When is metagaming too much as a DM?

[Lord Pendragon]

Yes, I'd consider it too metagamey for the Balor to target the wizard because he has fewer hit points. "Hit Points" is a metagame term, and Balors don't think that way.

Instead, I recommend you decide the Balor's actions based on in-game logic. In 3.x, at 17th-level it's generally a good idea to neutralize the spellcasters first. So stunning the wizard is exactly what a Balor would do.

Not because he has fewer hit points so the Balor knows it's more likely to connect. Because stunning the wizard is one of the best tactical options available to it.

Try not to ever base your monsters' decisions on metagame mechanics. Base them on what the critter can see/hear, and what it knows. With a superhumanly intelligent and knowledgable creature like a Balor, that gives you plenty of leeway without crossing the line.

Edit to add: Just be sure to not be swayed if next time the wizard puts up some kind of defense versus stunning. From the (next) Balor's point of view, stunning the wizard is likely to still be the best option, at least until after he's tried it once and failed.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

How about the standard of "guy carrying wands, wearing no armor, and wielding a staff?"

If anyone fit that bill, that is exactly who a Balor would stun.


I agree, though that if the wizard is wearing leather armor and carrying a sword (or even appears to look this way) that it should not be automatic.

And that is good roleplaying...the monster doesn't know the wizard is a wizard because all the clues aren't there. The DM knows who the wiz is, but the monster doesn't.




Here's another question: what if a creature hits the whole party with an area of effect spell that does the same damage to everyone (something like acid fog or somesuch that has no save and all damage is the same).

Can the monster determine who was most injured by that? E.G. for 4e, if everyone (from fresh) gets hit with the same effect that bloodies 2 members of the party, but doesn't bloody the other 3, is it obvious to the monster who has the least hp?

I don't know that I know the answer to this, but it is a DM metagame question.

More broadly asked: "Can a (very smart and perceptive) monster ever tell how injurious its attacks are relative to its foe's total health?"

 

[Obryn]

Try not to ever base your monsters' decisions on metagame mechanics. Base them on what the critter can see/hear, and what it knows. With a superhumanly intelligent and knowledgable creature like a Balor, that gives you plenty of leeway without crossing the line.

As far as I'm concerned, if my players can make decisions based on metagame mechanics, so can I.... And you'd better believe a Wizard player would resist casting that same spell on a Balor because he'd know it has too many HPs. That's just smart tactical play, in my mind.

I think DMs and players have to assume a certain level of transparency about game mechanics to the game's imaginary denizens. A Balor has no doubt cast that spell many, many times. He certainly knows that it doesn't work so hot on raging barbarians, but works pretty nicely on cloth-robed wizards. The question of whether or not "hit points" are known to characters and monsters is beside point; the point is that he'd know what the spell works on, and what it doesn't work on.

-O

 

[Bumbles]

Make a note--next group I'm in, try casting an illusion on all the PC's so they look alike!

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Ha! Great idea Bumbles!

Round 1 is pure confusion for the opposition...then drop a fog cloud or darkness and change positions....oh the horror!

Might have to do that as a DM too.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

The problem is another metagame issue. Namely, everyone is at the table to have fun, and its the DMs job to try to keep the game enjoyable. The player of the wizard may very well feel that his or her character is being picked on, and by extension, that he or she is being picked on personally. I would assume that if the wizard was specifically targeted, and his or her character gets killed as a result of the encounter, the player might have bitter memories of how unfair the DM was.

To some people (myself and my players included), the threat of death makes the game challenging and - geuss what? - fun. In regards to feeling "picked on" - if a player has that attitude it is either because they are oversensitive or the DM doesn't have their trust. I don't want oversensitive players at my table, whether I'm the DM or not, it is too divergent from my play style. My players do trust me to be fair. They have all had great successes with their PCs and have experienced PC death. Even in the dreaded "DM's Girlfriend" situation (although replace gf with wife) my players know that she gains no special treatment. Her characters live and die equally with everyone else.

[sblock][At an ENWorld Gameday where I was running a high-level Bo9S one-shot one player took a brutal beating, dying in the first round. Everyone was laughing about it and enjoying themselves (even the guy who's PC just died). They called over to my wife who was at another nearby table and asked her to tell me to 'be nice' to them. She informed them that I wasn't afraid to kill off her PCs just as fast, one of her characters didn't survive the first round of its first combat.][/sblock]

As for the Balor's intelligence, I think of it as being tempered by it's arrogance. ALL humans just look like soft and squishy mortals to it. It might no more distinguish between humans than we distinguish between ants. The differences that we treasure, that we think show our individuality, might be simply imperceptible to an alien intelligence used to ordering its mental world differently.

