How Visible To players Should The Rules Be?

[Cadence]

'Cooties' being the jargon term for ... ???

For a site with a lot of old gamers...

 

[Corinnguard]

If the GM is using a homebrewed adventure or a pre-made adventure for their party and they are keeping that knowledge from being common knowledge, it might be because the party is not at the right time and place in the adventure for the GM to reveal it. Then there is the possibility that a piece of knowledge isn't common knowledge. There will be things that are commonly known to everyone in a setting, and there will be things that are known to only a handful of individuals or just one individual.

Just an extra thought or two, would the DM really withhold 'common knowledge' from the player if they are role-playing a character in a given setting? The character after all was born, raised and educated there.

Also, what ought to be treated as common knowledge in a RPG?

 

[billd91]

Just an extra thought or two, would the DM really withhold 'common knowledge' from the player if they are role-playing a character in a given setting? The character after all was born, raised and educated there.

Also, what ought to be treated as common knowledge in a RPG?

That's the $100,000 question right there. It might even be worth a thread on its own and it'll get contentious.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Just an extra thought or two, would the DM really withhold 'common knowledge' from the player if they are role-playing a character in a given setting? The character after all was born, raised and educated there.

Obviously the GM shouldn't withhold common knowledge. Now it is practically impossible to communicate beforehand everything a person living in a fictional world would know, so some of the information must be filled in as it becomes relevant.

Also, what ought to be treated as common knowledge in a RPG?

That depends on the setting. For example in my current setting most people cannot read and travel is rather difficult, so the level of 'common knowledge' regarding faraway places is probably quite a bit lower than in a setting with more expeditious and effective methods of spreading information.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I can accept it without being happy about it, and if I am unhappy about it I see no reason to pretend I am.

I think there's a difference between being unhappy about it and constantly pointing out that you're unhappy about it. Like, let's say I don't like the term sandbox... I mean, I understand what people tend to mean when they use it, but I don't like it because it's a child's toy and it infantilizes RPGs... do you want me to start pointing that out every time someone mentions a sandbox in a thread?

I would think it would get a bit old, and would really just kind of distract from the conversation, no?

Just an extra thought or two, would the DM really withhold 'common knowledge' from the player if they are role-playing a character in a given setting? The character after all was born, raised and educated there.

Well, this thread began as a discussion whether players should even know the rules... so yeah, I imagine there are plenty of GMs out there who would likewise withhold information that may be considered common knowledge by many of us. I recommended a GM share the nature of a runic circle, and you and others said I was robbing the players of a mystery.

Also, what ought to be treated as common knowledge in a RPG?

That's a highly subjective thing, it seems. I tend to err on the side of providing as much information as possible. I don't generally like settings/games/campaigns that consist almost entirely of the PCs being "strangers in a strange land". I far prefer for them to have connections to the setting and knowledge of the setting. I don't think that the interesting aspect of "discovery" in RPGs is for the players to discover the cool atlas I've made, or the list of deities I've selected for the setting.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't think that the interesting aspect of "discovery" in RPGs is for the players to discover the cool atlas I've made, or the list of deities I've selected for the setting.

Yeah, here we definitely differ. I think that is a cool type of discovery. It of course needs to happen organically in play, when the characters visit these strange lands, instead of the GM handing the players a gazetteer to memorise.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah, here we definitely differ. I think that is a cool type of discovery. It of course needs to happen organically in play, when the characters visit these strange lands, instead of the GM handing the players a gazetteer to memorise.

Yeah, that's perfectly fine! I know many folks do enjoy that. For them, I imagine there's a need to hold back information in order to facilitate that sense of discovery. And it does come up in my games from time to time... the PCs may visit a strange, unknown place... I just don't like for that to be the default. I like having characters grounded in the setting, who feel like they've already existed there prior to the start of play. For me to facilitate that feeling, I have to share details freely, or work with the players to help establish the details.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yeah, that's perfectly fine! I know many folks do enjoy that. For them, I imagine there's a need to hold back information in order to facilitate that sense of discovery. And it does come up in my games from time to time... the PCs may visit a strange, unknown place... I just don't like for that to be the default. I like having characters grounded in the setting, who feel like they've already existed there prior to the start of play. For me to facilitate that feeling, I have to share details freely, or work with the players to help establish the details.

Yeah, I get that connection the setting aspect too. That is important as well. I want the characters to feel like part of the setting.

But of course the trick for having both is to have some established areas to which the characters have connections to and then a bunch of less known areas of which both the characters and the player know little of.

EDIT: (Also sometimes the reason for "withholding" information of distant lands is that I haven't invented it yet!)

 

[Maxperson]

Just an extra thought or two, would the DM really withhold 'common knowledge' from the player if they are role-playing a character in a given setting? The character after all was born, raised and educated there.

Also, what ought to be treated as common knowledge in a RPG?

I think that's highly dependent. Take Elminster. For the entire Realms I'd say that his name and his being a sage/wizard would be common knowledge. I don't think being from Shadowdale would be. It's well known enough to be a lowish DC. That said, I wouldn't make the party wizard roll. It would be common knowledge for wizards who learn about spell users. Nor the cleric of Mystra. Nor anyone who is from the Dale's or close by the Dales.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah, I get that connection the setting aspect too. That is important as well. I want the characters to feel like part of the setting.

But of course the trick for having both is to have some established areas to which the characters have connections to and then a bunch of less known areas of which both the characters and the player know little of.

Yeah, I think it depends on what you're going for. The setting you briefly described above... limited travel, common illiteracy... the world is going to be a very open and unknown kind of place for the average person. So it makes sense to have "blank spaces" or unknown areas on the map.

But let's say you're playing Delta Green. The setting is modern day Earth. Not nearly as much that's not known geographically to much of the world's population, and certainly not to the typical PC. There's definitely going to be things that are unknown... but they're not generally going to be like unknown countries and cultures and the like.