D&D 5E "As DM, I Know How All the PCs' Abilities, Spells, and Items Work" (a poll)

[Mind of tempest]

Do we still use LMAO?

some of my college chums used it so logically yes.

I vote for false on all areas.

 

[Ancalagon]

I try to know all of them, I don't always succeed.

Is this because I don't trust my players? Well, it's more that I don't trust the PhB's writing

 

[delericho]

Yes, to the best of my ability. The ones I have most difficulty with are Clerics, Paladins, and Druids, since they have so many spells available, but the others are manageable.

As with others, this is largely because I put together the character sheets for the group, and keeping these things updated serves as a good way to get used to the abilities.

 

[Cruentus]

In OSE, yes, I do.

In 5e, no, no I do not.

I might recognize the names, but don't know exactly what things do. Last time I played, my character sheet was 7 printed pages, including spells in tiny print. And abilities were scattered all over the place - race, feat, background, spells, spell like abilities, and so on. I didn't even know what everything did on my sheet, and I played it from Lv 1.

As a DM, I'll trust my players to be on the up and up. If they're cheating or fudging, they're only cheating themselves. But I will verify...

 

[Agametorememberbooks]

Life’s busy. I pull the, “remind me” card out all the time, and it helps other players know what certain abilities and features are for their own future character-building purposes.

 

[J.Quondam]

I should and I try, but I don't. And unless there's a "trust issue" with a player, I don't real feel a genuine need to, either.
I mean, there's enough other stuff on the GM's plate handling all the NPCs' details and characteristics of the rest of world.

 

[Agametorememberbooks]

I should and I try, but I don't. And unless there's a "trust issue" with a player, I don't real feel a genuine need to, either.
I mean, there's enough other stuff on the GM's plate handling all the NPCs' details and characteristics of the rest of world.

Yeah, there’s one player at my table who really overlooks action economy and the limits therein, so I generally make him read it aloud and we examine what he’s trying to do within that constraint. He’s also a dice snatcher, so I’ve had to ask players to discretely keep an eye on his rolls.

 

[Professor Murder]

Also: I feel even the hint that this is required of DMs is yet another hurdle discouraging people from stepping behind the screen.

 

[Mannahnin]

Mostly true, but less so over time. I used to be an encyclopedia of rules, in part due to playing one edition at any given time, and playing that edition regularly. Anything I didn't have memorized I could usually find quickly (might take a quick refresher on the 3.5 grapple rules, for example, but I knew the basic flow and could work it fast once the page was in front of me).

Nowadays between age and playing multiple editions actively, I more often need to look stuff up and occasionally get the current version of a rule, spell or ability confused with an older version. I still wind up being the default "rules guy" in a lot of my groups even when I'm not DMing.

 

[vecna00]

I tend to retain a lot of the general information about abilities/spells/items, but I will read into them more as needed. Especially if I need the specific wording in order to make a judgement call.