Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
DMs Advice - Player's bad assumptions
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="MarkB" data-source="post: 6157750" data-attributes="member: 40176"><p>Logically, any check result sufficient to answer the question "how does this dwarven security system work?" would be plenty to provide the information "this is clearly not a dwarven security system". By providing that simple answer you dispel the players' assumption.</p><p></p><p>And if their check result was insufficient, then they would've failed anyway, even if their assumption was correct.</p><p></p><p>I'll also point out that Knowledge checks are, by their nature, passive checks - they're a check to see whether or not the character knows something. Even if the player, hearing your description, thinks the runes are dwarven, his character will still recognise them as arcane runes if he's seen their like before. The player should automatically get to roll a check using the correct Knowledge skill the moment he says his character is examining the runes.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Try telling the players "You're proceeding under a false assumption. I know it was a few sessions ago, but do you remember that scene where <insert assumption-busting information>..."</p><p></p><p>If you feel that that's too metagamey, ask them all to make Intelligence checks first, then tell the above to whoever rolled highest.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MarkB, post: 6157750, member: 40176"] Logically, any check result sufficient to answer the question "how does this dwarven security system work?" would be plenty to provide the information "this is clearly not a dwarven security system". By providing that simple answer you dispel the players' assumption. And if their check result was insufficient, then they would've failed anyway, even if their assumption was correct. I'll also point out that Knowledge checks are, by their nature, passive checks - they're a check to see whether or not the character knows something. Even if the player, hearing your description, thinks the runes are dwarven, his character will still recognise them as arcane runes if he's seen their like before. The player should automatically get to roll a check using the correct Knowledge skill the moment he says his character is examining the runes. Try telling the players "You're proceeding under a false assumption. I know it was a few sessions ago, but do you remember that scene where <insert assumption-busting information>..." If you feel that that's too metagamey, ask them all to make Intelligence checks first, then tell the above to whoever rolled highest. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
DMs Advice - Player's bad assumptions
Top