D&D General DM's: How transparent are you with game mechanics "in world?"

[Lanefan]

I think we agree, which is why a player trying his best to dig for technical explanations is violating this principle, because it's attacking the world from the rules perspective.

Note that it's a bit the same with real world physicists (I've done quite a bit myself but deliberately leave it at the door when playing), because it's clear that there is no way that a D&D world can be consistently explained in terms of real physics.

Where I think it can be, using real physics as the foundation and adding magic as a fifth physical force.

In particular, I resist any attempt at defining air as mosty O2-N2 compound, air is the stuff from the elemental plane of air.

Where I'm the opposite: if air is an O2-N2 compound in the real world I'm going to assume it's the same in the game world until-unless told otherwise; and if told otherwise I'll probably ask what its base composition is.

More broadly, it's easier for us to imagine stuff if we can just assume everything works like the real world except where it clearly doesn't.

 

[Lyxen]

Depends on the NPC. Some last for ages, other are one-hit wonders - just like PCs.

It's not only a question of duration of life, but of actual use. The PCs are, by the nature of their adventures, going to be thrown into extremely varied situations where they will need to work as a team (D&D is a class-based TTRPG by design). NPCs will probably have situations which are far less varied, but will probably not rely on teams.

It's not mandatory, I've used the "enemy adventuring party" a number of times and to great effect, and in that case, why not use the PC rules indeed, but it's the exception rather than the rule.

Once a DM sets the rules of whatever game she wants to run she too is bound to honour those rules, just like a player is, if she intends to run her game in good faith.

First, "good faith" (I'm putting quotation marks here because I hope you are not saying what I think you are saying) is not a requirement of a DM. Being a lead storyteller and referee that provides fun for his table is his aim. Whether he uses "good faith" or not is totally up to him, but once more, it's insulting to other ways of playing to say that a DM fudging or making rules as he goes along, and you are sliding towards badwrongfun.

Once more, this is 5e, rulings, not rules, asking a DM to set them up before the game is not within the spirit of 5e. Nothing wrong there if you are not following that spirit, but on the other hand saying that it has to be done is wrong.

Second, once more, there is no rule whatsoever in particular in 5e that says that any person in the multiverse that has developed some power has had to use the paths that the PC use. "good faith" notwithstanding and assuming that I use your principle above (which I don't but let's just assume it), I don't want to set up such a rule in my multiverse, that's all. There are myriads of path to powers, some that the PC follows, others that they don't, there is no reason in universe to set path like it.

Metagaming is bad, I agree there; but I don't see how this promotes it.

Because the players will be able to second guess what the NPCs are doing and infer the limits and ways of working of the NPC power, and therefore technically game to gain an advantage that the players possess by knowing all the classes from the PH.

Now, don't get me wrong, if a PC wizard battles a NPC wizard from the same academy, it will not be metagaming, there is a good chance that the PC wizard will have studied the exact same spells that the NPC is using. But again, that should be the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Lyxen]

Where I think it can be, using real physics as the foundation and adding magic as a fifth physical force.

It sorts of work with low magical campaigns, but because magic violates basic physical rules like the conservation of energy and momentum, and every single law of thermodynamic, as a (long time ago but still very much interested) physicist, I really don't see how this work in p[ractice.

Even gravity does not work the same way in the canon, the Spelljammer gravity that makes zero sense compared to real world gravity is in Dungeon of the Mad Mage.

Where I'm the opposite: if air is an O2-N2 compound in the real world I'm going to assume it's the same in the game world until-unless told otherwise; and if told otherwise I'll probably ask what its base composition is.

YCMV and you are perfectly free to play it that way in your campaign, but for me that leads directly to exploits like gunpowder, and it doe snot work well at all with magic, in particular the elemental one.

So, in all my campaigns, air is just stuff from the elemental plane of air, much easier and avoids metagaming as well by PCs who have zero reason to have even notions of real world chemistry.

More broadly, it's easier for us to imagine stuff if we can just assume everything works like the real world except where it clearly doesn't.

I know it's easier, but you should try all books by Brandon Sanderson, he really challenges your brain with magic that has its own rules and physics, which is very consistent and fun, and still is at complete odds with real world physics. That is what I'm shooting for in my games.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I don't disagree, but many DMs want the illusion of choice, because the players will chafe under being told exactly what is going to happen to their characters.

I actually encountered this where a DM placed my character under a "curse". I'm not going to go into full details, but an evil NPC wanted us to do a quest, and I got in a confrontation with guards that my allies abandoned me to, so I was beaten unconcious, arrested, and then cursed. The curse could be removed by the NPC. The NPC was demigod level strong, so likely we could not remove it ourselves.

