Knowledge check!

[shadow_archmagi]

So, recently, the DM put us up against some flying brains with tentacles.

I made a knowledge check (I had ranks in dungeoneering, arcana, religion, AND local) and got a 28. The DM refused to give me more information then I could get by looking at it; saying things like "Well I'm not going to just tell you its stats" and "I don't know what I could say other than the description. It has lots of tentacles, okay?"

The next round I fired an Energy Missile with Electric energy. "Its immune to electricity"

Technically, you get one piece of useful information for beating the check, and an additional helpful tidbit for every 5 by which you beat it.

How does your group handle Knowledge?

[Rei_Jin]

Well, a flying brain with tentacles is probably a Grell. It comes under Knowledge: Dungeoneering as it's an aberration, and a successful check (DC 15) would tell you that it's a Grell, with each 5 points higher telling you something more about it.

Your DM may not be running things this way, although I'm not sure why he'd depart from the standard method when it works so well. DMs sometimes do strange things though.

*Shrug*

[Prometheus]

It is hard sometimes know what to tell people about monsters, but generally speaking, special abilities and qualities are the way to go, because they are probably the most memorable to the passerby.

I'm always afraid as a DM that people will think knowledge is useless and never use it, but they always take it and I can always tell them something useful for their skill points. I don't tend to have it strictly fixed to the 10 15 20 system, I just tell them something I think is appropriate for their roll.

[shadow_archmagi]

It is hard sometimes know what to tell people about monsters, but generally speaking, special abilities and qualities are the way to go, because they are probably the most memorable to the passerby.

I'm always afraid as a DM that people will think knowledge is useless and never use it, but they always take it and I can always tell them something useful for their skill points. I don't tend to have it strictly fixed to the 10 15 20 system, I just tell them something I think is appropriate for their roll.

Actually, on closer inspection the DC is 10+HD. So at first level, hitting 17 will net you two interesting facts, assuming level appropriate encounter.

[Rei_Jin]

Correct!

A Grell has 5HD normally, hence giving you a DC 15 check required. Of course, if something is more uncommon, then the DM is free to increase the DC to either 20 or 25 (using this system. Of course, a DM is free to do whatever they like regardless)

[Thurbane]

The WotC/Gleemax forum has a really neat (and long) thread detailing fan-made knowledge DCs and info for monsters that were around before that became standard in the MMs.

FWIW, I think a 28 should definitely have let you know of energy immunities...

[shadow_archmagi]

The WotC/Gleemax forum has a really neat (and long) thread detailing fan-made knowledge DCs and info for monsters that were around before that became standard in the MMs.

FWIW, I think a 28 should definitely have let you know of energy immunities...

Where?! I am anxious to have knowledge of this and my google-fu is failing me!

[BobVosh]

Rules as per D&D as bizarre. DC=HD+10 doesn't make much sense.

You see a small black lizardlike creature with wings. I got an arcane knowledge of 20. It is a black dragon hatchling!

You see a giant black lizardlike creature with wings. I got a knowledge check of 25. You have no clue what it possibly can be. Who knows? Far too big of a black dragon to have a clue. I mean some strange lizard.

[bosssmiley]

Hi shadow_archmagi, it sounds like your DM was a bit less than generous with his take on character knowledge. There's no meaningful fun to be had in leaving the characters hopelessly stumped in the face of the enemy though. "Bad DM! No cookie for you!"

The knowledge DC rules by the RAW are pretty b0rked. The classic instance is the commoner not understanding what an ox is (thanks to the DC13 "What's that pulling the cart?" check).

IMG we've played monster Knowledge checks as 10+CR (rather than HD) for a while now.

• Missing the required base DC gets you erroneous information and urban legends about the creature.
• Meeting the base required DC gets you the name of the beast and popular legends about it.
• Each 2 over the base required DC gets you a useful piece of game relevant information about abilities, immunities, etc. "It has DR, it has SR, it has resistance/immunity to (blah), it's a pack hunter, etc..."
• 20 over the required base DC gets you a look at the Monster Manual entry.

