Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
House Rule Idea: Knowledge Checks Never Fail (they just might make things worse)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 9242342" data-attributes="member: 2629"><p>I do something tengential to this idea:</p><p></p><p>When a character attempts a check that involves gaining information (intelligence skills, insight, perception, survival, etc...) I set a DC. Then they roll against it.</p><p></p><p>If the roll is far below the DC, I tell them they just don't know anything.</p><p></p><p>If the roll is at or above the DC, they get the beneficial knowledge (with more details being provided depending upon how much they beat the DC).</p><p></p><p>However, if the check approaches, but does not meet the DC, then they get bad info. The closer they get to the DC without meeting it, the worse the misinformation will be.</p><p></p><p>Example: Tim the Wizard asks what they know about Cosmic Dreadnaughts after hearing about them from an NPC. I aske what Intelligence skills he has, and based on that I ask him to roll a proficient intelligence check. As he is doing so, I am setting a DC in my mind. I select 18. </p><p></p><p>If his result is a 5, I tell him he knows nothing about them and doesn't recall ever even hearing of them before.</p><p></p><p>If his result is an 18, I'll tell him he doesn't know much about them, and then use about 25 words to describe Cosmic Dreadnaughts in a useful way.</p><p></p><p>If his result is a 30, I'll volunteer a decent amount and then ask him what else he would want to know about the creatures.</p><p></p><p>If his roll is a 15, I'll tell him he doesn't know much about Cosmic Dreadnaughts and give him 25 words to describe them - but it will be a mix of useless and incorrect information.</p><p></p><p>If his roll is a 17 - just beneath the DC, I'll tell him that he has heard of them and recalls some useful information - but what I reveal to him is incorrect and potentially dangerous. Maybe I'll tell him that they can't see motion, so as long as you're stationary they can't see you ... which is entirely false.</p><p></p><p>If the player knew the DC they'd be able to spot the misinformation. However, as they do not know if the DC was 15, 18, 20, or 23 they won't be able to tell whether they are getting good, or bad, info. </p><p></p><p>This system works well to allow PCs to not know when they are being misinformed ... but that is problematic as well. If you tell the PCs something after they feel like they got a decent intelligence roll and then it ends up biting them, the players can have a negative reaction. TO limit this impact, I am VERY clear that this is how I run these types of checks and I remind them of it often. Still, when a PC acts on bad information and it gets them (or another PC) killed, it can be very frustrating. To that end, I would not recommend this approach to all DMs, and certainly not to all groups.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 9242342, member: 2629"] I do something tengential to this idea: When a character attempts a check that involves gaining information (intelligence skills, insight, perception, survival, etc...) I set a DC. Then they roll against it. If the roll is far below the DC, I tell them they just don't know anything. If the roll is at or above the DC, they get the beneficial knowledge (with more details being provided depending upon how much they beat the DC). However, if the check approaches, but does not meet the DC, then they get bad info. The closer they get to the DC without meeting it, the worse the misinformation will be. Example: Tim the Wizard asks what they know about Cosmic Dreadnaughts after hearing about them from an NPC. I aske what Intelligence skills he has, and based on that I ask him to roll a proficient intelligence check. As he is doing so, I am setting a DC in my mind. I select 18. If his result is a 5, I tell him he knows nothing about them and doesn't recall ever even hearing of them before. If his result is an 18, I'll tell him he doesn't know much about them, and then use about 25 words to describe Cosmic Dreadnaughts in a useful way. If his result is a 30, I'll volunteer a decent amount and then ask him what else he would want to know about the creatures. If his roll is a 15, I'll tell him he doesn't know much about Cosmic Dreadnaughts and give him 25 words to describe them - but it will be a mix of useless and incorrect information. If his roll is a 17 - just beneath the DC, I'll tell him that he has heard of them and recalls some useful information - but what I reveal to him is incorrect and potentially dangerous. Maybe I'll tell him that they can't see motion, so as long as you're stationary they can't see you ... which is entirely false. If the player knew the DC they'd be able to spot the misinformation. However, as they do not know if the DC was 15, 18, 20, or 23 they won't be able to tell whether they are getting good, or bad, info. This system works well to allow PCs to not know when they are being misinformed ... but that is problematic as well. If you tell the PCs something after they feel like they got a decent intelligence roll and then it ends up biting them, the players can have a negative reaction. TO limit this impact, I am VERY clear that this is how I run these types of checks and I remind them of it often. Still, when a PC acts on bad information and it gets them (or another PC) killed, it can be very frustrating. To that end, I would not recommend this approach to all DMs, and certainly not to all groups. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
House Rule Idea: Knowledge Checks Never Fail (they just might make things worse)
Top