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

[ccs]

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.

True. I haven't read an FR novel in 25+ years. And it's probably been around that long since I played a D&D PC game (video/PC gaming has never really been my thing).
Nor do I keep current on FR lore as it doesn't apply to the games I run - not even when using one of the published adventures.

So when I ran this? I didn't think anything of her. She has a name, & she has a stat block in the back of the book with a short write up that tells me all I need.....

 

[Cadence]

"People hold unsubstantiated beliefs all the time." and the like has come up several times.

They do, and now I'm picturing a TV show where the hook is that the main character sometimes knows what bad things the person they're introduced to has/will do based on hearing their name. Kind of a riff on the one where they get tomorrow's paper today.

Moving it a step further , I'm imagining a step further where they just blurt it out. ("She's a Nazi!" yelled at the stranger you were just introduced to). It has me wondering how the NPCs react to these strange outbursts if they are proved wrong a few times --- or if they're always proved right.

 

[Flamestrike]

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.

The OP admits its not an unsubstantiated belief. He's basing it on out of character knowledge he obtained by reading an RA Salvatore novel!

 

[Charlaquin]

The OP admits its not an unsubstantiated belief. He's basing it on out of character knowledge he obtained by reading an RA Salvatore novel!

It would be unsubstantiated for the character. I’d expect the “keep player knowledge separate from character knowledge” crowd to recognize that distinction.

 

[Flamestrike]

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.

No, its bad play. He's literally openly admitted to using player knowledge his character does not have.

If it was me, I'd play it as if I did not know.

If a player openly admitted to plotting to murder an NPC based on nothing other than player knowlwdge (say, they read or DMd the module beforehand) id forcefully and politely ask them to stop.

If they tried acting on it, I'd likely insist they leave the group.

 

[Flamestrike]

It would be unsubstantiated for the character. I’d expect the “keep player knowledge separate from character knowledge” crowd to recognize that distinction.

Hea actively plotting to kill the NPC with other players! Why else would he be worried about ESP for Gods sake!

 

[Charlaquin]

Hea actively plotting to kill the NPC with other players! Why else would he be worried about ESP for Gods sake!

Well, yeah. If the characters suspect her of being a lich, I would expect them to take steps to confirm this suspicion (which they did, the Paladin used divine sense), and upon having it confirmed, formulate a plan. Likely to try and kill her.

 

[Charlaquin]

No, its bad play. He's literally openly admitted to using player knowledge his character does not have.

The player didn’t actually know for certain she was a lich. The DM could easily have changed details about the character, or even used the name for a completely different character. Additionally, the character does not need to know she’s a lich to suspect her to be one. People suspect things all the time with little to no evidence. Obviously it would be smart to take steps to confirm or deny this suspicion before acting on it. Which they did.

If it was me, I'd play it as if I did not know.

That’s also a perfectly valid choice.

If a player openly admitted to plotting to murder an NPC based on nothing other than player knowlwdge (say, they read or DMd the module beforehand) id forcefully and politely ask them to stop.

If they tried acting on it, I'd likely insist they leave the group.

Ok. That’s your choice. Clearly this group feels differently, and that’s ok.

 

[Flamestrike]

Well, yeah. If the characters suspect her of being a lich,

The characters dont. The players do.

I would expect them to take steps to confirm this suspicion (which they did, the Paladin used divine sense), and upon having it confirmed, formulate a plan. Likely to try and kill her.

Why would they try and kill her?

They're Good aligned. She isnt harming them, has no intent on harming them, and divine sense doesnt reveal alignment (not that this matters).

Why just murder her? How is that 'good'?

As an Elf, why wouldnt they assume she's a Balenorn (Good aligned Elven Lich)?

 

[Flamestrike]

The player didn’t actually know for certain she was a lich. The DM could easily have changed details about the character, or even used the name for a completely different character.

The player openly admits to making that assumption (she was a Lich) based on his OOC knowledge from reading the books.

It wasnt just a lucky guess; he openly admits to using that knowledge, to formulate a plan and advise the other players at the table (including the Paladin) of that fact.

Additionally, the character does not need to know she’s a lich to suspect her to be one. People suspect things all the time with little to no evidence

I dont care about hypotheticals. In this specific case the player openly admits his character only suspected her because of his own knowledge out of game.