Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 7580331" data-attributes="member: 6801286">My take on this is that I don't expect my players to fake ignorance, nor do I expect them to possess the knowledge that their character should have. Their characters are allowed to use what ever assumptions they have as players, but their guess is as good as that of an unexperienced player. Where their knowledge as players is lacking, I provide them with the information that I believe their characters would have so that they are able to play the competent adventurer they are trying to portray.For example, last night my players defeated two Liches, and being an experienced player, the priest in the party asked me if his character knew about philacteries. I decided to have him make a check to determine the outcome, but I might as well have said 'yes', because my campaign does not hinge on finding and destroying the philacteries of those Liches. I have no intention to have those Liches make a surprise return, and so whether they destroy the philacteries is irrelevant to the campaign honestly.Is it really a problem that the player uses his knowledge of Liches in the game? His character is a priest, so it is entirely possible that he has some how obtained this knowledge over the years. But even if he hadn't been a priest and had no reason to have this knowledge at all, would it really make a big difference? Does it make the game easier to know what a philactery is when dealing with a Lich? Honestly, to me as a DM the difficulty of my encounters does not hinge on some obscure bit of gotcha knowledge. My players can decide for themselves if their character knows something, and if they are in doubt I'm happy to make that ruling for them. But more often than not, I simply ask my players 'Do YOU think your character would have this knowledge?' rather than telling them 'NO'.I will however correct misunderstandings about the facts as established in the campaign, if I believe their characters should know better. Players can sometimes get confused or misremember details, especially over the course of a long campaign (which is understandable). For example, the same player thought that the God of Death would disapprove of another player laying the souls of the Liches to rest, but I corrected him on this. I corrected him because I felt that his priest would have a deep understanding of the gods in my campaign world and know things that the player might not.To me it is all about facilitating my players, and helping them with what they are trying to do. If one player wants to play the wise priest who informs his party about Liches, I try to give him the freedom to do this. I pass that information to him, so the gameplay can continue, rather than come to an abrupt halt. To me there is no benefit to hiding this information from my players or their characters.</blockquote>

Verification