How Visible To players Should The Rules Be?

[pemerton]

This is basically the equivalent of you leaping up behind from your GM screen, and shouting "Spoilers!" Why not let the party figure out what the circle is first before you tell them what it is?

How are the players going to figure it out?

Either they ask the GM and the GM tells them (perhaps gating that telling behind something else, like making a certain roll on the dice).

Or they conjecture, and the GM confirms their conjecture.

More generally, @hawkeyefan is positing that what is interesting in play is not a relatively drawn out process of conjecture and confirmation that results in the GM telling the players that yes, indeed, it is a circle of protection. And rather is the players actually deciding what they want their PCs to do about the circle of protection (eg to use it; to lay a straw across it; to erase it; to determine its origin; etc).

 

[pemerton]

Because history. The game can't shift that much, and I don't believe even Gygax ever said that players should be given all the numbers, or even any numbers from the DM side of the screen.

I can't comment directly on Gygax's view about whether or not players should read the Monster Manual. Moldvay Basic does tell players to read the monster chapter.

What is clear is that Gygax's approach to D&D was a wargame approach, in which some information (from the fiction) that is obvious to the characters (eg how is this mercenary equipped?) is numerically represented in ways that the players are expected to be familiar with - eg a sword does d8 damage, a hauberk is AC 5, etc. Whereas some other information is hidden, and part of the point of play is to try and learn it.

There is no principle in Gygax's work that I am familiar with which states that it is important that the GM not tell the players any stats, because this is not the players' role.

 

[Maxperson]

No one in this thread has asserted that any numbers (however attenuated) convey more information and options than any and all description.

There was a least 1 claim that numbers(AC, HP, etc.) were greater than description.

@hawkeyefan has asserted that numerical stats for a creature/NPC (in a D&D-esque RPG) conveys more information than descriptions of the attributes that those stats model/express - eg that AC 15 conveys more information than tough hide.

It doesn't even do that. AC 15 can come from tough hide, pure dex, magic, dex and magic, dex and hide, dex and hide AND magic, special abilities, and more. Description narrows that down by providing more information than just the number.

 

[Maxperson]

I can't comment directly on Gygax's view about whether or not players should read the Monster Manual. Moldvay Basic does tell players to read the monster chapter.

From the 1e MM.

"One final note: as valuable as this volume is with its wealth of information, some DMs may wisely wish to forbid their players from referring to the MANUAL in the midst of an encounter, since it will be considerably more challenging to confront a monster without an instant rundown of its strengths and weaknesses - and besides, a D & D player’s true mettle (and knowledge) will be put to the test. And as even the most casual D & D player knows, that’s what this fascinating game is all about. . ."

He said players should not have the numbers in front of them during the encounter. That's what the game is about.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Hm, the other irritating thing is that since they know how their character class will level up, they build out their characters for the foreseeable future. If they didn't know what their character would get at the next level before it came, then they wouldn't be so focused on the "build" and focus more on how their character is developing during the game.

I should note this is usually an artifact of games with levels (so there's big chunky things forthcoming) and abilities with prerequisites (so you have to plan for them). I know any number of skill or point based game systems where to the degree this exists, its much, much milder.

 

[Thomas Shey]

No one in this thread has asserted that any numbers (however attenuated) convey more information and options than any and all description.

@hawkeyefan has asserted that numerical stats for a creature/NPC (in a D&D-esque RPG) conveys more information than descriptions of the attributes that those stats model/express - eg that AC 15 conveys more information than tough hide.

You can make an argument that I'm cynical that virtually any GM gives enough description to convey more meaningful information than the associated numbers do; in part because (as others have mentioned) what the description actually means should often be more visible to the characters than the players.

 

[pemerton]

There was a least 1 claim that numbers(AC, HP, etc.) were greater than description.

Please provide the quote. At this stage, I am extremely confident that what you will see is that the person said that an AC number provides more information, to the players, than does a description of the toughness of the armour/hide etc.

It doesn't even do that. AC 15 can come from tough hide, pure dex, magic, dex and magic, dex and hide, dex and hide AND magic, special abilities, and more. Description narrows that down by providing more information than just the number.

Huh? In what way does the description tough hide provide more information about the prospects of success in combat than AC 15?

 

[pemerton]

From the 1e MM.

"One final note: as valuable as this volume is with its wealth of information, some DMs may wisely wish to forbid their players from referring to the MANUAL in the midst of an encounter, since it will be considerably more challenging to confront a monster without an instant rundown of its strengths and weaknesses - and besides, a D & D player’s true mettle (and knowledge) will be put to the test. And as even the most casual D & D player knows, that’s what this fascinating game is all about. . ."

He said players should not have the numbers in front of them during the encounter. That's what the game is about.

The very fact that we are told players shouldn't read it during an encounter strongly implies that they may read it outside of an encounter. And then, during an encounter, rely upon their memory - this is how their knowledge is put to the test!

 

[Campbell]

From the 1e MM.

"One final note: as valuable as this volume is with its wealth of information, some DMs may wisely wish to forbid their players from referring to the MANUAL in the midst of an encounter, since it will be considerably more challenging to confront a monster without an instant rundown of its strengths and weaknesses - and besides, a D & D player’s true mettle (and knowledge) will be put to the test. And as even the most casual D & D player knows, that’s what this fascinating game is all about. . ."

He said players should not have the numbers in front of them during the encounter. That's what the game is about.

Who is arguing for players to see the entire stat block or look up a monster in the monster manual? This is a little different from a preference for sharing DC numbers, a feature which is quite common in other games (whereas stat block sharing is not). Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition for instance requires the GM to give player characters a Void point if they are keeping the roll's difficulty a secret and Chronicles of Darkness uses dice penalties which a player must be aware of because they are literally rolling less dice.

 

[pemerton]

Who is arguing for players to see the entire stat block or look up a monster in the monster manual? This is a little different from a preference for sharing DC numbers.

Well, I am making the point that part of the wargaming aspect of early D&D is that it was expected that players might be familiar with the stats of enemy "units" (by dint of having read the MM) - but they were expected to bring that knowledge with them, as part of their skilled play.

The idea that the whole resolution side of the game should be opaque to players is a post-wargame thing, where the game keeps the trappings of wargame resolution but turns it into a series of devices for the GM to use to maintain control over the shape and trajectory of play.