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="Maxperson" data-source="post: 7580623" data-attributes="member: 23751"><p>It's not about a fear of abuse. It's about common sense and reason. It makes no sense for a group to want to use player knowledge about trolls out of a desire not to have to feign ignorance, but but okay with feigning ignorance about vampires and golems. It's not at all the same kind of situation as "Mother May I."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's true that people run hit points how they prefer, but it's equally true that I wasn't stating "my way," but rather RAW when I spelled out what hit points are. </p><p></p><p>As for my players being equally cautious at 110 hit points as they are at 14, no they aren't. That's only because they are not perfect. They try, though. They will avoid a 30 foot fall at 110 hit points and at 14 hit points, because a 30 foot fall can mean death. The PCs don't have any knowledge of hit points, so they don't know they are at 110.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In my first post I forgot to specify that it was for my game. In my follow-up I did specify. I have repeated it a number of time as well. The reason that there is "confusion" is that there are poster's here who would rather ignore the truth in favor of false statements in order to try and "win." I'm not referring to you, but rather to those who just don't want to have discussions with me in good faith the way you do. If they did, they would be having the same civil conversation that we are. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A troll is very unlikely to even be able to regenerate if the party knows the truth. They will use methods that take advantage of the weakness, to the xp value should be diminished if metagaming player knowledge is allowed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, it's not an unfair advantage, because it's not guaranteed that they will find out. The game has rules for determining if players can find out, or it did. 5e leaves that in the DM's hands again. I believe that the players sometimes knowing and sometimes not is the balance point of monsters with weaknesses. Players never knowing would make them worth more. Players always knowing would make them worth less.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think so. It may not be the only disagreement, but it seems like the largest one. I'm even okay with the player adding in background later if it makes sense for the PC, but not if it's done for immediate gain. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They can be. I've already agreed that it can. They just can't come up with it on the fly to take advantage of what's in front of them. That to me is as much cheating as metagaming is.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think you understood what I meant by "fluff," even though I provided an example that is similar what happens to Han Solo. Fluff just means "not mechanical." A fluff background can and will be very important. It can provide motivations, context, and become part of play. There's nothing wrong with being fluff. Fluff is often more important in my game than mechanics are.</p><p></p><p>No, because the player investment will be there. Fluff does not mean "unused" and "unimportant." It just means that it will not be mechanical in nature. Han Solo's background with Jaba had a huge influence, even though it was fluff. Leia's fluff background as a princess is important throughout the movies, even though her planet is destroyed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 7580623, member: 23751"] It's not about a fear of abuse. It's about common sense and reason. It makes no sense for a group to want to use player knowledge about trolls out of a desire not to have to feign ignorance, but but okay with feigning ignorance about vampires and golems. It's not at all the same kind of situation as "Mother May I." It's true that people run hit points how they prefer, but it's equally true that I wasn't stating "my way," but rather RAW when I spelled out what hit points are. As for my players being equally cautious at 110 hit points as they are at 14, no they aren't. That's only because they are not perfect. They try, though. They will avoid a 30 foot fall at 110 hit points and at 14 hit points, because a 30 foot fall can mean death. The PCs don't have any knowledge of hit points, so they don't know they are at 110. In my first post I forgot to specify that it was for my game. In my follow-up I did specify. I have repeated it a number of time as well. The reason that there is "confusion" is that there are poster's here who would rather ignore the truth in favor of false statements in order to try and "win." I'm not referring to you, but rather to those who just don't want to have discussions with me in good faith the way you do. If they did, they would be having the same civil conversation that we are. :) A troll is very unlikely to even be able to regenerate if the party knows the truth. They will use methods that take advantage of the weakness, to the xp value should be diminished if metagaming player knowledge is allowed. No, it's not an unfair advantage, because it's not guaranteed that they will find out. The game has rules for determining if players can find out, or it did. 5e leaves that in the DM's hands again. I believe that the players sometimes knowing and sometimes not is the balance point of monsters with weaknesses. Players never knowing would make them worth more. Players always knowing would make them worth less. I think so. It may not be the only disagreement, but it seems like the largest one. I'm even okay with the player adding in background later if it makes sense for the PC, but not if it's done for immediate gain. They can be. I've already agreed that it can. They just can't come up with it on the fly to take advantage of what's in front of them. That to me is as much cheating as metagaming is. I don't think you understood what I meant by "fluff," even though I provided an example that is similar what happens to Han Solo. Fluff just means "not mechanical." A fluff background can and will be very important. It can provide motivations, context, and become part of play. There's nothing wrong with being fluff. Fluff is often more important in my game than mechanics are. No, because the player investment will be there. Fluff does not mean "unused" and "unimportant." It just means that it will not be mechanical in nature. Han Solo's background with Jaba had a huge influence, even though it was fluff. Leia's fluff background as a princess is important throughout the movies, even though her planet is destroyed. [/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