That would be a great personality for an individual NPC Balor in your campaign. And if said Balor were in a combat in my game he would react differently than I would play the "average" balor.

The problem with not meta-gaming with a spell like Power Word: Stun is that the spell has built-in meta-gaming aspects. You should know the capabilities of the spells you cast. That spell's capability is based off hit points. I'm not saying the NPC would know any PC's hit point total when making his choice, but he should be able to work off in-game clues that would make someone look like they have less hit points. Whether it's low Con, already injured, or looking and acting like a bookworm spellcaster.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

Just curious - as a DM, were there ever situations where you felt that having full and perfect knowledge of everything in the game was more of a burden/hindrance than a boon?

....

But personally, I felt that I would have been better off not knowing the players' hit points at that instance. Then regardless of how well or poorly power word: stun fared, I can't be guilty of metagaming. I don't have to bother rationalizing my choice to the players or to myself, and the game would just go on.

Your thoughts?

As a DM, there is a fine line you have to tread with respect to combat. On the one hand, you want combat to be engaging, and challenging enough so that any combat you run should be one that is worth running. Outside of specific roleplay situations, you wont break out the dice and do initiative for a single standard orc vs a 10th level adventuring party. You do not want fights to be so easy that they wont tax the player resources at all.

On the other hand, you do not want to fall into the trap of over optimizing the combats to negate your players strong points. Doing this is simply unfair.

I deal with this in two ways. On one level I do tend to pick monsters that I think will create an interesting fight. This inevitably leads to me considering what my players have and what I want to get out of the fight. This does lead to me picking monsters that are better able to give the players a challenge.

But when running combat, I make an effort to have the creature only use tactics that are reasonable for its in game knowledge. This means I won't have an archer ready an action to nail a spell caster if that archer does not know a given character is a spell caster.

When I want to use the most optimized tactics, I take steps to justify it. In Red Hand of Doom, I had hobgoblins retreat for combat and had the survivors report the combat tactics and abilities of the players. When someone later tried after the players, they knew exactly who was dangerous and tried to deal with them accordingly.

For your balor example, I do not think it is unreasonable for the Balor (or any spell caster) to target a character it suspects will be most vulnerable to a given spell or attack, as long as your a few rounds in and the Balor knows the spell caster is a caster.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Lidgar]

An item to keep in mind for intelligent outsiders with spell-like abilities - especially one as powerful as a Balor - these are innate abilities that they likely have been using on a variety of foes for a long time. So, it is not necessarily just about their high intelligence, they should have the past experience to rely on when making decisions on who/what to target, and therefore getting the most out of their abilities and who/what would be most affected by them (based on quick visual observations in combat - they won't necessarily be perfect decisions!).

As many others have posted, role-playing the creature, including his/its background, provide for more in-game fun. For example, every Balor had different experiences before they encountered the party, and each Balor will react to (or initiate) hostile actions in at least slightly different ways. It may be fun at times playing a Balor that distrusts some of his SLA's because they failed him before or he is a bit mad and just likes the fisty-cuff. Conversely, another Balor may have a real disdain for close combat and likes to "toy" with his prey primarily using SLA.

Lastly, DM knowledge is almost never perfect. It may be near perfect in terms of the setting/existing conditions, but players have a great way of distorting those conditions in unexpected ways.

 

[Allenchan]

I consider this not metagaming, in the way that acid/fire on a troll is not metagaming, its something people in that world just know from experience / common knowledge. If necessary, a VERY low knowledge check should make it aware that adventurers who are somehow alive and well outside their native plane and are dressed in robes and have a belt full of small bags and a small critter on their shoulder are probably magic users, who tend to be physically frail but with strong minds. CRUSH THEM!

 

[Slife]

Wait, you guys know how many HP the player characters have? I'm hard-pressed to keep track of their opponents', much less theirs. If I need to know, I ask for a status check (general level, like: on my last legs, or a little scratched up).

Basically, unless the players make an attempt on disguising who's who, the monsters have a general sense that the guy in robes with a spell component pouch is probably a wizard or sorcerer, the guy with a holy symbol and no horse is a cleric, they guy with mistletoe and holly/the giant spider with a pet bear is a druid, et cetera.