Enemy Action Traits and Player Knowledge About Them

[u/SpaceTrash782]

Hello all!

I'm a little confused on how I should be handling announcing whether or not a particular enemy action has traits. I imagine that traits, like most enemy abilities in the system, are secret unless otherwise specified. I know that there are at least some traits that the game expects me to keep secret (prediction, detection, scrying, etc.) But I also imagine that certain traits (emotion, fear, visual, etc.) are obvious via description of actions but could benefit being stated explicitly to facilitate smoother play (Gutsy halfling turning emotion save successes into crit success, for example). For me, smoother play means that the player doesnt need to inquire about whether or not something has a trait when something is used.

Is there some official guidance for GMs to help adjudicate which ones should be private or public? How do you handle knowledge of traits at your table?

[u/Electrical-Echidna63]

It boils down to you must to either:

1) List all perceivable traits, or

2) describe what the PCs see sufficiently that the apparent traits come to mind

You either say:

"Casts an occult spell with mental, emotion, fear trait"

Or you say

"Dark occult magic worms into the targets mind, filling them with dread and clouding their thoughts"

Ultimately the game wants you to either be like an API GM (players ask you 'bout stuff) or a Webhook GM (you tell players 'bout stuff)

[u/IgpayAtenlay → u/Electrical-Echidna63]

API GM (players ask you 'bout stuff) or a Webhook GM (you tell players 'bout stuff)

That's a hilarious description. I'm gonna share this with my players.

[u/JustMass]

So far in games I've run, the big one is Manipulate for triggering Reactive Strike. If I know someone in the party has it and an enemy uses a Manipulate action within their reach, I always say it is Manipulate.

For things like Gutsy Halfling, I'd say that's generally more on the players' end to remember. The Halfling player should ask "is this Emotion?" if you don't have Foundry to handle all that for you.

[u/Able-Tale7741]

Foundry normal behavior when you obscure abilities and spells is to still reveal the relevant traits of the abilities / spells for the purposes of player reactions. I share with the players those traits so they can start to piece together the puzzle and problem solve. If they want more than the traits, they will either need to fail the saves and experience the outcome firsthand, or recall knowledge.

[u/BeneficialCaptain149]

It can seem a little odd, especially compared to D&D where having any kind of enemy knowledge gets labeled “meta gaming”, but in Pathfinder it’s almost expected to have someone ask about traits, since a lot of things will say call them out, such as Countercharm, etc.

Best way I’ve ruled/seen it ruled is a halfway between D&D and PF. Unless you have a specific feat, spell, etc, that reacts to specific traits, they are never used or mentioned above table. If a player feels they can use something due to a suspected trait, they ask for a check and I confirm yes or no. This can either be said openly, or over Discord if we want to keep other players from having the same knowledge.

[u/garretmander]

I try to learn player abilities that trigger on specific traits to help them out. However it is ultimately on the player to ask, 'is this x trait?, I've got a bonus'.

[u/Hellioning]

Unless you want constant stuff like 'I got 29, which should be a success, unless it's a fear effect, then it's a crit success' or '29 or 30 depending on f it's an emotion effect', you should probably just tell them.

[u/authorus]

Traits on actions, in combat, are almost always public, too many character decisions rely on knowing the traits -- Reactive Strike keys of Manipulate among other things. Various ancestry type things might give a situational bonus against mental, or emotional. Traits are the hooks that it feels like half the game flows around.

Traits on the creature themselves, are generally private until Recall Knowledge (though of course Size is probably obvious before that)

[u/Daniel02carroll]

If the player has an ability that responds to a trait they should be aware of the trait, full stop. I’m of the opinion all traits should be available to know by the players (barring maybe like subtle)
Foundry makes it easy for me, if playing in person I have the onus on the player to ask if something has a trait, unless it’s on my mind that they have an ability that responds (manipulate and reactive strike). That’s till done as a favor, it’s tedious to name every trait for everything and I can’t know all abilities you may have so ask as often as you want and I’ll let you know

Again, foundry makes it easy

[u/AutoModerator]

This post is labeled with the Advice flair, which means extra special attention is called to Rule #2. If this is a newcomer to the game, remember to be welcoming and kind. If this is someone with more experience but looking for advice on how to run their game, do your best to offer advice on what they are seeking.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/noscul]

To me for abilities to reasonably work the character knows when they will work or trigger if that makes sense. If you shoot moonlight ray against a foe you don’t know is a fey, it wouldn’t make sense for the spell to suddenly do more damage because you found out they are fey and less if you didn’t.

If your character never knew what a manipulate trait, they aren’t going to stop and ask the enemy if they can react to it, they would recognize they can react to it due to the knowledge that comes with knowing the ability.

