sallygreen
Villager
Playing with adults is ok)
There's an important consideration here, at least for the characters who aren't complete idiots: trolls that are capable of speech are probably smart enough to know that fire-prevention is a good idea.The troll who got hit turns to his buddy, nods, smiles, or says something. Troll two does something that seems like approval.
Are you defending metagaming?This allows players to use their normal tactics and discover mysteries about the world/universe, and maybe even the monsters, while not nullifying their player knowledge.
That's not assuming that adventurers are complete idiots. That's assuming that adventurers don't exist. Because, really, what's the life expectancy of someone who intentionally goes into lairs with the intent to kill magical creatures, steal someone's treasure, or both?And quite frankly, I really wish DMs would stop assuming adventurers are complete idiots. Insane? Goofballs? Murderhobos? But you go out adventuring, money's on you've heard a story once or twice about trolls not liking fire, or maybe you have a druid or a ranger or a class with a skill in the subject who can figure it out on the fly. . .
Players metagame because they know and the DM is expecting them to pretend their characters are idiots. If you don't want your players to know something, throw something new at them! Even a little twist on an old idea can be enough to throw people off. Just don't expect players to throw away their resources on pretending to be stupid. Heck, dragons even come color-coded! No metagaming needed!
Who says what a character knows? So long as the play involves the PC, I don't care if they heard it at the tavern or from old Uncle Bob. If the game depends on players pretending they don't know, I consider that a GM failure, not a player one.There's an important consideration here, at least for the characters who aren't complete idiots: trolls that are capable of speech are probably smart enough to know that fire-prevention is a good idea.
Are you defending metagaming?
That's not assuming that adventurers are complete idiots. That's assuming that adventurers don't exist. Because, really, what's the life expectancy of someone who intentionally goes into lairs with the intent to kill magical creatures, steal someone's treasure, or both?
From a different perspective, it is a "role-playing game." Using player knowledge is the breakdown of role-playing. Maybe the DM was assuming role-players would role-play? But yes, if you're any type of D&D druid or ranger who wasn't raised by wolves, you probably know that some trolls have a bit of a fire-aversion. Oddly, so do animals and humans. Tieflings, not so much...
Who says what a character knows? So long as the play involves the PC, I don't care if they heard it at the tavern or from old Uncle Bob. If the game depends on players pretending they don't know, I consider that a GM failure, not a player one.
I'm going to ignore the whole metagaming conversation, because I've been in others before, and I know how they go . . . I'm metaforuming, you could say.I realize that it is often difficult to pretend your character doesn't know what you as a player know. Even the D&D beat-em up video games lampshade this.
OK, let's assume that everyone in the game world does know that you have to use fire to prevent trolls from regenerating. Fine, but what if the trolls found something to combat this with? For my example, I'm going to use HARP and assume a science fantasy universe.
The party finds a couple trolls who attack then. Predictably, one of the characters uses a fire spell, throws flaming oil, whatever and it hits one of the trolls. Instead of immediately resulting in permanent damage, the troll's skin steams for a little bit, and leaves only a 1st degree burn. The troll who got hit turns to his buddy, nods, smiles, or says something. Troll two does something that seems like approval.
Eventually, each of the trolls runs out of whatever is preventing fire from preventing regeneration, and the party defeats them. In the lair they find empty cans. Assuming they can read the language on the cans, they find out that the cans are Ablative Enhancement sprays.
How did the trolls come by this product? Where did it come from? Where can I get some? How many layers of this stuff did each troll have?
This allows players to use their normal tactics and discover mysteries about the world/universe, and maybe even the monsters, while not nullifying their player knowledge.
I just want to say that I love the idea of trolls using fire repellent. For my own use, I think it's going to be fire repellent deodorant with a distinctive scent . . . and I'm sure I'll have the can reference Axe Body Spray.
There's this large swath of territory between, "this has no impact" and "the game depends on". Maybe we can consider what happens in that in-between, rather than driving to extreme strawmen used to assign "failure" to a GM, hey what?
Hands up how many people here know about, say, vampires and crosses, werewolves and silver, and, say faeries and iron from sources outside gaming? I bet it's a lot of hands. And those monsters aren't even real. People tell stories about monsters and lots of people know 'stuff' about their habits, appearance, diet, and vulnerabilities. Adventurers can very reasonably be expected to know 'stuff+' regardless of stats, skills, class or anything else.
The player, until she makes the game less fun for other players.Who says what a character knows?
So long as the play involves the PC, I don't care if they heard it at the tavern or from old Uncle Bob. If the game depends on players pretending they don't know, I consider that a GM failure, not a player one.
The point was that I didn't refer to player failure, and I didn't say that the game depends on players pretending that they don't know.Then, by all means, explore it. It's fine to drop by and say that there's a lot of territory, but that's a bit easy. Are you advocating for an encounter where, say, half the players pretending they know you use fire against trolls and the other half doesn't, and this makes the pretending have impact between 'no' and 'I, as GM, built my encounter based on players pretending they don't know about trolls and fire?'