If we left the area of these two kingdoms, my character permanently died and only a wish could restore them (we were level 8 or 9, and our main goal was getting out of this area)
If we took more than 20 days to complete his quest and return, my character permanently died and only a wish could restore them.
He would only remove the curse if we traveled to the citadel of his enemy (of equal godlike power), retrieved an object of power, and brought it back to him. The Journey would take more than 20 days one way.
So, the NPC was going to provide transport to the citadel of their enemy, so we could arrive before I died, and then provide me with a single person teleport so I could return alone to give him the artifact, restoring him to even greater power, and then he would send me away from these kingdoms... while I left my friends and companions behind to rot.

There were other details that made my character a burden on the party and a drain on resources as well.

And the guy was insistent that he wasn't railroading, that I still had choices, and that because I had been in that conflict with the guards within the first hour of us being in this city, it was a natural consequence of my actions, and I should be grateful he didn't just kill my character off.

And he wanted to stage an execution of my character, that the other PCs would try and stop, but have me signal to them to not stop it, because trying to stop it would get them killed, and they were supposed to just do something else rather than try and rescue me, so we could go on this quest.

Because he didn't want to take away our ability to choose, because railroading is bad.

So, yeah. We can change up the labels, but I can see the tools being used horrifically badly, and that makes me quite hesitant to lionize DMs. Because if you get it in your head that it's okay to do things to make the story happen in the way you want, it can get out of hand.

Yikes. Sharing your experiences make it clear why you are uncomfortable with the concept of DMs not being able to cheat. Seems like that particular DM might even have a persistent array of spells going on in the background in order to force their story hooks - some amalgamation of Compulsion, Dominate Person, Fast Friends, and/or who knows what. IMO, it is much simpler and has much better results when a DM lays down story hooks that the players choose rather than have foisted upon them. It's all about good faith play.

Did you continue with that story? If so, was it at all fun?

 

[Maxperson]

Not really, we always did storytelling and roleplaying, but dropping powergaming not only allowed us to spend more time on the former, but also switched us into a much more friendly cooperative game without the slightest hint of competition.

As for the Lava Gnomes, I have told you, it's a fine explanation if you want to use it (although it does have the additional requirement to need creatures that could be interacted with and therefore need some level definition), I was just pointing out that, when you're stuck, there is an official background explanation that you can always pull out of your hat.

Again, though, that official answer was in the context of things that appear to be magical, like dragon breath or an area where gravity is reversed. Nothing in that section when taken in the context of the question and answer would indicate that lava is "magical."

 

[Yora]

I think that a well designed game system makes it mechanically advantageous for players to act in ways that feel fitting for the style of story the campaign. If you think "It would be amazingly dramatic to do this thing now, but that'd be a really bad use of my turn", then the system is falling short of its purpose.
But at the same time, I don't think characters should be aware of their stats or character sheet. That always feels weird. (And has always been a big issue with D&D magic for me.)

 

[Lyxen]

Again, though, that official answer was in the context of things that appear to be magical, like dragon breath or an area where gravity is reversed. Nothing in that section when taken in the context of the question and answer would indicate that lava is "magical."

And again, obviously, lava flowing cleanly, not burning from 10 meters away, not emitting fumes, and not cooling is something that you yourself found to be unnatural enough to need an explanation for. Ordinary lava that you can't approach because it cooks and poisons you, and quickly stops flowing in cooler conditions is indeed clearly not "magical" and does not even need an explanation, but it's not the "fantasy laval" that we are discussing, which is as unnatural as a dragon's breath.

 

[Maxperson]

And again, obviously, lava flowing cleanly, not burning from 10 meters away, not emitting fumes, and not cooling is something that you yourself found to be unnatural enough to need an explanation for.

I was just making a joke, as evidenced by the laughs it got

I feel no need to explain lava. It's just not a big enough deviation to warrant one. The game isn't meant to mirror real life. But in any case...

 

[Lyxen]

I was just making a joke, as evidenced by the laughs it got

I feel no need to explain lava. It's just not a big enough deviation to warrant one. The game isn't meant to mirror real life. But in any case...

View attachment 143629

View attachment 143630

I'm sure you've noticed that in the first case, although the lava is clearly cooling down, the guy stays a few meters away, and in the second case, if you've watched the video, the guy is actually fairly far away. Nothing that resemble this, because that is fantasy lava:

 

[Maxperson]

I'm sure you've noticed that in the first case, although the lava is clearly cooling down, the guy stays a few meters away, and in the second case, if you've watched the video, the guy is actually fairly far away. Nothing that resemble this, because that is fantasy lava:

Nothing says that I have to do fantasy lava in a grand way like that, but that's also the Star Wars universe, so there's no D&D "magic" lava there. If they can have non-"magic" lava like that, so can I.