Something obscure and alien like the Grell might enjoy a +5 "What the hell is that?" bump to the required Knowledge DC, but the rules of the game still apply to it.

[Eldariel]

I tend to ignore the CR and just draw ad hoc numbers on how common those creatures are in the world. For example, due to all the tales and such about Dragons, even though it's a CR27 Great Wyrm Gold Dragon I'd expect for every single commoner who has ever heard a travelling Bard's tales to know it's a Dragon. Therefore, I usually make the checks based on the relative fame/obscurity of the creature.

Common creatures like Goblins, Orcs and such don't have names at all, nor the ones so Legendary that they're in all stories, such as the Dragons. Most aberrations though, along with outsider natives, many plants and so on do require more difficult checks simply because they aren't common or legendary. And aberrations do have the added "What the heck is that?"-DC to the check. In fact, I tend to automatically add 5 to Knowledge DCs against aberrations.

[random11]

The knowledge DC rules by the RAW are pretty b0rked. The classic instance is the commoner not understanding what an ox is (thanks to the DC13 "What's that pulling the cart?" check).

Of course familiarity with the creature should be calculated, and the checks should be completely ignored with common creatures, but "What's that pulling the cart?" is a reasonable question for a character who never saw an ox in his life.

If you describe an iguana to the players, how many will think it's a baby dragon?

Imagine this description: You see a huge creatures with two horns and a tentacle on his forehead slowly moving toward you. How many will prepare fireballs, and how many will understand it's just an elephant?

[bosssmiley]

Of course familiarity with the creature should be calculated, and the checks should be completely ignored with common creatures, but "What's that pulling the cart?" is a reasonable question for a character who never saw an ox in his life.

I was citing the reducto ad absurdem argument, but yeah, the familiarity thing is a legit response.

If you describe an iguana to the players, how many will think it's a baby dragon?

Imagine this description: You see a huge creatures with two horns and a tentacle on his forehead slowly moving toward you. How many will prepare fireballs, and how many will understand it's just an elephant?

Trick question! You should always fireball elephants, whether you know what they are or not (I heard about what them pachydermian sockchuckers did in Boatmurdered).

[BobVosh]

If you describe an iguana to the players, how many will think it's a baby dragon?

Imagine this description: You see a huge creatures with two horns and a tentacle on his forehead slowly moving toward you. How many will prepare fireballs, and how many will understand it's just an elephant?

Problem with the iguana is that is diminutive, so not a proper size catergory.

But I want to do that elephant...except add in "herd of huge..."

[random11]

Problem with the iguana is that is diminutive, so not a proper size catergory.

A lizard that can be as long as 1.5-2 meters isn't that small, and if the heroes don't know it's fully grown, they might suspect it's a baby of something much worse, even if not specifically a dragon.

[Curmudgeon]

I simply follow the rules. If you have no ranks in Knowledge (Local), you can't tell humanoid races apart; you need those people to tell you their ancestry because you can't distinguish elves from half-elves. It's like someone who grew up in Canada not being able to recognize Somalians and Liberians: they just haven't picked up the knowledge.

[Matthew]

I tend to ignore the CR and just draw ad hoc numbers on how common those creatures are in the world. For example, due to all the tales and such about Dragons, even though it's a CR27 Great Wyrm Gold Dragon I'd expect for every single commoner who has ever heard a travelling Bard's tales to know it's a Dragon. Therefore, I usually make the checks based on the relative fame/obscurity of the creature.

Common creatures like Goblins, Orcs and such don't have names at all, nor the ones so Legendary that they're in all stories, such as the Dragons. Most aberrations though, along with outsider natives, many plants and so on do require more difficult checks simply because they aren't common or legendary. And aberrations do have the added "What the heck is that?"-DC to the check. In fact, I tend to automatically add 5 to Knowledge DCs against aberrations.

