Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 7578705" data-attributes="member: 6785785"><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Two things. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>1) If a player, at the time of character generation or session 0, says that he has an adventuring uncle in whose footsteps he's following, and that he was raised hearing stories of the uncle's exploits, how would you handle that? Would you allow such a character the option to know about a monster vulnerability? Would you require a check, but lower the DC compared to another character possibly knowing it?</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>What if D&D 5E actually addressed this specifically in the rules? They don't; it's left entirely up to the DM (and/or players, depending). But let's say that Session 0 resulted in a very loose sketch of each PC. They have a their Traits, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws, and their Background, but no other details. The rest is to be filled in during the course of play. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Is it somehow better if this kind of fictional detail is decided ahead of time rather than during play? I think this is the actual question here. Or perhaps, is it somehow worse to decide such things during play rather than ahead of time? </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>I don't see why; there's no metagaming going on in the strict sense; there's no reason that characters cannot in any way know such a detail. It's perfectly plausible to have decided it ahead of time....with approval from the DM, of course. Which is delving into the Mother May I form of play. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>2) Do players in your game ever act with a mind to their current HP and/or other resources? I mean, does the Fighter get more cautious when his HP get lower? Does he try to save his single use abilities like Second Wind and Action Surge for when they are truly needed? </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Isn't this a case of Falstaff acting explicitly with the stats in mind? Shouldn't Falstaff act cautious toward every single attack directed at him because we all know that any attack could be lethal? Only by acting with the metaknowledge of HP and death saves and (except at low level) a whole process that ensures the character doesn't simply die outright from a gnoll hitting him in the head with a flail (!) does the character boldly wade into combat with no fear. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Which is fine.....I want Fighters to boldly wade into combat with no fear. I don't mind how HP and death saves and related mechanics work. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>But, in this way, isn't metagaming happening in every game, and by every player? Everyone involved knows you're playing a game. It's meant to be played. Why pretend that's not happening? </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>There are very few instances of metagaming that I can think of that can't be justified in some fictional way after the fact just as easily as they could be before the fact. So the question really does boil down to what are the benefits and drawbacks to establishing fictional elements (such as character knowledge) ahead of play or during play. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Which I think is the interesting part of the discussion, and which relates to the Mother May I topic. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>"Metagaming is always cheating" is clearly not true even across all editions of D&D, let alone when we start to include other games.</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 7578705, member: 6785785"] [B] Two things. 1) If a player, at the time of character generation or session 0, says that he has an adventuring uncle in whose footsteps he's following, and that he was raised hearing stories of the uncle's exploits, how would you handle that? Would you allow such a character the option to know about a monster vulnerability? Would you require a check, but lower the DC compared to another character possibly knowing it? What if D&D 5E actually addressed this specifically in the rules? They don't; it's left entirely up to the DM (and/or players, depending). But let's say that Session 0 resulted in a very loose sketch of each PC. They have a their Traits, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws, and their Background, but no other details. The rest is to be filled in during the course of play. Is it somehow better if this kind of fictional detail is decided ahead of time rather than during play? I think this is the actual question here. Or perhaps, is it somehow worse to decide such things during play rather than ahead of time? I don't see why; there's no metagaming going on in the strict sense; there's no reason that characters cannot in any way know such a detail. It's perfectly plausible to have decided it ahead of time....with approval from the DM, of course. Which is delving into the Mother May I form of play. 2) Do players in your game ever act with a mind to their current HP and/or other resources? I mean, does the Fighter get more cautious when his HP get lower? Does he try to save his single use abilities like Second Wind and Action Surge for when they are truly needed? Isn't this a case of Falstaff acting explicitly with the stats in mind? Shouldn't Falstaff act cautious toward every single attack directed at him because we all know that any attack could be lethal? Only by acting with the metaknowledge of HP and death saves and (except at low level) a whole process that ensures the character doesn't simply die outright from a gnoll hitting him in the head with a flail (!) does the character boldly wade into combat with no fear. Which is fine.....I want Fighters to boldly wade into combat with no fear. I don't mind how HP and death saves and related mechanics work. But, in this way, isn't metagaming happening in every game, and by every player? Everyone involved knows you're playing a game. It's meant to be played. Why pretend that's not happening? There are very few instances of metagaming that I can think of that can't be justified in some fictional way after the fact just as easily as they could be before the fact. So the question really does boil down to what are the benefits and drawbacks to establishing fictional elements (such as character knowledge) ahead of play or during play. Which I think is the interesting part of the discussion, and which relates to the Mother May I topic. "Metagaming is always cheating" is clearly not true even across all editions of D&D, let alone when we start to include other games.[/b] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top