How Visible To players Should The Rules Be?

[Micah Sweet]

Knowing the odds may help you decide what to do. Maybe there are two opponents with different ACs. Maybe there’s something else you can do with a better chance to succeed compared to attacking an opponent with a high AC.

There could be many ways it helps. It allows the players to make truly informed decisions.

And if the PC has logical reason to know that information, I am all for it.

 

[Thomas Shey]

But does knowing the AC (or soak score) ahead of time negate the experience of finding out by experience what tactics/weapons to deploy? And is it valuable to do so, or have to that experience? It might be nice to be able to always approach a conflict with an optimal strategy in hand, but it's also nice to have to find those strategies myself or, at least, have that unknown quantity so that I start in a similar perspective as my PC - not knowing so much about how tough and dangerous this opponent is.

The problem is that's a transient pleasure at best; its not like you're not going to know after repeated play anyway. So on the whole is it valuable enough for the downsides?

 

[hawkeyefan]

And if the PC has logical reason to know that information, I am all for it.

Isn’t that these are representations of observable things reasonable enough?

 

[Thomas Shey]

My point was that telling the player/s either is intended to be (and sometimes even is) a streamlining thing. There are other games--just about anything d100/roll-under, for instance--where the player will know whether they hit without the GM needing to tell them.

There are ones that instead of a counter-roll, there's a modifier to the extent roll for defense. As an example, Hero is a roll-under game that uses your Combat Value to determine to hit--but you don't actually know what you need without knowledge of the opponents Defense Value.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Isn’t that these are representations of observable things reasonable enough?

Well, to qualify, when they are observable things. That can be true in some but not all.

 

[Cadence]

And of course in many modern and SF games, there's no particular logic in being coy about armor soak numbers; most of the time you're dealing with standard armors experienced combatants should have a pretty good idea how protective they are.

So do you tell them what the protection appears to be? Or what it really is?

(In D&D, do they auto-know if some armor is magic? Do they know in the sci-fi game if something is a decoy even before they attack?)

 

[Thomas Shey]

So do you tell them what the protection appears to be? Or what it really is?

Often the vast majority of cases these are the same thing. You just don't have a lot of ways to change the value of armor without also changing its appearance. Enchanted armor is a fantasy case, and often has no equivalent (especially in a modern game). Even in cases where there's some paranormal options, it'll show itself in one fashion or another (which doesn't mean it'll necessarily be precise, but that guy with the telekinetic field will not look like the guy without it).

And of course when you get away from games that conflate to-hit and armor-penetration together, it'll often be pretty clear after a successful attack anyway.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Isn’t that these are representations of observable things reasonable enough?

Maybe. Depends on the character and the circumstances. All I know is, the more most players IME know about the system, the more that knowledge encourages them to game the system for advantage.

 

[Cadence]

Often the vast majority of cases these are the same thing. You just don't have a lot of ways to change the value of armor without also changing its appearance. Enchanted armor is a fantasy case, and often has no equivalent (especially in a modern game).

Is it always obvious when someone has the bullet proof vest on? Which level it is?

If it's usually the same thing is it ok to tell them what it appears to be to their character (and then not have it be that if it isn't?).

 

[Thomas Shey]

Is it always obvious when someone has the bullet proof vest on? Which level it is?

At least above a certain level, pretty much. I've got a buddy who wears one for his job, and its pretty obvious when he's wearing it and not, even under clothes. Some really lightweight cases not so much, but they're also the ones that don't provide that much protection. And that's true of relative levels, too, because the material gets thicker and usually involves plates.

If it's usually the same thing is it ok to tell them what it appears to be to their character (and then not have it be that if it isn't?).

You could, but when "it isn't" is vanishingly rare, is it really doing anything to be coy?