That's how I would do it.

[kamikasei]

I made a knowledge check (I had ranks in dungeoneering, arcana, religion, AND local) and got a 28. The DM refused to give me more information then I could get by looking at it; saying things like "Well I'm not going to just tell you its stats" and "I don't know what I could say other than the description. It has lots of tentacles, okay?"

Well, the description is what you can tell simply by looking at it. If making a Knowledge check doesn't tell you anything more than simply looking at it would, then Knowledge checks to identify monsters are pretty much totally worthless. Aside from pointing out the existing rules and reasonable fixes for them mentioned by others in this thread, you might point out to the DM that he's ruling that entire use of the skill as pointless.

[Funkyodor]

He didn't have to reveal that it is resistant/immune to electrical damage. He could have related its preferred method of attack, if they travel in packs/herds or are solitary, lingering effects from their attacks, if they are fearless or will retreat if hurt, etc... He doesn't even need to tell you its name (Maybe your character remembered reading its description somewhere, and never learned what it was called or it was referenced with some foreign language name.)

But I agree that he should have disclosed more than just its physical description.

[Orran]

I simply follow the rules. If you have no ranks in Knowledge (Local), you can't tell humanoid races apart; you need those people to tell you their ancestry because you can't distinguish elves from half-elves. It's like someone who grew up in Canada not being able to recognize Somalians and Liberians: they just haven't picked up the knowledge.

Well that isn't really a fair comparison, different races look a lot more different than that. I think anyone would be able to tell the difference between a human and an elf, and forcing your players to take K:local to do so is absurd. Especially since by your rules players can't tell the difference between dwarves and merfolk.

[Curmudgeon]

I think anyone would be able to tell the difference between a human and an elf, and forcing your players to take K:local to do so is absurd.

Take it up with the game designers, then. They obviously thought otherwise.

[fractic]

Well that isn't really a fair comparison, different races look a lot more different than that. I think anyone would be able to tell the difference between a human and an elf, and forcing your players to take K:local to do so is absurd. Especially since by your rules players can't tell the difference between dwarves and merfolk.

Well they'll be able to tell the difference between a dwarf and an elf. But they wouldn't know what race they are exactly.

In fact anybody without ranks in knowledge local can't make knowledge DC's higher then 10 and even a lvl 1 commoner elf has a knowledge check DC of 11 to figure out what kind of creature they are.

Also as people get stronger it gets harder to tell what race they are ;)

[shadow_archmagi]

The WotC/Gleemax forum has a really neat (and long) thread detailing fan-made knowledge DCs and info for monsters that were around before that became standard in the MMs.

FWIW, I think a 28 should definitely have let you know of energy immunities...

Pleeeaaaaaaaaaaaseeeee give me a link.

[Hal]

It sounds like your DM wanted the battle to be a challenge and didn't want to lose the element of surprise. "Oh noes! All my spells keep bouncing off the thing!"

Just mention to him how the rules work. If he's not going to let you use the Knowledge skills as they're intended, ask if you can switch the skill points out into something he'll allow to be useful. Alternatively, ask if you can have Knowledge Devotion for free so that you can at least get some combat utility out of your skill ranks.

[Thurbane]

Pleeeaaaaaaaaaaaseeeee give me a link.

Monster Lore Compendium

[Colmarr]

Rules as per D&D as bizarre. DC=HD+10 doesn't make much sense.

I agree with this, and always did during my 3e days.

I think 4e handles this marginally better, by giving base DCs (15/20/25) and boosting them according to the creature's tier rather than level. IIRC it's +10 for paragon tier and +20 for epic tier.

While it still poses the problem that a 1st level PC doesn't know that the enormous red thing razing the town is a Dragon, it at least goes some way to making sure low-level adventures with moderate knowledge recognise ogres and trolls when they see them and have some possibility of gaining insight into their capabilities and resistance.

