D&D General Just Eat the Dang Fruit

[Micah Sweet]

Why would you want an explanation? What purpose would it serve? What sorts of explanations would work for you in this situation? What happens if the player offers no explanation or one that doesn't sit well with you?

If an explanation is provided that makes sense in-universe and doesn't have anything to do with the save, I would likely accept it, although I may still find it a little suspicious. If nothing was offered I would probably still accept it in the service of social unity, but I wouldn't like it and the players would know that.

 

[iserith]

If an explanation is provided that makes sense in-universe and doesn't have anything to do with the save, I would likely accept it, although I may still find it a little suspicious. If nothing was offered I would probably still accept it in the service of social unity, but I wouldn't like it and the players would know that.

Could you explain what purpose asking or knowing serves? Is it simply to allay suspicions? And if so, why do you suppose those suspicions exist in the first place?

For my part, as DM, I don't think I need to know. I'm only tasked with adjudicating an action that is taken, not in getting an explanation for one that is not taken. (Or, frankly, even for ones that are taken unless somehow it's related to deciding if the approach to the goal is likely to succeed, fail, or whether it's uncertain.) So I'm trying to understand another point of view here.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Could you explain what purpose asking or knowing serves? Is it simply to allay suspicions? And if so, why do you suppose those suspicions exist in the first place?

For my part, as DM, I don't think I need to know. I'm only tasked with adjudicating an action that is taken, not in getting an explanation for one that is not taken. (Or, frankly, even for ones that are taken unless somehow it's related to deciding if the approach to the goal is likely to succeed, fail, or whether it's uncertain.) So I'm trying to understand another point of view here.

My primary goal as a DM is to create a plausible fantasy world for the PCs to live in and interact with. Ideally, any actions the PCs take should flow from the in-game circumstances, which are all the PCs should have access to. I believe it was a mistake to have the fruit-eating PC make that save in public, for example, because it provides far too great a temptation to the players to metagame, which means that the PCs subsequent actions in regards to that situation may be suspect. Hence my desire for an explanation if those actions strongly suggest the out of universe saving throw was a factor.

 

[iserith]

My primary goal as a DM is to create a plausible fantasy world for the PCs to live in and interact with. Ideally, any actions the PCs take should flow from the in-game circumstances, which are all the PCs should have access to. I believe it was a mistake to have the fruit-eating PC make that save in public, for example, because it provides far too great a temptation to the players to metagame, which means that the PCs subsequent actions in regards to that situation may be suspect. Hence my desire for an explanation if those actions strongly suggest the out of universe saving throw was a factor.

It sounds like absent the call for the saving throw then, you likely have no suspicions and probably don't ask for reasons for not eating the fruit. Do I have that right?

 

[Mort]

In a situation like the one you described, I would want an explanation, if the players really didn't take the save into consideration.

Whereas I (If I was the DM) would just shrug and realize that maybe having an immediate and obvious (to the players) saving throw was a bit unfair, ESPECIALLY if I cared about metagaming.

The DM here (if he cares about metagaming) is essentially putting the players (and PCs) in a lose, lose situation. Either eat the fruit, even though they don't want to or be accused of the dreaded metagaming. Which in some groups is punishable by anything from shame to (apparently) full on expulsion. Unless the player can provide some "reason," which, well, is both arbitrary and encourages "gaming the DM..." over actually being invested in the situation (IMO).

 

[Hriston]

I'm not sure why it's being considered "metagame information" that the PCs know a wave of exhaustion washed over their fruit-eating comrade when that's exactly what the DM told the players in their description of the environment. Seems weird.

 

[iserith]

I'm not sure why it's being considered "metagame information" that the PCs know a wave of exhaustion washed over their fruit-eating comrade when that's exactly what the DM told the players in their description of the environment. Seems weird.

To be fair, I could see that being interpreted a couple of ways. One way is the DM is saying it to just my character, who said nothing about it to anyone else, and kept on eating. Or the DM said it to everyone as noticeable, intending to telegraph that something is off about this fruit (or at least off about my character). I don't actually know which is true, despite being there. I do know the DM doesn't care about "metagaming" though, and may very well have just thrown it out there to let us decide whether we notice it or not.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It sounds like absent the call for the saving throw then, you likely have no suspicions and probably don't ask for reasons for not eating the fruit. Do I have that right?

Correct.

 

[Brotton Goodfellow]

I think the DM could have handled it a little better by waiting a round before calling for checks from anyone who ate the fruit. This would have helped illicit a more true character response.

 

[iserith]

Correct.

Great. Would it bother you that a player's decision to eat that fruit was based on wanting to earn Inspiration for portraying a flaw? That's certainly a "metagame" consideration.

If that doesn't bother you, what do you think the difference is between not eating the fruit due to seeing someone need to make a saving throw versus eating the fruit so you can earn Inspiration? The former is avoiding potential danger and the latter is trying to earn a resource.