Just want to say that i love that you are back on the education! We missed you for sure!

These are fantastic, I have players who constantly want to know everything about a creature without understanding the basics of the rules when told or asking to roll blind. Showing them is much more powerful with you narrating it.

Love the remaster We have always home brewed it this way but I like it For those that use FVTT, the PF2E system has an integrated DC, Skill type and the built in table. It’s really one of my favorite features and I even use it on Hazards and intentionally build in additional situations that make use of whatever Lore skill the players have so they feel like it’s a great single action on say their third action of an encounter The only issue with what Dave called out and that is meta gaming. Players embrace the idea that your PC may do something smart or stupid bc of what it learns in a RK check. It adds to the fun

Banger title

One thing I don't think you addressed in this video was the part of Recall Knowledge (PC1 p231) that has the player suggest which skill they'd like to use. It's a bit vague on exactly how that affects the result of the roll, though. In the legacy version the GM determined which skills applied, which I think was a simpler approach.

I love all How It's Played videos!

appreciate this nitty-gritty study into the topic, since the game mechanics encourage its use, and for suggestions

I love how this mechanic works compared to 1e or D&D. It's frustrating to find a creature known to all players and not be able to apply the knowledge so as not to generate meta-roll. With all these improvements in 2e it's now easier to gain knowledge about a monster's strengths and weaknesses without "cheating". And it's even better playing a Thaumaturge!

Thank you for this video. I find this mechanic so awkward. It's like Paizo added the worst elements of puzzles into combat and then shrugged their shoulders and said "it's up to you, GM!" If you want a mechanic where players can figure out vulnerabilities and special abilities, then bake it into the stat bloc and be specific. Give the skill and what they learn if they beat various DCs. A fail gives them the lowest defense. They only learn nothing on a crit fail. Players should only get incorrect information from not taking this action (being lied to by NPCs, incorrect meta-game knowledge etc...).

This was a great video. Having moved from DnD 5e to PF2e just before the remaster it was hard to get used to recall knowledge checks. I think this really cleared up how it works in the remaster and I can't wait to put it to use.

Really glad they took another swing at recall knowledge for the remaster. This is pretty much how I've been house ruling it since the beginning. Minus the secret checks and misinformation. I only do that for feature that specifically require it, like the Dubious Knowledge feat.

Excellent explaination of what has been a controversial rule subject! Thank you!

Superb video as always! Thank you for continuing to educate us!

I would like to see every single spell and skill and feat all played out in full the official way that they are meant to be used. Now that would be useful to beginners or for reference in general.

This is great. Thanks.

a much needed video, thank you

Great video!

🎉Thanks!!!🎉

Usually I find myself giving more information than the answer to a single question whenever the player of a smart character decides to actually engage with the recall knowledge system and spends one of their actions on that instead of fun meaty combat stuff

I do have a question that I've been struggling to find an answer for. I know the question is long and will understand if nobody has the time to go through my thinking, but I would greatly appreciate any help. [TL;DR: The question: With the Recall Knowledge check being a secret check, who decides what skill is rolled?] I have seen problems with the different ways this is run. 1. The player asks a question + the GM chooses the appropriate skill + the GM rolls in secret using the appropriate skill: There's a higher likelihood of crit failure here because the player may not have asked for the check if they'd have known they weren't trained. As a consquence, often getting false information may leave a sour taste for players. The second problem here is that the GM may not know what lore skills a player has and may neglect to take that into account. 2. The player asks a question + the GM and player discuss what skill is appropriate + the player decides if they want to roll or not + the GM rolls in secret using the agreed upon skill: in this situation, the player is getting free information - specifically, what the likely creature type is. Not sure if a creature is a spirit or an undead? Well the GM just told me its Occultism... so it's a spirit. Let's abandon the check and have someone else roll who's trained in Occultism roll instead. The other problem here is that I see a situation where a player might frequently argue to change the skill to one they're trained in. "You say it's Occultism, but I mean spirits come from dead things too, right. So can I roll Religion?" , "I'm pretty sure my character was taught about Hags in the temple... so, Religion, right?" Now, the GM is put in the situation where they have to keep bending to this (thereby making the choice of skill pointless to begin with), or to keep saying 'no'. 3. The players asks a question + the player chooses the skill based on gut instinct + the GM rolls in secret using that skill: This puts the GM in an awkward position of how to judge the roll. The player completely mistakes the Hag for an undead and uses Religion. The GM rolls Religion and meets the DC. But did they? The roll was supposed to be Occultism or Society. So, given that they've used the wrong skill, but still rolled well, what do we give them? Do we increase the DC because it was the wrong skill? By how much? Would some skills be more incorrect than others (like maybe Arcana would be better than Religion for the hag because... errr... they cast spells), and how would that affect the DC? This just puts an unnecessary burden on the GM. Also, as with (2), the player is just going to always choose their strongest skill, regardless. If I roll Religion for the Hag with a +19, but get a -5 penalty because it's the wrong skill, isn't that still better than rolling the Society skill I should have rolled when I'm untrained in that skill and only have a +2. Why would I be incentivised to ever roll anything other than Religion and just take the penalty? So... What is the best way to do this? Is there a rule I've missed somewhere? As a GM, I run the game like (1) above. I tend to just add some caveat to crit fails like: 'You think it has resistance to electricity, but you're also not really sure about these types of creatures'. As a player, my GM runs Recall Knowledge checks like (3). But because the rolls are secret, I never really understand what his process is in determining his answers. For all I know, he could just be winging it and making it up based on how he feels (which is why I've not wanted to ask him in case it calls him out). I would love to know your thoughts on this (or anyone else's for that matter). Thanks

Now, in Remastered edition, if a character learns the Hymn of Healing Bard level 1 feat through the Bard archetype, does he gets a Focus Point too ou just the feat (even though he does not have a Focus Point to use it)?

How do you handle "lore" about a creature? When faced with a scary monster my players don't want to spend actions to hear "This creature is called X" or "it is know for lurking around X, and forms large societies that practice demonic summoning. It is a fiend and is mindless" etc. So they ask about its saves or combat abilities but then never get around to hearing the "cool lore". Sometimes they learn its saves, unique abilities, deduce its AC and attack mod, but never learn its name. I've been just throwing in some of that lore for free on a success but then there's the wrinkle of what to do if they fail/crit fail. Note that I included some traits in the lore too, I'm not sure about doing that. Maybe the best way is to make name + lore + traits + level one "category" of information that the player can ask about. I WANT to give that information so it's more like they're fighting something rather than fighting some statblock, just don't know when is the perfect time to give it.

Weird question: is there an AP, where the PCs fight in something like a war? Cause I had this idea, that it could be interesting to play a campaign as an all summoner Party, and styling it somewhat like the Fate series, where the PCs eidolons are basically spirits of heroes summoned there from Earth, Mars, or Golarion via the worldscape, with the PCs either being part of the seven Masters, or it's a battle between factions like in Fate/Apocrypha.

How do you rule or handle a failure for a PC with Dubious Knowledge? Since they are asking a specific question, giving an answer with two pieces of information makes it clear they failed so now I put the player in agony deciding which one to believe which I find very fun, but some times I wonder if am doing it right.

GM says "Keep you damn mouth shut!!!! " LOL🤣

Standard DCs by Level assume stat stays maxed & item bonuses. Are there items that assist Lore skills?