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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Bard Playtest discussion
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="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8790307" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>Really, because for the last three posts you have fought tooth and nail about how I must be metagaming, if I was in a game where orcs were rare. Now it is "assume what you want".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No. Wolves come in one form. Wolves. </p><p></p><p>If you want different monsters, you use different statblocks, like Dire Wolves (which aren't just called wolves) or Winter Wolves, or Flame Wolves, or whatever else. When I said wolf, I meant wolf. Not anything else. Remember, we are talking about a game here, terms are defined.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Balgura are the same as Chasme. Glabrezu are the same as Balors, except that the one is immune to fire. The one immune to fire by the way, is the one holding a flaming whip and with an aura of fire around it. I wonder how I could possibly tell that it might be more than resistant to flame, with it being constantly on fire. I must be forced to use magic! </p><p></p><p>Also, you are ignoring CR. You wouldn't typically fight a Balor before you fight a Chasme.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And how is the magic weapon information useful if you don't have magical weapons? </p><p></p><p>This is one of the things that makes this worse than the theorycraft. Because finding out the enemy is resistant to non-magical weapons, like I said and you ignored, is useless information unless you specifically have magical weapons that are worse than your non-magical weapons. Otherwise, you will be using the same weapons regardless of the information. </p><p></p><p>If information cannot lead to a tactical change in the current fight, it is useless information in the current fight.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"can include" </p><p></p><p>So, now, to avoid metagaming, I have to consider that this STORM giant, isn't actually intrinsically tied to storms, but might instead be a psionic sorcerer using subtle spell to just APPEAR like he is intrinsically tied to storms... So, how does my character know about psionics or subtle spell? Those aren't metagaming according to you, but thinking that a <strong>STORM </strong>giant might be elementally tied to <strong>STORMS </strong>is. So, do all characters just come pre-loaded with all knowledge of all casting styles, that they must consider as viable alternatives to any possible elemental resistance?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Make unique monsters? Sure, that's fine. </p><p></p><p>Make unique monsters explicitly to evoke an elemental immunity, but actually have the creature immune to a completely different element, with the sole purpose of trying to catch players who assume that the monster's appearance is giving valid clues? Yeah, that's like, definitionally a gotcha. There is no other reason for that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Uh huh, so an ability that allows you to know Vulnerabilities would not tell it to you, because it is not a Vulnerability. Remember, this was copying the Hunter's Lore ability, which has the capitalization. They are not the same thing, which you literally just admitted.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes they do.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Right, it protects better, and they probably have a rough idea of how hard it would be to hit the individual wearing it. </p><p></p><p>It is absolutely something the character's can figure out. Just because we can put it to hard numbers instead of vague feelings doesn't change that and suddenly make it impossible for the PCs to understand how armor works. And if we can have abilities that tell us ability scores of enemies, we can have abilities that tell us AC. It isn't even a stretch, </p><p></p><p>Plus, you know, MAGIC. It doesn't have to strictly follow even psuedo-realism.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8790307, member: 6801228"] Really, because for the last three posts you have fought tooth and nail about how I must be metagaming, if I was in a game where orcs were rare. Now it is "assume what you want". No. Wolves come in one form. Wolves. If you want different monsters, you use different statblocks, like Dire Wolves (which aren't just called wolves) or Winter Wolves, or Flame Wolves, or whatever else. When I said wolf, I meant wolf. Not anything else. Remember, we are talking about a game here, terms are defined. Balgura are the same as Chasme. Glabrezu are the same as Balors, except that the one is immune to fire. The one immune to fire by the way, is the one holding a flaming whip and with an aura of fire around it. I wonder how I could possibly tell that it might be more than resistant to flame, with it being constantly on fire. I must be forced to use magic! Also, you are ignoring CR. You wouldn't typically fight a Balor before you fight a Chasme. And how is the magic weapon information useful if you don't have magical weapons? This is one of the things that makes this worse than the theorycraft. Because finding out the enemy is resistant to non-magical weapons, like I said and you ignored, is useless information unless you specifically have magical weapons that are worse than your non-magical weapons. Otherwise, you will be using the same weapons regardless of the information. If information cannot lead to a tactical change in the current fight, it is useless information in the current fight. "can include" So, now, to avoid metagaming, I have to consider that this STORM giant, isn't actually intrinsically tied to storms, but might instead be a psionic sorcerer using subtle spell to just APPEAR like he is intrinsically tied to storms... So, how does my character know about psionics or subtle spell? Those aren't metagaming according to you, but thinking that a [B]STORM [/B]giant might be elementally tied to [B]STORMS [/B]is. So, do all characters just come pre-loaded with all knowledge of all casting styles, that they must consider as viable alternatives to any possible elemental resistance? Make unique monsters? Sure, that's fine. Make unique monsters explicitly to evoke an elemental immunity, but actually have the creature immune to a completely different element, with the sole purpose of trying to catch players who assume that the monster's appearance is giving valid clues? Yeah, that's like, definitionally a gotcha. There is no other reason for that. Uh huh, so an ability that allows you to know Vulnerabilities would not tell it to you, because it is not a Vulnerability. Remember, this was copying the Hunter's Lore ability, which has the capitalization. They are not the same thing, which you literally just admitted. Yes they do. Right, it protects better, and they probably have a rough idea of how hard it would be to hit the individual wearing it. It is absolutely something the character's can figure out. Just because we can put it to hard numbers instead of vague feelings doesn't change that and suddenly make it impossible for the PCs to understand how armor works. And if we can have abilities that tell us ability scores of enemies, we can have abilities that tell us AC. It isn't even a stretch, Plus, you know, MAGIC. It doesn't have to strictly follow even psuedo-realism. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Bard Playtest discussion
Top