Is this skill useless?

[Jon_Dahl]

I have this homebrew skill in my game, and the PCs take it quite frequently but they don't seem to use it and when they use it, it really doesn't help the PCs in any way. What do you guys think?


Knowledge (tactics) (Int; Trained Only)
A class skill for the following: Fighter, Expert.


Fields of study


Military formations; tactical planning and preparation in practice and theory; large-scale and small unit tactics; conventional and asymmetric combat; naval, aerial, land and joint warfare.


Check


Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions).


In many cases, you can use this skill to identify the non-supernatural and non-magical abilities and attacks of monsters. In general, the DC of such check equals 10 + the monster’s HD. A successful check allows you to know what the natural AC of the monster is.


For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information as follows:
Exceeding the DC by 5 points: Knowledge of number of primary natural attacks and secondary natural attacks and their base damage die/dice.
Exceeding the DC by 10 points: Knowledge of physical attributes (Str, Dex, Con).
Exceeding the DC by 15 points: Base attack bonus.
Exceeding the DC by 20 or more: Optional by DM.


If you have 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics), you gain +1 bonus to your Leadership score.

Two characters with 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics) can use hand signals to communicate basic combat maneuvers (one hand signal with a free hand as a free action once per round) regardless of possible language barriers. Anyone with 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics) who sees the hand signals is able to understand them too.


Action


Usually none. In most cases, making a Knowledge check doesn’t take an action—you simply know the answer or you don’t. Hand signals work in the same way as talking, but with an extremely limited military terminology.


Try Again


No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn’t let you know something that you never learned in the first place.


Synergy


If you have 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics), you get a +2 bonus on Perform (weapon drill).

[Jormengand]

I feel that in a relatively militarised setting, it ought to be just as useful as any other knowledge skill. Further, in a setting like fields of blood, you could use it as the knowledge skill to identify formations (just as knowledge arcana is used for dragons and religion for undead).

[Ceaon]

Okay, let's see here...

Answering a question within your field of study has a DC of 10 (for really easy questions), 15 (for basic questions), or 20 to 30 (for really tough questions).

Ok. Basic stuff.

In many cases, you can use this skill to identify the non-supernatural and non-magical abilities and attacks of monsters. In general, the DC of such check equals 10 + the monster’s HD. A successful check allows you to know what the natural AC of the monster is.

For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information as follows:
Exceeding the DC by 5 points: Knowledge of number of primary natural attacks and secondary natural attacks and their base damage die/dice.
Exceeding the DC by 10 points: Knowledge of physical attributes (Str, Dex, Con).
Exceeding the DC by 15 points: Base attack bonus.
Exceeding the DC by 20 or more: Optional by DM.

The meat of the skill. My guess as to why this data is not interesting or all that useful to your players: these underlying building blocks are not the stats they care about tactically. They care about the target scores (attack bonus, AC, saving throws, HP, damage etc.) and the tactical capabilities (spells, feats, skills) of their foes. Those do seem a bit meta; I could see stuff like: "Depends on their powerful armor to just withstand most blows (AC 24)", "Will always fight in groups and will run if cornered alone because of their frail nature (20 HP)", "Will make use of stealth and subterfuge to make q quick stun attack (Invisibility and Hide +18, Move Silently +18, has some kind of stunning attack)", or even "Deals high damage for its CR (2d12+14, has power attack)", or "Can best be countered by grappling (grappling modifier +4 but has powerful spells)"... stuff like that.

If you have 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics), you gain +1 bonus to your Leadership score.

Awesome. This alone will justify taking ranks in this skill for some characters.

Two characters with 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics) can use hand signals to communicate basic combat maneuvers (one hand signal with a free hand as a free action once per round) regardless of possible language barriers. Anyone with 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics) who sees the hand signals is able to understand them too.

Cool idea, though I'd like to see some examples of "basic combat maneuvers".

Action
Usually none. In most cases, making a Knowledge check doesn’t take an action—you simply know the answer or you don’t. Hand signals work in the same way as talking, but with an extremely limited military terminology.

Try Again
No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn’t let you know something that you never learned in the first place.

Synergy
If you have 5 or more ranks in Knowledge (tactics), you get a +2 bonus on Perform (weapon drill).

All fine and dandy.

I think this has the potential to be a great addition to a game, though not a flashy change. It's more a skill I'd homebrew as a player (for a specific character) than as a GM, though.

[ngilop]

I have this skill in my campaign world as well.


It follows closely to what your does DC X= combat information about oppoenent (Saves, combat style, HD etc)

I also allow it to give characters nice boosts

For example Fighter with know: tactics takes his action to obvesrve Storm Giant Jarl in a fight for a round does his roll and gives allies a +4 bonus to attack, the fighter notices the Storm Giant Jarl leaves his left side open to attacks when he swing his mega hammer.

Of course I have feats to reduce this to a move action.

WIth the advent of ToB I also interfolded martial lore into this skill as well, fighter have such crappy skill points that 2 very similar skills felt unnecessary to me.

[Jon_Dahl]

The meat of the skill. My guess as to why this data is not interesting or all that useful to your players: these underlying building blocks are not the stats they care about tactically. They care about the target scores (attack bonus, AC, saving throws, HP, damage etc.) and the tactical capabilities (spells, feats, skills) of their foes. Those do seem a bit meta; I could see stuff like: "Depends on their powerful armor to just withstand most blows (AC 24)", "Will always fight in groups and will run if cornered alone because of their frail nature (20 HP)", "Will make use of stealth and subterfuge to make q quick stun attack (Invisibility and Hide +18, Move Silently +18, has some kind of stunning attack)", or even "Deals high damage for its CR (2d12+14, has power attack)", or "Can best be countered by grappling (grappling modifier +4 but has powerful spells)"... stuff like that.

Sorry for the delay. I guess my idea was to make my life as the DM easier. If a PC in question would know, for instance, some tactical detail about magma mephits, that would beg the question how (s)he knows something about magma mephits. That's why I decided that you can instantly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of any opponent in a heartbeat without having a clue what the opponent actually is.