D&D 5E Reliable Talent. What the what?

[5ekyu]

This is true.

As no doubt Pythagorus would have agreed with 2500 yrs ago when evrryone else around him thought the earth was flat and his work showed it was a sphere.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[SkidAce]

As no doubt Pythagorus would have agreed with 2500 yrs ago when evrryone else around him thought the earth was flat and his work showed it was a sphere.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

I believe he would have agreed. After all, the post I quoted didnt say accept the wisdom of the masses, it said "consider" the fact you "may" be wrong if everyone else around disagrees.

He probably considered it, and in this case had enough wisdom and evidence to stand his ground.

I would do the same should everyone I know disagree with me, nothing wrong with a little introspection and a couple of times ( I have discovered myself to be misguided.

 

[Hussar]

As no doubt Pythagorus would have agreed with 2500 yrs ago when evrryone else around him thought the earth was flat and his work showed it was a sphere.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

Well, if you can mathematically prove that metagaming is somehow bad for roleplaying, then fair enough. Otherwise...

 

[Sadras]

Meta-gaming is definitionally not role-playing, and role-playing is the method by which a role-playing game is played.

and

The DM is responsible for role-playing all NPCs in the game. That includes the NPC who designed any given trap, and decided where to place it; even if that character died a thousand years before the campaign began. If the DM is using their out-of-game knowledge of who the PCs are (or their absolute bonus with thieves' tools), to make decisions for this NPC who never met the party, then that's meta-gaming. Likewise, if there are eight kobolds in the next room instead of four, if their decision to congregate was based on information they could not have, then that is meta-gaming.

Do you design adventures or any encounters based on the level of the PCs? I imagine you do and this is natural for DMs.

Even those that create the game for us design adventures & encounters based on level which means that meta-gaming is very much part of our hobby. If the designers of our hobby incorporate meta-gaming (and this is meta-gaming), then how can we arrive at the conclusion that meta-gaming is not roleplaying?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

and

Do you design adventures or any encounters based on the level of the PCs? I imagine you do and this is natural for DMs.

Even those that create the game for us design adventures & encounters based on level which means that meta-gaming is very much part of our hobby. If the designers of our hobby incorporate meta-gaming (and this is meta-gaming), then how can we arrive at the conclusion that meta-gaming is not roleplaying?

Quite simply, actually.

In my megadungeon /wilderness sandbox, I planned the basic level of all the adventure sites and levels of the megadungeon before the players entered play (I didn't flesh them out, but I did assign them a level range). After that, it's the players' decision to decide if their 1st level character can take on the ancient red dragon or if they should find a more level-appropriate adventure.

In fact one groups of 2nd level character did venture into the red dragon's den. They rolled well (as per the tables in OD&D Monster's and Treasure) and the dragon was fast asleep when they arrived. They rolled well on their Stealth chekcs, didn't wake the dragon, and snuck out with enough treasure for them to reach 3rd level after a single session. The next session they went back and were burned to death by dragonfire.

Meanwhile, the second group was busy killing rats and looking for the local constable's body in the Old Sewers, reaching 2nd level after four sessions of play, while their rival adventuring party, who find themselves burned to death, has to start again from 1st level.

Risk and reward, folk. Risk and reward.

 

[Sadras]

After that, it's the players' decision to decide if their 1st level character can take on the ancient red dragon or if they should find a more level-appropriate adventure.

So you don't classify that as meta-gaming?
Does the fighter PC mention the 'level-appropriateness of the adventurer' in or out of character?

 

[KahlessNestor]

So you don't classify that as meta-gaming?
Does the fighter PC mention the 'level-appropriateness of the adventurer' in or out of character?

Sounds like Order of the Stick! LOL

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

So you don't classify that as meta-gaming?
Does the fighter PC mention the 'level-appropriateness of the adventurer' in or out of character?

No. A 1st years engineering major doesn't apply for a senior developer position at Google and expect to get the job. Real life people know not to take on tasks they can't handle. Just like day 1 adventurers don't take on ancient red dragons.

What I don't do is tell my players, "Wait! Don't go there; that's a 16th level adventure." But if the lunatic cobblers go off hunting dragons, I'm not going stop them...or go easy on them.

 

[Sadras]

What I don't do is tell my players, "Wait! Don't go there; that's a 16th level adventure." But if the lunatic cobblers go off hunting dragons, I'm not going stop them...or go easy on them.

Same, but I'm under no illusion that the D&D hobby is prepped by ONLY DM's who pre-plan EVERYTHING in their world like you do for your sandbox megadungeon/wilderness sandbox. Sometimes PCs create their own challenges and DM's are forced to create encounters based on guidelines, certainly published adventurers are prepared on a level-progressive storyline approach.
And this then highlights that meta-gaming is very much part of the hobby. To categorically state that meta-gaming is abhorrent in role-playing is but a bold-face lie or the person making such claim is under some self-delusion (a failed save by 5 or more).

'lunatic cobblers' I like.

 

[5ekyu]

Well, if you can mathematically prove that metagaming is somehow bad for roleplaying, then fair enough. Otherwise...

Otherwise, what?

Lack of proof of A (mathematical or otherwise) is not proof of anything else and certainly not proof of !A.

My arguments against the position, rather exclusive ones, are already here in this thread.

But just because i may disagree with one position that doesnt mean i have to throw in with others arguments also against it that i might find equally wrong, just differently so.

But the pythagorus reference was both a push back against the sense of wisdom of the mob that could be read into it AND also a more personal realization that any discussion on forums is not even remotely "everyone" in the subject as forums goers are a small and non-representative sample of the whole of the participants in any subject (it has seemed.)

To me, emphasis on how many disagree is rather meaningless in this context and dangerous road to travel and when so many other ways to chalkenge are so obvious a generally wrong way to go about it.

Ymmv.



Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app