons.

Yeah, how is this ever something you let him get away with? Did you ever actually just say "Hey, could you not look up the stats of the monster you're fighting?" If you did and he completely disregarded that, then I think that would be a moment for some public shaming in front of the whole table.

[Waazraath]

I would be flabergasted, opening and closing my mouth, without sound coming out. For quite a whille.

[AvatarVecna]

To a certain degree, this kind of meta-gaming is absolutely bad form; that being said, most ways of stopping it in-game just leave some other loophole open, so the best solution is, as is usually the case, solving the problem OoC. Talk to your player about the issue, and see if you can come to some kind of mutually acceptable substitute, such as an alternative mechanic-dependent path to monster knowledge that the DM controls, or throwing weird monsters into the mix, as others have suggested. On the other hand, however, this kind of meta-gaming can still end up being a problem: some people, when prevented with a complete shut-down, will max out their knowledge checks to auto-succeed to the point that they may as well crack open the MM to see the monster's entry themselves; some will go far enough to actually memorize the MM, while some will cheat by peeking at the SRD on their phones.

That kind of stuff still falls into the "dickish behavior" area of things, but this next example doesn't: I've spent a lot of time haunting the 3.X sub-forum, and I play a lot of 3.X games, both here and elsewhere; one of my Skype games (a PF game) had our level 3 party face off against what was described to us (in a roundabout fashion) as "a shapeshifting spellcaster riding what appears to be some kind of 5-headed dragon". Is it meta-gaming for me to feel apprehensive about my level 3 character going into a fight that includes a hydra and a druid powerful enough to ride one? It is absolutely meta-gaming...but it's also not really something I can stop either. Now, due to a combination of "large party", "lenient DM", and "insane luck", we managed to kill the Hydra and intimidated the druid into running away with skill-based fear effects...but that druid is still out there, and now bears a grudge against us.

To a certain degree, meta-gaming is a conscious choice one makes that can be prevented through either a calm talk or a Fiat-Hammer...but to a certain degree, meta-gaming is an unconscious part of becoming more familiar with the system, particularly the more optimal parts of the system. Whether it's knowing which energy resistance spell to prepare based on the color of the rumored dragon's scales, knowing which creatures to call forth with Planar Binding without checking the book, or knowing how easy it can be to kill the Tarrasque, learning the system in-and-out in an attempt to stretch your char-op wings comes with a healthy dose of automatic meta-gaming. That kind of thing is why we have double-blind experiments in science: when either the test subject or the person administering the test knows what exactly the test is testing, there's inevitably some chance of the results being unusable due the knowledge potentially corrupting the results.

[ryu]

Depends. What's his total modifier for the knowledge skill relevant to the monster relative to said monster's HD plus or minus reasonable circumstance modifiers. Depending on the answer to that question he either knows nothing, the knowledge in the book, the knowledge in the book plus several relevant tips about monster weaknesses he has access to, because of course if he was studying this type of creature so hard that's what he'd remember. Study of various monster types is a thing that happens in-game and it's represented by skills. PCs aren't assumed to literal brick stupids who understand neither what they're fighting nor which end of their implement of choice to point at said thing.

[Deophaun]

On the other hand, however, this kind of meta-gaming can still end up being a problem: some people, when prevented with a complete shut-down, will max out their knowledge checks to auto-succeed to the point that they may as well crack open the MM to see the monster's entry themselves...
I'm sorry, but how is this a problem?

[Jon_Dahl]

I have an idea: I will link this thread to him.

Keep the posts coming, please.

[ryu]

I'm sorry, but how is this a problem?

I agree. If the guy's goal is to know everything it only makes sense to put skills into knowing things. That's like getting angry about a fighter focusing his stats into strength to hit things better. Or a casting class focusing mainly on their casting stat because that's how they do things.

[AvatarVecna]

I'm sorry, but how is this a problem?

When such a response is made in regards to it being a proposed counter-solution, there's no problem...but when that's the response to the DM flat-out stating they don't want the players knowing the monster's full capabilities for the sake of the game, it's the player trying to use the rules as a way around the DM. If the DM's problem is with non-mechanical access to monster knowledge, this is a perfectly fine solution, but specifically using it to circumvent the DM's attempt to limit the meta-game is just a different way of being a **** in the way the OP finds meta-gaming to be dickly behavior.

EDIT: I don't personally have a problem with people heavily investing in Knowledge skills to let themselves read the Monster Manual entry, but I've had DMs who had severe problems with intentional meta-gaming; when the DM reacted to MM-cracking meta-gamers by restricting access to the MM, and a player employed this "solution", all it solved was the lack of loud angry arguments.