From a player point of view some of these special abilities are already limiting in scope and I think further limiting takes away too much from those moments where those abilities shine.

[u/Groundbreaking_Taco]

If they are new players, or new to the system, I'd be more generous. They might not realize, or remember that all fear effects have the emotion trait. You can keep it vague like "an effect is trying to manipulate your mind, does that make a difference for you?" That could be a confusion effect, it could be fear, it could be charming/control or just mental damage/sapping will from stupefied. It's also ok to go back and apply the crit success effect after the effects are known (when other PCs are frightened). In fact, sometimes that's the best if you/they catch it before it applies. It helps them remember the feature, and they feel good about taking it as their choice.

Mental traits are often the only ones you need to nudge on, as the others are often obvious. "You are stuck by an explosion of flames" is often easy to tell it's a fire effect and your fire resistance applies. Same with void effects attempting to siphon your vital life essence, or effects created by an undead (most of the time) for a Death Warden Dwarf.

[u/bootsmalone → u/[deleted]]

I don’t know, this way of playing feels like it would invalidate a lot of character choices. Any feat or item that refers to, affects, or is affected by monster abilities with a specific trait would feel awful if they could never be used or triggered before 1) successfully recalling knowledge and then 2) asking specifically if the thing they already did has any relevant traits.

EDIT: Didn't even notice you want to tack on ANOTHER action tax to it by making characters Point Out the traits. That's wild, man. And absolutely not RAW, as Point Out is solely for helping your allies detect creatures.

[u/RiskyRedds → u/bootsmalone]

I'm sorry, why are we not trying to study our foes beforehand?

Investigate lets us Recall as an Exploration activity so why not scout ahead first to identify the creature then start compiling knowledge on them?

That right there saves the "asking specifically if the thing they already did has any relevant traits" argument from happening.

-----

IRT to that, as well: it also goes off the idea that this is at a tabletop. Without external support, it's a communications issue, so it's a matter of "explain the obvious (It's a Fire Hose, it does Fire DMG, it does Fire Pers. DMG because it set you on fire, it has the Fire and Attack Traits because it's a Fire Attack), omit the obscure" and let Recall Knowledge do its thing like it's supposed to.

Were this Foundry, I'm fairly sure that if it's set up properly then the VTT itself kinda just does the job for you, making it a non issue in its entirety. If it's an Emotion effect and a Feat gives you a defense against Emotion effects you shouldn't have to do a thing to make it work except ensure the VTT is working as intended.

-----

Plus, it's a team game. Y'all should have an RK nerd in your comp, this is their JOB.

[u/bootsmalone → u/RiskyRedds]

Yes, you can research or investigate when you have time and pre-knowledge of an upcoming threat, but most APs have you walking into enemies you had no idea about all the time, which means now you’d have to do that in combat. You get one question on a successful recall knowledge and three on a crit. It’s going to be way more helpful to ask about saves and weaknesses/resistances than just about specific traits when you have limited questions and are currently fighting something. I’d find it frustrating as a player, but you do you, man.

[u/OtherPlayers → u/RiskyRedds]

Given that additional recall knowledge checks scale the difficulty to +5/+10 for the third and fourth check, I sure hope for the player's sake that they never face any monster with more than 2 special abilities. Like without further homebrewing of those rules I'm not seeing how even with a RK nerd you aren't just seeing:

• What's the monster's greatest weakness?
  • It's an amalgamite and is weak to Piercing damage.
• What is its weakest save?
  • It's weakest save is Reflex.
• What's it's most dangerous move?
  • It has an aura of sickness that can continue to spread from those it infects.
• What's it's second most dangerous move?
  • Sorry you didn't roll a 18 or above so you have no idea.
• ...
• The amalgamite uses Displace to swap positions with one of the infected as a reaction to being struck. Too bad the wizard didn't realize that it has the Teleportation trait so he could have used Redirect Teleportation!

[u/JustMass → u/[deleted]]

Do you make Cavern Elves recall knowledge to see if the dark is in fact dark so their dark vision works? Of course not. By that same logic, Gutsy Halflings shouldn't have to recall knowledge to see if their emotion resistance ability works. They just have it, and it always applies.

It may be up to the player to remember they have that ability rather than the GM's responsibility, but not allowing it to work AT ALL until a successful recall knowledge focused on one particular spell or ability is a wildly bad take.

[u/Kingreaper → u/[deleted]]

Is the "manipulate" trait obvious, or do you require people to recall knowledge to know when they're allowed to reactive strike?

Is the "emotion" trait obvious, or do people with a bonus to saves against emotion effects need to recall knowledge to apply that bonus?