Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4989497" data-attributes="member: 2011">Only the obvious stuff. For example, this foe has Chain and Shield and this foe is in Leather. Does that mean that the Leather clad foe is easier to hit? Not necessarily.Two large crab monsters? No, the players do not know that one crab monster has a higher AC than the other until they actually roll dice and start discovering on their own how easy or hard the monsters are to hit. The players can probably intuit that these are crab monsters from the description, hence, they are probably hard to hit.No, it's more like Chess.If the players make a Monster Knowledge check, I will tell them that the foes work better adjacent or whatever. But, I don't auto-hand out such information. And, the players might not know that they work better adjacent because they are offensively better or defensively better. They just know that this monster has an effective mode of combat that they should try to avoid. I give generalities with Monster Knowledge checks, not explicit detailed information.By definition, the game is not more "fun and interesting" if the players know all or even most of the capabilities of the monsters. To me, it's actually more boring because the player's decision making then starts becoming a bit restricted. Who is going to use their Push power when the Slide power is the only one that will help the situation?I prefer a game where the players learn some monster info from Monster Checks and other monster info by actually fighting the monsters. The game is more enjoyable if there are surprises and unexpected challenges to overcome than it is if the DM lets all of the players know all of the monster capabilities.I'm not a big fan of spoon feeding monster info to the players.As a player, I come to the game table to be surprised and thrilled, not to learn new monster capabilities so that I can tactically play to the best of my PCs abilities.Uggh.Sorry, but I really wouldn't want to know that as a player. I want to roll a 12 and miss every once in a while, not be encouraged by the DM to change targets to almost always attack the squishiest one for whichever defense I tend to target.I really do not believe in this level of entitlement that many DMs seem to think players want and need to have.E.g. The players are entitled to know everything about the monsters. The players are entititled to know everything about a trap. The players are entitled to most treasure that is explicitly suited for their PCs.I believe in a balanced approached. The players know some stuff, they don't know a lot more than they know. That maintains mystery. That forces the players to not take encounters for granted. That gives players a sense of accomplishment for what they achieve.</blockquote>

Verification