[Waazraath]

Knowing everything, imo, kills a large part of the fun. The guessing, the finding out what a creature can do, the experimental approaches on 'how the hell do we deal with this', the wonder... it's all not there, when you simply know what a creature can do. It's one thing to invest in knowledge roles and roleplay to get information, but reading the stats is just lame. They aren't meant for a player.

I play 3.x for so long now, that I know most monsters, weaknesses etc. by heart, especially from the older books (forcing my current DM to mainly use critters from MM IV and V) ; in fifth, which I also play atm, I avoid the MM and DMG as the plague, because I don't want to have knowledge on how the different mechanics work. Let my character find out on his/her own :smallwink:

[Jon_Dahl]

The player has promised to mainly look at the pictures of monsters, so I guess that the problem has been solved.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

Low-level magic to the rescue!


1) Prestidigitation to alter a monster's color. There was once a Red Dragon pretending to be a White Dragon at first glance to invite PCs to use fire spells on it. At other times he'd pretend to be an unknown species of Pink Dragon, stumping the metagamers in their search for immunities.

2) Illusions to alter a monster's appearrance. If the players start metagaming based off how it looks, assume they believed the illusion. There was once a crazy gnome wizard making animated statues and disguising them as golems. The PCs, believing the things were immune to magic like golems are, relied on physical and energy attacks which were the statues' strongest point.

3) Fog Cloud and Darkness to prevent a monster from being seen. Fighting lowly goblins while believing they are something far worse is always fun.

[Kesnit]

I'll often re fluff/rename them, or use some of the more obscure mobs, often stuff from third party sources.

I ran a short campaign several year ago where I pulled monsters straight out of the MM, but then changed their physical description. (I had a player who was too familiar with the MM...) It's hard for him to say "those are orcs!" when the creature is described as "Green Army Men (http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41XZjIgQmWL._SY300_.jpg)."

[Chester]

Have you considered adding a template to the monsters?

The Half Farspawn template from Lords of Madness is particularly vile.

[Necroticplague]

1. Heavy template use. Chances are, if there's a creature, you can get something that appears solar by applying templates to something else. Make use of this fact. "Wait, is that a shambling mound, or a Corpse of a Greenbound Half-fey ooze?"
2. Refluffing. Given a stat block, its entirely possible to come up with a different description I them that still works.
"Wait, green woman in the middle of the woods, I thought this was a green hag? How's it regenerating?" "Some troll varieties are more sexually dimorphic than others."

[atemu1234]

Have you considered adding a template to the monsters?

The Half Farspawn template from Lords of Madness is particularly vile.

That brings back memories. Like that one adventure from Dungeon Magazine, where you fight a Half-Farspawn Dwarf Fighter 6 at one point.

It almost killed a party of mine back in the day.

[martixy]

Such meta knowledge has the unfortunate habit of damaging space time. That makes it the responsibility of the quaruts. They're on page 102 of the Fiend Folio, in the event you wish to deal with more than one.

Oh, that is awesome.

I evokes a certain picture in my mind.
The DM looks the player in the eyes.
"You see a conical shaped silhouette approaching. It seems to be repeating a single word."
"What word?"
"EXTERMINATE!"

As far as OP, I'd say figure out what this player's capacity for abstraction is before deciding how to approach. As inclusive as we'd like to think D&D is, it requires of its players certain cognitive abilities that quite frankly not every person possesses, or is willing to bother applying.

[Necromancy]

Rival the party against a powerful illusionist who uses their oddly accurate monster knowledge to draw them into traps

[Quertus]

A lot of this has already been said, but...

1) what's the problem? This is not at all the way I like to play the game, but, if that's his preferred play style, what's the problem? Is it ruining anyone's fun? (but see below)

2) you could try banning all the books (one of the easiest and most reasonable solutions), but, if this is his preferred play style, then you might be ruining his fun. Also, it's hard to ban what's already in someone's head - this style just encourages metagamers to memorize the entries.

3) play with custom monsters. Having played forever, I personally appreciate it when DMs mix things up this way. Although adding to my fun, it will likely detract from his, and make things harder for you.

4) make his style legit. require him to take all the knowledge skills at max ranks. Only play with monsters he could reasonably make the rolls for, with perhaps the rare exception where you (show him the picture and then) ask him to put the book away for this encounter.

