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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
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="iserith" data-source="post: 7583067" data-attributes="member: 97077"><p>Are you referring to D&D 5e? If you are, none of that is true. At all. A player can say what the character thinks, which (to build on your example) might include what he or she thinks about the weaknesses of fiends. He or she can then have the character act accordingly. </p><p></p><p>Here's the problem though: <strong>The player, and thus the character, might be wrong</strong>. The player might have gotten the weaknesses of demons mixed up with devils (oops!). Or the DM might have changed the stat block or added environmental complications that make exploiting the weaknesses risky. So the smart play is to try to recall what the character knows about fiends or deduce its weaknesses from available clues first to verify these assumptions before taking action. Or use a spell or class ability to do the same. Otherwise the player risks being wrong and all that may entail in context.</p><p></p><p>These skill proficiencies, spells, and class abilities are there for that reason, not to justify your playstyle. What's more, if you just stop adding your justification/DM blessing requirements to the game and change the odd stat block from time to time, you will achieve the same goal of reducing "metagaming" by just playing the game instead of relying on the social contract to change behavior. You'll even get rid of the "metagaming" you end up creating by the whole process of the DM and player establishing sufficient knowledge to take action.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, there can be reasons. But they needn't be elucidated. The player need only describe a goal and approach to act. My ranger doesn't have to tell you why he's using his silvered dagger to kill this devil right here. He just does it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7583067, member: 97077"] Are you referring to D&D 5e? If you are, none of that is true. At all. A player can say what the character thinks, which (to build on your example) might include what he or she thinks about the weaknesses of fiends. He or she can then have the character act accordingly. Here's the problem though: [B]The player, and thus the character, might be wrong[/B]. The player might have gotten the weaknesses of demons mixed up with devils (oops!). Or the DM might have changed the stat block or added environmental complications that make exploiting the weaknesses risky. So the smart play is to try to recall what the character knows about fiends or deduce its weaknesses from available clues first to verify these assumptions before taking action. Or use a spell or class ability to do the same. Otherwise the player risks being wrong and all that may entail in context. These skill proficiencies, spells, and class abilities are there for that reason, not to justify your playstyle. What's more, if you just stop adding your justification/DM blessing requirements to the game and change the odd stat block from time to time, you will achieve the same goal of reducing "metagaming" by just playing the game instead of relying on the social contract to change behavior. You'll even get rid of the "metagaming" you end up creating by the whole process of the DM and player establishing sufficient knowledge to take action. Sure, there can be reasons. But they needn't be elucidated. The player need only describe a goal and approach to act. My ranger doesn't have to tell you why he's using his silvered dagger to kill this devil right here. He just does it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top