Interestingly, the last piece of information 4e gives out is resistances and vulnerabilities. I can't remember whether a similar rule was in place for 3e, but I find it intriguing that the designers would prefer to give players information about enemies' attacks (powers) than their vulnerabilities...

[OneFamiliarFace]

Interestingly, the last piece of information 4e gives out is resistances and vulnerabilities. I can't remember whether a similar rule was in place for 3e, but I find it intriguing that the designers would prefer to give players information about enemies' attacks (powers) than their vulnerabilities...

I think they did have a similar rule in 3e. Usually in the knowledge for monsters systems, you are more likely to gain story info, then special attacks, then special qualities. It is probably because the number of people who have seen a troll attack is greater than the number of people who have killed a troll :-p. Gamewise, I'm sure it's just because the vulnerabilities are not only the most important knowledge for the PCs, they are often less obvious than the attacks. If someone came upon the remains of an attack, evidence of the monster's attack powers would be easier to see than evidence of his defenses in most cases.

[random11]

One more thing to add about knowledge checks:
As a rule of thumb, all "passive skill" rolls (anything that is initiated automatically without the player actually stating that he is using it) are made by the GM and hidden from the players.
Generally, it helps to avoid situations like "I think I failed a spot check", and to increase the tension and uncertainty.

Specifically about knowledge checks, it allows the GM to feed false information for a bad roll.
In real life terms, it resembles a situation when real knowledge is mixed with myths and rumors.
The result shouldn't usually be critical, but it can cause the characters to waste time and resources, for example by using only fire based attacks when anything else could also cause damage.

[Sholos]

Rules as per D&D as bizarre. DC=HD+10 doesn't make much sense.

You see a small black lizardlike creature with wings. I got an arcane knowledge of 20. It is a black dragon hatchling!

You see a giant black lizardlike creature with wings. I got a knowledge check of 25. You have no clue what it possibly can be. Who knows? Far too big of a black dragon to have a clue. I mean some strange lizard.

Isn't there some clause in the Knowledge section about very common knowledge? Like what a dragon is, and what each dragon breathes? At the very least, you can apply a massive bonus to the check for the information being available to most anyone.

Well they'll be able to tell the difference between a dwarf and an elf. But they wouldn't know what race they are exactly.

In fact anybody without ranks in knowledge local can't make knowledge DC's higher then 10 and even a lvl 1 commoner elf has a knowledge check DC of 11 to figure out what kind of creature they are.

Also as people get stronger it gets harder to tell what race they are ;)

I'd go to the point of requiring a knowledge check to separate different kinds of races. Like Moon Elf from Sun, or High. Anything else is simple observation (assuming that your character has had at least decent exposure to other people and/or tales). Even half-elves are pretty obvious (unless they're taking pains to disguise themselves as human or elf, something I'd give them a bonus on), what with the pointy-ears but human body. This is when common sense (something that all DMs should be using, different from a houserule in intent) comes into play and says to make exceptions to RAW.

[Gorbash]

You see a small black lizardlike creature with wings. I got an arcane knowledge of 20. It is a black dragon hatchling!

You see a giant black lizardlike creature with wings. I got a knowledge check of 25. You have no clue what it possibly can be. Who knows? Far too big of a black dragon to have a clue. I mean some strange lizard.

Stupidest thing I've ever heard. Look at it this way.

You know that black dragon hatchling is immune to acid and can breathe water, but you don't know that the older dragon can cast insect plague and is resitant to mundane weapons. That's the way to describe the difference between their HD.

Damn, why do people on these boards have to be so literal...

[Eldariel]

What he's saying is what the rules say. Specifically, he's bringing up the absurdity of the rules. The rules state that you need to succeed Knowledge check vs DC 10+HD to remember a useful piece of information. And by every 5 points you exceed the DC, you get more. So against an Adult Dragon, you probably wouldn't know that it can breath or fly by those rules - those are useful pieces of information and therefore you need a check in the 30s to get any info whatsoever.

His whole point is that this is stupid and therefore, houseruling is in oder.