I played a cyberpunk game once where, for fluff reasons, my character owned a large collection of "old" movies. The GM hinted that I should put some ranks in knowledge to reflect my knowledge of these old movies. I responded bitterly that we both knew that as soon as my character started quoting old movies, one of the other players would do so, too, whether it made sense in character for them to do so out not. And, of course, they did. Insert grouchy emoticon here.

So, for me, someone having even this completely pointless fluff knowledge when, mechanically, they should not, ruins the fun for me. 3.x has knowledge skills - if you want to play with the MM open during the game, invest in said skills; otherwise, keep the book shut. Now, back in 2e, where there were no such skills, other players having the MM open during the game didn't bug me. Heck, I even liked to look at the pictures myself from time to time! But, as I've mentioned in other threads, I kept extensive track of what my characters knew, from personal experience, from the people who trained them, and from talking around the camp fire - including things I knew OOC to be false.

So, for the lols,

5) if he does not have the skills, hand him a MM from a different edition to use to look at the pictures. Bonus points if someone else in the group does have the skills, and you hand them the real MM.

[fishyfishyfishy]

I would tell the player that he's not allows to read a monster manual entry at the table unless I expressly give him/her permission to do so. I also strictly enforce the knowledge checks to ID monsters. I have a player who's invested most of his skill points into these and makes use of them all the time.

[BearonVonMu]

I will echo the multiple similar responses above, and assume that you have attempted to talk to the player, indicating that what he is doing is not welcomed at your table.
If you haven't, that would be a fantastic place to start: conflict resolution between friends should not have to get ugly or messy.
Failing that, there are always other answers:
1) Make your own monsters. If the world is Faerûn, who is to say that the orcs are not sometimes orks, having a culture based upon low level psionic powers and a natural knack at being artificers?
2) Re-fluffing of existing monsters makes for a fresh new experience for all of the players, rewarding use of knowledge skills to identify the creatures while causing your trouble player to have nowhere to metagame from. Re-work constructs to be clockwork men, perhaps. Pull creatures from third party settings, from other games, from movies, from whimsical thoughts of "wouldn't it be cool if...".
3) If you're not comfortable with simply editing the monsters, templates work as well. Make it so that there is a disturbance in the Force, an alteration of the world with no explanation currently forthcoming, and now all monsters have a template or two. Silverthorne Games made a pdf book called "Book of Templates - Deluxe Edition". It's cheap, and it has some fantastic stuff in it that players won't see coming.
4) Sadly, sometimes you need to kick a player. It is always regretful, but it occasionally happens.

[Segev]

Yeah, just tell everybody that they're not allowed to open the monster manual or anything similar during game. If he starts to, tell him to put it away. If he refuses, then treat him like you would any other cheater. I personally suggest that his character suffers a sudden existence failure for at least the duration of the combat. Alternatively, that he fail every action he attempts, and that anything he tells others in the party to do fails as well. If this leads to a forced retreat, this may cause the other players to be upset with him for his "help."

Otherwise, yeah, refluff monsters to look different and use their statblocks without telling him what they are.

[Droopy McCool]

I never opened a MM while playing like that. However, one time we were in a dungeon and I spotted a long, glistening cord hanging above my head. I immediately thought 'large spider' and the DM also said the cord was taut. So, naturally, I yelled "OH GEEZ GUYS INVISIBLE MONSTROUS SPIDERS!" I remember his face dropped, because he was trying to surprise us.

Afterwards we agreed it wasn't out of character, I was a Duskblade with a high Int and multiple knowledge skills (which I did to reflect my personal knowledge).

I guess all I mean is I almost ruined the fun and my character was MADE to do stuff like that. What your player is doing is plain rude. If it happened in my game, I would do exactly like several people said already and have the monster he ID'ed be an illusion while they fight something else.

McCool

[JNAProductions]

I'll echo what's already been said-solve this OOC. Now, there's some good advice (use templates, classed monsters, refluff) but those are band-aids. You need to address this issue at its root, and its root is OOC.

So talk to the player. Tell them that you do not want that level of metagaming at this table, and to kindly leave their copy of Monster Manual safely out of reach while playing.

[Deophaun]

When such a response is made in regards to it being a proposed counter-solution, there's no problem...but when that's the response to the DM flat-out stating they don't want the players knowing the monster's full capabilities for the sake of the game, it's the player trying to use the rules as a way around the DM. If the DM's problem is with non-mechanical access to monster knowledge, this is a perfectly fine solution, but specifically using it to circumvent the DM's attempt to limit the meta-game is just a different way of being a **** in the way the OP finds meta-gaming to be dickly behavior.
Character building is 100% metagame. If a DM doesn't like that, he should probably play Traveler instead.

