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

[Flamestrike]

Your PC doesn't know she's a Lich. Using your own knowledge is wrong. Planning to kill her based on that knowledge is wrong.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Your PC doesn't know she's a Lich. Using your own knowledge is wrong. Planning to kill her based on that knowledge is wrong.

Nice skateboard. Did your mom buy it for you?

 

[Hriston]

You're reminding me of a thread from...a few years ago? An anti-metagamer offered a scenario in which werewolves simply didn't exist in a game world, until of course the DM decided to bring one in. "How," this poster argued, "would it be possible to have any knowledge of werewolves and their vulnerabilities?"

On the one hand, this raises the question of what "reality" is in a game world (as per my comment up thread). Does that reality exist independently of what has been experienced by the adventurers? Does the DM actually control every aspect of it? After all, if a werewolf suddenly exists in that world, it came from..."somewhere". Right?

On the other hand, werewolves don't exist in our world, either, and yet somehow even non-gamers know that you need silver weapons to kill them.

This recurring debate about playstyle, and the insistence of the anti-metagamers that we are not only doing it wrong, but "cheating", keeps making me think of the movie, "Lords of Dogtown". Specifically, the scene where Tony Alva, Stacy Peralta, and Jay Adams show up at a skateboarding competition. All the other competitors were freestyle skaters, the style that basically defined skateboarding since the 60's. They took umbrage at these newcomers using skateboards in a way that one just simply did not do. They weren't following the rules. They were defying tradition. They were cheating.

And, of course, what these newcomers were doing was freakin' awesome.

I think there's a strong fear that if you give players control over the past experiences, memories, associations, and areas of knowledge that their characters possess, actually letting them be inhabitants of the world, which is the most natural thing (it's how children play make-believe), that the players will run away with the game and the DM won't be able to keep up. The alternative seems to lead to an experience where the players are highly passive with regard to these things and assume that their characters aren't allowed to know anything unless the DM tells them they do. It's something I've had a hard time overcoming with players that are new to my group. I think from now on I'll just say, "Your character knows stuff, and it doesn't have to be written on your character sheet. You're in charge of what that stuff is." I've found that rather than running away with the game, players use this in surprising yet responsible ways.

 

[Mort]

Your PC doesn't know she's a Lich. Using your own knowledge is wrong.

Cat's out of the bag, just roll with what happened and move on. The player thinks she's a Lich. Is she - that's up to the DM. it's dangerous to use player knowledge without verification.

Planning to kill her based on that knowledge is wrong.

Well it's certainly not smart, seeing that if the player is right it's almost certainly a TPK or near TPK.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I mean, just the antagonists trying to conceal themselves in plain sight while not using a pseudonym?

That's a reasonable modification to your position. It's probably not too much to expect a DM to check and see if an antagonist who is attempting to hide their identity like that is a well-known figure.

But honestly, they need to put sidebars in the adventures to the effect that fans of FR lore might have out of character knowledge about such and so. Because I know a reasonable about of FR lore going back to 1st edition, mainly gaming products and video games (the only novel I think I've read was Azure Bonds) but I wouldn't recognize the name in the OP or a whole lot of other names that rely on following the exploits of Drizz't or whatever.

I can't imagine I'm the only DM whose knowledge of the Forgotten Realms is limited to certain categories. In fact, that's probably most people.

 

[Flamestrike]

Cat's out of the bag, just roll with what happened and move on. The player thinks she's a Lich

Yeah, and the Character doesn't.

 

[Mort]

Yeah, and the Character doesn't.

Why not? People hold unsubstantiated beliefs all the time. The player controls what the character thinks /believes. There is no requirement the belief be based in anything concrete.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Yeah, and the Character doesn't.

I’ve heard that if you repeat that ten times with your eyes shut tight while squeezing your fists and curling your toes, you can make it come true.

If that doesn’t work, try more eye of newt and wing of bat.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah, and the Character doesn't.

I’m pretty sure it’s up to the player what their character thinks. Granted, the character doesn’t know she’s a lich, but people think things they don’t know all the time. And technically the player doesn’t know she’s a lich either.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think there's a strong fear that if you give players control over the past experiences, memories, associations, and areas of knowledge that their characters possess, actually letting them be inhabitants of the world, which is the most natural thing (it's how children play make-believe), that the players will run away with the game and the DM won't be able to keep up.

I can only speak for myself, but when I used to be an anti-metagaming DM, my stance wasn’t nearly as conscious as this suggests. I didn’t fear what would happen if players had control over their characters’ past experiences, memories, &c; I didn’t even really think about what would happen. It was just metagaming, and therefore bad. I never questioned why it was bad, it was just an accepted truth. It didn’t help that it seemed to be common knowledge. Everyone just knew metagaming was bad, and that you had to be vigilant for it. It was only when I consciously interrogated the reasons behind this “common knowledge” (or, rather, read several articles, blogs, and forum posts from other DMs that did so) that I came to realize this dogma I had uncritically been adhering to wasn’t actually serving any useful purpose.