My group has twice come across a situation where they’ve tried to recognize someone. I’ve used circles both times, but I feel like that might not be its intended use, but the only other thing I could think is an appropriate wise skill. Both of these seem correct, so I wanted to know what the consensus here is.
Is this an NPC that has been introduced previously? In most cases I would simply say yes to them recognizing the person, the players can’t actually see this NPC to recognize them themselves, and have to rely on the GM as their eyes and ears to notice the traits they would use to ID the person.
If this is a new NPC that the players want to establish knowing from their past, then in that case circles would be most appropriate.
A few notable exceptions would be:
Is the other person trying to not be recognized? Disguise vs Observation.
If it has been a while since the characters have seen each other in person and/or the NPC has a new scar/tattoo/other major change in appearance, AND mistaken identity would be an interesting complication to the story. I’d say Perception.
They were new npcs:
One was a rival supplier the merchant character was spying on. He was not established to be known, so we made a circles test.
The other one was one character who had been a servant to an elf tried recognizing if he knew the half-elven character’s mother. We didn’t know if the character would know the mother or not so we did circles.
I was thinking for the first one instead of using supplier wise as a linked test to use it as the main test and was contemplating making the servant use elven nobility wise because instead of trying to make contacts they were trying to recognize someone, but the line “Circles is an ability and mechanic that allows players to abstract the process of discovering who their characters know in the game world.” convinced me to use circles, but I just wanted confirm with other forum members, and hopefully Burning Wheel HQ staff.
Was there something interesting at stake? It sounds a bit like the kind of think where I’d simply say yes. “Of course you recognize her, it’s the mother of your old master!”
It seemed like a Say Yes, but maybe we’re missing why the PCs needed to recognize them? Only the “why” can really let us help decide if it was test-worthy. What was the intent of the PCs when they asked if they did recognize them?
The intent of the merchant character was to find out who his competition was so he could act against them. This one I do think needed a roll of some sort.
The intent of the servant was to know if he ever saw the other character’s mother because the character’s belief was to find his mother. This one I do feel was more of a just say yes.
The first one doesn’t seem to be about recognizing someone, but finding someone. Circles could apply if the player was trying to find someone who would know this information and be disposed to help. Of course, the player might find a different approach which would lead to a different test.
The servant sounds like a just say yes moment, especially if it would be likely that the servant would have seen her, or you could have him roll to open up “Other-Character’s-Family-Wise.” 
As for the first one, I don’t think I gave enough context. The player had gotten up early in the morning to catch the supplier’s face. He sneaked up to the shop when he said he knew the goods would be delivered and when he saw the man he made a supplier wise to reduce the number of potential suppliers down to 3, he succeeded, giving him +1 his circles test he called for upon seeing this man. That’s how it played. If I had known his intent from the beginning of the scene I would have called for a supplier wise to get to the scene which would then link into a circles test. Does that all seem reasonable. I think the circles roll failing could mean interesting things, like he’s ran into the supplier before and had beat him to another deal before too.
I agree completely on the second one. The most interesting option would have been to say yes.
So, many tests!
Actually, I’m a little confused about the reducing the number of potential suppliers down to 3 part. He sees the man’s face. It sounds like a Supplier-wise to know who he is. A circles test to say he’s in his circle of acquaintances.
I would have asked for a Wholesale-wise or Supplier-Wise to know when the shipment would be delivered. Sneaking up on the shop would have likely been an Inconspicuous or Stealthy, depending upon how he did it. If he sees the supplier, then I would just invoke Let it Ride from the first test to determine if he knows the suppliers here well enough to know who this guy is. Circles if he wants to know him personally or know someone who knows him.
Yeah, I’m not completely happy with how I handled that either. That was every one of my group’s second session of this game, so we’re still wrapping our head around the rules. I just have trouble with good linked tests and failiure results. Still used to Pathfinder and D&D. I think I might retcon the info he got from the tests, seeing as he hasn’t acted on any of it yet.
I would have asked for a Wholesale-wise or Supplier-Wise to know when the shipment would be delivered. Sneaking up on the shop would have likely been an Inconspicuous or Stealthy, depending upon how he did it. If he sees the supplier, then I would just invoke Let it Ride from the first test to determine if he knows the suppliers here well enough to know who this guy is. Circles if he wants to know him personally or know someone who knows him.
I forgot. They did successfully us inconspicuous not to get caught. Thanks for the advice. It gives me some things to think about when assigning skill rolls. The sentence about Circles is also helpful for knowing when to use it.