Knowing everything, imo, kills a large part of the fun. The guessing, the finding out what a creature can do, the experimental approaches on 'how the hell do we deal with this', the wonder... it's all not there, when you simply know what a creature can do. It's one thing to invest in knowledge roles and roleplay to get information, but reading the stats is just lame. They aren't meant for a player.
If stat blocks were not meant for a player, there would be no SoDs in the game. "Roll a new character" is a terrible mechanic for discovering a monster's capabilities. [Edit: Just realized I was reading you out of context. Content retained for Lessoned Learned]

Is it people like this who are causing my players not to make Knowledge checks? I come up with these monsters with unique abilities, and then there's a TPK because no one bothered to roll Arcana during five rounds of combat.

[ganondorf50]

There are many ways to deal with this.

A Change the monsters stats and abilities

B Its not the monster they think it is

C this is evil but give it class levels !!!! :smallfurious::smallfurious: so imagine the ooze drawing a sword and proceeding to open a can of WHOOP ASS on the party. This is my favorite option and it works they stop metagaming really quick after that.

D This is a side note but the players can be their own worst enemy. Gee all these brains hope there isnt a mind flayer sure enough pop a few mind flayers appear in the next room

[OldTrees1]

Yet another solution:

Take the player aside and say that sometimes the players know things that their characters have not learned. Since the player seems to like playing as if a well informed character, perhaps they should roll up a well informed character. Prohibit them from referencing the MM during play but let them use their player knowledge while they roleplay their informed character. This lets them show off and celebrate their player knowledge while having it representative of their character's knowledge.

Example:
My Fighter has 5 ranks in Knowledge(Dungeoneering) [we increased skill points to 4+Int and broadened the skill list].
I personally know the names of "every" monster in the Monster Manual and can site some details about each without reference (even have some misinformation in my head).
As such, my DM let's me use my player knowledge about Aberrations and Oozes and might even supplement with more information it if I roll high.

[Nibbens]

I'll echo what's already been said-solve this OOC. Now, there's some good advice (use templates, classed monsters, refluff) but those are band-aids. You need to address this issue at its root, and its root is OOC.

So talk to the player. Tell them that you do not want that level of metagaming at this table, and to kindly leave their copy of Monster Manual safely out of reach while playing.

This. Except, I'd go as far as say that the band-aids will only look (to the metagamer) like you're intentionally doing this as revenge or something. Avoid all of this and address the issue directly with him.

Most of us more or less know what the stats of a goblin are. I know exactly what they are, right down to the number of skillpoints diverted into which skills. But that doesn't give me (or anyone else) the right to look at the monster's stats during gameplay (when not the DM). It would be disrespectful to the host running the game, and insulting to the other players as well who may or may not have the same system mastery.

Chances are, from the way you describe it, he's not trying to hide his actions during gameplay and secretly look at the manual. So, this individual (most likely) doesn't know he's doing anything wrong - so being direct will probably clear up any misunderstanding. If he still insists... Well, that's your call.

[mauk2]

if they want info they must invest skillpoints in knwoledge and properly pass the test DC, in that case DM will provide the info according whatever he thinks reasonable.


This is the perfectly complete and thorough answer.

The game has mechanics to con mobs. He's cheating.

If he persists, swap names. He looks up the wrong mob, problem solved.

[NichG]

I don't really use the MMs at all for statting encounters, so said player would at best not be receiving any benefit, and at worst would be seriously hindering themselves by going all-in on strategies that only work presuming the accuracy of the MM information (based on the damage we've dealt it should have 3hp left, so its okay for me to close to melee range and cast a spell that has a minimum damage output of 4hp even if its full attack would normally kill me three times over...)

[AnonymousPepper]

If she's passed the Knowledge DC sufficiently well, that's 100% cool.

If she hasn't, then I take her aside at the first available opportunity for privacy and explain that this is not okay and I explain why it's not okay.

If it continues, I'll consult with the other players and if they're in agreement, I'll approach her about it again in front of the rest of the group.

If it keeps going after that, she's out.

[Slayer Lord]

Tell them that the gods are appalled and offended by the PC's access to forbidden knowledge of the universe and smite him with a 100d12 lightning bolt of divine judgement. I think he'll take the hint. :smallwink:

But seriously though, talk with the guy OoC and explain how it's disruptive to the game. If he wants a knowledge-based character, help him with his build, or something. If the problem persists, ask him to leave. Or start taping templates and class levels on. All that ill-gotten info on the ochre jelly won't seem half so clever when it starts lobbing fireballs at people.

