Can your players know too much?

[tx7321]

I cut and pasted this from the thread that got locked, I hope thats O.K. I had wanted to discuss what Lane said there but then it got locked so...anyway mods please delete if you need to.

Lanefan wrote (in another thread)

"I've never seen it as unsustainable at all. The players need to know only those rules that apply to them and-or their characters; the DM needs to know the rest. There are a great many things players do not *need* to know (THAC0/BAB being but one) but for some reason do. That was always one of the true attractions in the game for me, at least before I started DM'ing; that I didn't know everything, that there was arcane game knowledge I was not privy to, that everything wasn't laid out on a platter. Then again, I was fortunate in having a competent DM."

I see this as a problem with players these days. It seems like everyone runs out and buys that latest game and then memorizes the rules (shortly followed by the monster manuals). This kind of action is no doubt what the publishers want, but, I think it takes away alot of the energy and fun the game would normally have if only the GM new the rules. Where is the mystery? How can it feel like a fantasy reality if you know the rules and how to move across the imaginary game board.

And then there's the fact that if the DM tries to make stuff up to improve the game the players often cetch him on it. Infact, my players in 3E used to site the rules and page numbers more then I...and would already know what they needed to role on any die to hit a monster (having memorized them the first night they read the book).

Has anyone else experianced this?

Yep, the best games are those where the players sit down clueless to how things work, ignorant of monsters and thier effects, and just "do".

 

[shilsen]

Yep, the best games are those where the players sit down clueless to how things work, ignorant of monsters and thier effects, and just "do".

For you. Personally, I want my players to be completely and totally conversant with the rules. That doesn't necessarily include knowing exactly what the monsters and their efefcts are, but whether they are or not, I have no problems separating player and character knowledge, nor do they.

 

[Lanefan]

This is also one of the joys of having new players in a game; you just never know what they're going to do...they don't know what the game expects and so they just...do it. Or try it, anyway; success not guaranteed!

Preserving the mystery...something I'd never really given much thought to until seeing various posts and discussions here over the last year or so...is vitally important. I rather suspect that if you dig deep, the dimly-remembered sense of mystery is behind much of the nostalgia for 0e/1e. Now some wrongly equate that "mystery" with "powermongering DM", and some DM's admittedly can't tell the difference; however that'll be a problem no matter what rule-set gets used and can't be allowed to derail this train of thought.

Unfortunately, WotC quite correctly figured out that marketing all the books to players as well as DM's would increase sales, so those worms are out of the can now and can't really be stuffed back in. But for those contemplating a houserule system, or a rule-set the players aren't familiar with, only tell them what they need to know! (that said, err on the side of telling too much rather than too little; there's nothing worse than someone losing a character because they didn't know how a rule worked...)

Lanefan

 

[Crothian]

I like that my players understand what is going on. I like that they know the rules. Rules should not be a mystery unless I'm running Paranoia. The mystery comes from the plot, the NPCs, and the actual game sessions.

And there is the usual D&D is like a boardgame comment. I play with guys that own the books and know a lot about the game. D&D is not a boardgame to us becasue we don't let it be that way. Play the game how you want to play it and don't make excuses.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I can't speak to this, because I always knew the stats of the critters better than my GMs because Monster Manuals/Compendiums/Folios/etc. were my favorite D&D books. It never reduced my enjoyment one whit.

Players knowing the AC of the monster always seemed like a benefit to me - anything that reduces the amount of question and answer I have to suffer through. The more the players know without my having to tell them, the better.

I also think it comes across as a little silly to keep rules "secret" (or rather, forcing players to exert a modicum of effort to learn them) for immersion's sake when the most immersive games are generally those with so few rules you can write them on a few index cards - freeform, FATE, Wushu, and the like.

 

[Lanefan]

Play the game how you want to play it and don't make excuses.

I'll second that one.

One rather simple way to preserve a great deal of the mystery...though it'd take some pre-campaign DM time and creativity...would be to simply rename (and maybe re-stat slightly) most of the common monsters. I mean, when your first DM described that you'd disturbed a small colony of 3' tall creatures, green-skinned and scaly, and mostly armed with menacing little spears, you didn't immediately think "Kobold" and start rattling off stats in your head...because you couldn't, because you didn't know them! *That's* what I'm getting at.

Lane-"I am not a Kobold"-fan

 

[Stalker0]

I definately think players can bit a bit too adamant about their rules knowledge, agressively questioning dm's calls past the point when its time to move on. I know I'm guilty of this at times.

On the other hand I've found I have a really good grasp of the rules when I'm a player, but when I'm dming and running a whole bunch of things at the rules often fly out of my head. Its good to have a reminder once in a while

 

[Grymar]

There are two sides of this...the players who are sometime DMs or similar who know the monster stats because they know the game. They should also be good enough at the game to be able to separate in-character and out-of-character knowledge...not "don't let the mummy touch you...it has mummy rot and you'll need to hit a fort save of DC17 to survive." The experience player is going to avoid that sort of information leaking out at the table or affecting the actions of his character if the character wouldn't already know it.

On the other hand there are the players who actively go out and acquire sourcebooks or adventures that you might be running only to study them to have an advantage as a player. These guys are worthless and should be banned from your game. (yes, I have on in my group).

 

[reanjr]

I concur.

 

[Bacris]

Playing as a DM and as a player, I can tell you that I tend to be a bit of a rules lawyer, but at the same time, the mystery is easily maintained by modifying the base monsters that everyone knows.

"What do you mean that orc was immune to the fireball?!?"

Knowing how the mechanics work - such as how to roll an opposed grapple check - not so much worried about, because having to look up rules or doing it ad hoc is too much of a PITA. The mystery is in the plot and creatures that don't follow the norms - thereby introducing intrigue without invalidating all the base rules you've already learned.