D&D 4E 4e: the metagame.

[ExploderWizard]

Cadfan wins the thread by knockout

Disengage, I too prefer a more " old school" approach to gaming but when I pick up the dice to play 4E specifically I take the silliness at face value and run with it. If I were to ever DM a game of 4E I would pretty much just run it as written. There are other systems out better suited to simulationist style games that won't drive you mad trying get them to make sense. Change systems or relax and go with the 4E flow would be my advice for optimum sanity.

 

[Disengage]

Not gonna lie, that was funny and awesome lol.

Combat Advantage is something that needs to be clear to the player in order for the character to function, and I would be transparent about it. As for the Bloodied bit, it mostly comes to down me being stubborn and not wanting to tell my players how much HP the enemy has left, but for abilities that depend on it, I would do my best to have them and only them know. If that player then tells everyone else while OOC that the enemy is half HP, I would try to punish it somehow. It's just not something I want at my table.

Remember, "Bloodied" is a game keyword, not a description of something. As such, I always wouldn't use words like "Stun" and "Flanked" and "Fatigued" as part of my description, and if I did, I would indeed let my players take advantage of it because it was my mistake.


cmbarona:

It's true, I set out to play D&D as a satisfying roleplaying experience, not a fun game. That doesn't mean it's not fun, however. As you can imagine, 4E is not my favorite edition.

 

[satin]

As a player, I do appreciate knowing about Bloodied status because my character's got abilities that count on it...

As a DM, I would probably share information about Bloodied status because it should be fairly obvious to the characters (enemy looks badly beat up, and so on). I would also expect my monsters to know when PCs are Bloodied. But definitely, wouldn't share hit point totals.

As an earlier poster mentioned - I'd go with untouched, not yet bloodied, bloodied, and unconscious / dead.

 

[Kzach]

Look, if a character has Bloodhunt and I don't tell the players that a foe is bloodied, I've basically just cheated my player out of one of his class abilities. Through my negligence, no less, not even through anything intentional. So I can't claim that I was using my discretion as a DM.

What about powers like shield though?

Either you tell the player that a +4 will be effective or not. That alters the power of the power significantly. Either it's obvious it will work or won't work so that the player can make an informed decision, or they have to gamble on their encounter power.

There are numerous other examples where the system seems to require this type of decision as a DM. The podcasts and various chats with 4e staff give a strong indication that such metagame information should be made available to players so that they can make informed decisions on the use of their powers.

 

[robotsinmyhead]

The DMG (pg 26/27) specifically spells out that players should be told (whether you wanna fluff the text is up to you) when they are under the effect of a condition or when monsters are bloodied. IMO, this bypasses subversive metagaming by evening the field for everyone.

Telling the players what a monster's AC is going a little far, but most players have a decent idea what a 4e monster will have or are able to zero in on that value. In addition, telling players what sort of armor/weapons the monsters have is pretty obvious and comes in handy as such:

A rogue should use a X vs Reflex attack on a monster that's 2-handing a greataxe and wearing plate armor and a X vs AC on a 'rogue-y' looking foe. Common sense stuff that could be easily gleaned from a DM without having to metagame at all.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I think there's a fine line between giving the player's the information they need to play the game and not breaking immersion. It's not an either/or thing in my mind, but a balancing act that can sway way one or another depending on the GM/players, and even session-to-session.

It's the DM's job to make sure the player's have the information they need. It's everyone's job to help set the atmosphere and mood and make it more than just a board game.

 

[Skyscraper]

Not gonna lie, that was funny and awesome lol.

Combat Advantage is something that needs to be clear to the player in order for the character to function, and I would be transparent about it. As for the Bloodied bit, it mostly comes to down me being stubborn and not wanting to tell my players how much HP the enemy has left, but for abilities that depend on it, I would do my best to have them and only them know. If that player then tells everyone else while OOC that the enemy is half HP, I would try to punish it somehow. It's just not something I want at my table.

What about the players? What do they want? Does that count at your table? JI'm not trying to be sarcastic here, it's just my impression that old-school D&D (from which i stem) advocated all-power to the DM, screw the players. While i believe that the game has evolved to something more of the type: let's find a game style that suits everyone, even if the DM has final say at the table on rules questions. It took me a while to realize how i used to DM (in fact, i had to sit as a player at a couple of tables where DMs justified their whims with "not at my table" arguments, arguments that i disagreed with, before i thought about my own DMing habits...)

Remember, "Bloodied" is a game keyword, not a description of something.

Funny, i introduced a new player to 4E last weekend, and my explanation of "bloodied" was that it is both a keyword and a description. As for the description part, it is equivalent to the battle-trained PCs recognizing fatigue, stamina, minor wounds, morale, stance or more generally staying power as you said, as decreasing. They sense when a creature is in a bad situation. The players almost always ask how opponents fare anyway, why not propose a description. They won't know how many HPs the creature has left because it's under 50%, it might be 2, it might be 30.

It's true, I set out to play D&D as a satisfying roleplaying experience, not a fun game. That doesn't mean it's not fun, however. As you can imagine, 4E is not my favorite edition.

I think that you and i have similar preferences as far as gaming style is concerned. I've been trying to kick the meta out the door as much as i can. However, i don't think that avoiding the "bloodied" tag is a good idea, no more than combat advantage.

Sky

 

[buzz]

Am I the only person who does this?

No—and I would add, with all due respect—unfortunately.

A quote from the DMG pages referenced by robotisinmyhead:

p. 27, emphasis added: "Tell them when an enemy is under any condition, is bloodied, or under an effect and tell them when it ends. Further, if an adversary heals, the PCs should notice, and the players should be told—especially if the monster is no longer bloodied."

And, generally, p.26: "All the information the players need to make their choices comes from you. Therefore, within the rules of the game and the limits of PC knowledge, Insight, and perception, tell players everything they need to know. You don’t have to reveal all aspects of a situation or hazard in one go. You should, however, give enough information that the players know what’s up and have an idea what to do—and what not to do."

And, an example, p.27: "For example, if the characters are fighting a pit fiend, whose aura of fire deals fire damage to creatures within 5 squares, you might tell the players (before their characters come in range), 'The heat emanating from the devil is intense even at this distance. You know that getting within five squares of it is going to burn you.'"

 

[robotsinmyhead]

This actually came up in a recent game: A Goblin Hexer nailed our rogue with a power that dealt a whopping 3d6+1 damage (or thereaboust) if he moved. The DM was pushing for the player to NOT know what the effect of this Hex was or what would trigger it.

To me, this is would be unfair. If we roleplay this at all, the character should feel some sort of oncoming doom in this situation. Firstly, knowing that he had been hexed, and secondly, knowing that "something dire would happen" if he moved, like he has a tingling sensation in his legs or something similar. There's no need to tell the player SPECIFICALLY "You'll take 3d6+1 damage if you move" (which would probably have killed him at the time) if you drop clues like this.

In summation, I think 4e has met metagaming head-on and dealt with it extremely well.

 

[Old Gumphrey]

I'll never tell my players who is a minion and who is not. If they use a Daily Power on one, too freaking bad. Players need to be more conservative with the new Power system anyway.

That sounds totally awesome, sign me up.

I'll never outright tell someone is "Bloodied".

So you either ignore PC abilities that operate on the bloodied condition, or you keep track of all of it yourself while you're trying to DM? That sounds totally awesome, sign me up.

I discourage talk at the table.

I hate talking with my friends. Again, sign me up!

Am I the only person who does this?

I think you're one of the 15 or so.