[Ualaa]

I mix things up, so while a player may think the creature is something, that doesn't mean that it actually is.
As stated earlier, use Templates, or just change how something looks in your campaign world.

If the player takes the relevant knowledge skills, and gets a high enough check, you can give them some of the relevant information (more information, depending how much they beat the DC by).

Information that is revealed is specific to your game; in my game a character understands that some things are harder to hit because of intrinsic defenses. These defenses could be from great Agility (Dex/Dodge based) or thick Skin (Natural Armor) or actual armor. The character does not know of the meta-game term Armor Class, but can learn if more of the AC is from Agility or from Hide. If you're comfortable with meta-knowledge, maybe the knowledge skill will say the creature has 19 AC, at your table; it does not at mine.
Generally speaking, and depending on the check relative to the monster's Challenge Rating, some resistances or vulnerabilities may be revealed too -- I won't say, it has Fire Resist 20, but will say that it is highly resistant to Fire. Knowledge, in my game, is in the terminology that would be in-character as opposed to a game mechanic discussion.

If the player makes the investment of knowledge skills, which is generally five main skills (Arcana, Dungeoneering, Nature, the Planes and Religion) for most creature types, but occasionally another knowledge for less common types, they're welcome to use that knowledge.
You determine what information is revealed from that knowledge.
If the creature is a type of Troll, but a relatively unknown variant, you can give the clue that this creature closely resembles a Troll, which has certain traits (based on their knowledge check vs creature's CR)... but that this creature does not quite look like a typical Troll and might be different in some ways. After the players have encountered your variant a few times, and experienced what it can do (as a character), future knowledge checks for that type of Troll will provide more information.

Without relevant knowledge skills, just guessing that you should use Acid based attacks because the creature takes partial or no damage against Physical Attacks (high DR), Fire, Cold and Electricity, and has a slew of other immunities... because that is what the book says, is pure meta-gaming.
In this case, since the characters have no way of knowing what the vulnerability or resistances/immunity of the creature actually are, CHANGE THEM.
Maybe 1=Fire, 2=Cold, 3=Acid, 4=Electricity, 5=Sonic, 6=Psychic, 7=Physical Attacks (Natural or Weapon) and 8=Force Effects. Then roll a D8 for each type of thing the creature is normally either immune to, resistant to, or vulnerable to. So the White Dragon is actually immune to Electricity and vulnerable to Acid, because you rolled a 3 and a 4.

[Âmesang]

I'll admit I've probably pulled out a manual before, but to be fair I can only recall ever doing it against foes that my character had already fought before or had indeed passed the Knowledge check against new foes.


1) Prestidigitation to alter a monster's color. There was once a Red Dragon pretending to be a White Dragon at first glance to invite PCs to use fire spells on it. At other times he'd pretend to be an unknown species of Pink Dragon, stumping the metagamers in their search for immunities.
Have it disguise itself as a Black Dragon and call it a Shiny Charizard. :smalltongue: It just got back from fighting a foe that had cast glitterdust on it.

[Jormengand]

Advise the player to play a truenamer and spam universal aptitude and hidden truth on himself, as well as using his many skill points and not much to do them (beyond "Hey, why not max truespeak?") to get lots of ranks in knowledges, take Knowledge Devotion, and use all of the knowledge bonuses from truenamer to boost knowledges that can identify creatures. He should be able to max arcana, dungeoneering, local, nature, religion and the planes as well as truespeak, and if he drops a hidden truth (which doesn't have a duration, just provides a +10 to the next knowledge check he makes) on himself at the end of each battle and after any other knowledge check he uses, he not only has enough knowledge to read the entry anyway (I usually peg that as the base DC + 20 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=19271048&postcount=2)), but can also feel as though he's actually accomplished something by doing it. Also, the attack/damage bonuses from knowledge devotion could easily be quite fun. Give the man an item familiar to send all his skills, knowledge and truespeak alike, through the roof.

Illumians (Races of Destiny) can get a +2 bonus on all knowledges (and other int-based skills) and he can choose a second sigil (we recommend the dexterity sigil for the neat +2 on initiative checks, plus being able to balance and tumble and stuff isn't exactly bad). Also, there's a feat in the same book to bump it up to a +3 on all int/dex checks and skill checks based on int or dex, which is neat (the fact that the race openly admits to being worth more than two feats is ludicrous; it's a race I often take over human).

Though, have you tried asking him not to? Or if he really just wants to see the picture, show him the picture (though ochre ooze doesn't have one, here's the gelatinous cube one (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG201.jpg), for example).