D&D 5E player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)

[Guest 6801328]

I have a feeling this was more pertinent advice when the concept of a roleplaying game was more novel.

Yeah. Maybe I was doing it wrong back in the early 80's, but we didn't roleplay at all back then. I mean, other than trying to not use player knowledge. But personality, backstory, motivation, etc. etc. etc.? No way. Kick open the door, kill the monster, take its stuff.

 

[auburn2]

The DM didn't adjudicate any action by the player or character. The player just blurted out that the NPC is a lich to all other players. The DM had no input into the conclusion. Without knowing more about the character's background, it's hard to say whether or not the character would no anything about the NPC. If they are not from the Sword Coast or Thay, it is unlikely. And I'm not sure Valindra is well known as being a lich, especially outside of those regions. Even if you can make a reasonable explanation for why the character might know about Valindra, it still kinda takes the fun out of the game to spoil that surprise for everyone.
Yes, players do get to decide what their characters think, but there is an expectation of separation between character and player knowledge about some things. If players are constantly using what they know about the game to make choices for their character when they character would have no reasonable source for that knowledge, I'm going to stop playing with them.

I get that. I would argue I do have a reasonable source for the knowlege though. I am from the sword coast (Neverwinter specifically). Also I am a Ranger with undead as a FE. So eventually when Primeval Awareness always indicates undead within 1 mile .....

We know she is undead because the cleric cast detect evil and good, probably influenced by what I said, but none the less.

Also my reaction at the table was spontaneous, not reasoned. If I thought it through I would have privately told the DM what I said in the first paragraph above. At the time we were exploring the heart and she was just a monster we came across and I figured she was getting ready to attack us. I did not know there was a bigger plot line at play. I admit I should have realized niether the DM nor the published module would have had a lich attacking a party of level 4/5 characters.

 

[iserith]

I get that I would argue I do have a reasonable source for the knowlege though. I am from the sword coast (Neverwinter specifically). Also I am a Ranger with undead as a FE. So eventually when Primeval Awareness always indicates undead within 1 mile .....

We know she is undead because the cleric cast detect evil and good, probably influenced by what I said, but none the less.

A player had a character make an assumption about an NPC. The players had their characters take steps to verify their assumptions. Now they know with certainty and can decide what to do about it.

That is the game working as intended in my view.

 

[Cadence]

So...wait...are you saying that the player should have to keep notes of their thought processes, and if you think they might be metagaming they should have to produce the notes that led to the action declaration?

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. That seems awful!

Although I'm not sure asking "why would you think that?" to someone who thought she was a Lich would require them referring to notes though.

I may have implied that some people have been typing like it's impossible to guess that someone probably didn't actually use knowledge their characters couldn't have.

--The party realizes there is no way they can crack the safe in the gaps between the guards checking in, but they have several good ideas about the logic behind the numbers used and who needs to be muscled to get the details. "Wait" says the player in the comfy chair with the coke. "Let's try 4-21-26." DM's face falls and it unlocks. "What do you mean, how did I know what page of the book the map was on, how old the queen was, and how many gold pieces were in the sack?!? .... Uhm, I just like Queen Elizabeth and that's her birthday." --

But seriously. I'm fine with the best way to deal with the knowledge use being to maybe change the combination from what you'd written down, or move on to the next part of the adventure if finding it out wasn't a big deal. Maybe it would be better if no one ever had to expect the inquisition.

 

[Charlaquin]

A player had a character make an assumption about an NPC. The players had their characters take steps to verify their assumptions. Now they know with certainty and can decide what to do about it.

That is the game working as intended in my view.

Not just a player, but @auburn2 themself.

 

[Cadence]

I gotta give a gold star for having gone through and found all those passages.

It was either that or do the dishes.

Edit: <expletive>. The dishes are still there :-(

 

[Cadence]

Yeah. Maybe I was doing it wrong back in the early 80's, but we didn't roleplay at all back then. I mean, other than trying to not use player knowledge. But personality, backstory, motivation, etc. etc. etc.? No way. Kick open the door, kill the monster, take its stuff.

In the shared world we DM'd we made entire families for our characters and cities for them to live in. Although now it feels a bit odd to think about making up a wife and kid for my character while I was in 8th grade.

In the one with lots of players, we didn't get a lot of down time, but my gourmet cleric made sure to buy some good snacks while shopping for lots of supplies to cook later on in the dungeon crawl.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that. That seems awful!

Although I'm not sure asking "why would you think that?" to someone who thought she was a Lich would require them referring to notes though.

I may have implied that some people have been typing like it's impossible to guess that someone probably didn't actually use knowledge their characters couldn't have.

--The party realizes there is no way they can crack the safe in the gaps between the guards checking in, but they have several good ideas about the logic behind the numbers used and who needs to be muscled to get the details. "Wait" says the player in the comfy chair with the coke. "Let's try 4-21-26." DM's face falls and it unlocks. "What do you mean, how did I know what page of the book the map was on, how old the queen was, and how many gold pieces were in the sack?!? .... Uhm, I just like Queen Elizabeth and that's her birthday." --

But seriously. I'm fine with the best way to deal with the knowledge use being to maybe change the combination from what you'd written down, or move on to the next part of the adventure if finding it out wasn't a big deal. Maybe it would be better if no one ever had to expect the inquisition.

I know it’s just an example, but my god does guessing random numbers to try to figure out the code to a safe sound like a boring way to spend a D&D session

 

[Cadence]

I know it’s just an example, but my god does guessing random numbers to try to figure out the code to a safe sound like a boring way to spend a D&D session

It certainly started off sounding that way when I was typing it. I was careful to give a reason not to try that, clues to explore, and hope for some confrontation. I'd like to hope the way they got the clues was more exciting than watching paint dry -- but really do need to go do the dishes.

 

[R_J_K75]

I get what you are saying, but she took no pains to disguise her identity. She does cloak herself in illusions to look like a living elf (as Shadowmantle is know to do), but Vilandra Shadowmantle is famous (or infamous). She is probably the 3rd most famous lich in all of Ferun. I think my character would know who that was, especially since she grew up on the sword coast and is proficient in history and arcana. If someone came up to you and introduced herself as Nanci Pelosi I think you would immediately think - wow a Senator! Quite frankly considering her celebrity, I would argue, if (the player) did not recognize the name the DM should have given me a check to see if I knew it.

You're right your DM should have asked for a skill check you should have requested one. Personally I believe this is what happens when powerful NPCs are used in adventures such as Vilandra Shadowmantle and Artus Cimber. Thats why I very rarely if ever have an NPC accompany a party of adventurers, or use known ones as antagonists or protagonists.

In closing, I think the initial exchange should have went something like this...

DM: ...She introduces herself as Valindra Shadowmantle...
YOU: I of course announced that at the table (Its Nancy Pelosi!)