Stoutstien
lunk
I believe it due to GMs having a higher tendency to be more active in discussing the game as a whole.I think it's interesting that the voting community trends so heavily towards being the Dungeon Master. I wonder what that means or why that is?
Most Published adventures are inherently flawed because anyone can pick it up and up and read it or if they run it again it loses it's replay value. It like the joke that idiots get twice a much value watching sports on TV because there may be different results in the instance replays.If I read a module so I know where the treasure was hidden, the answer to the puzzle, and the immunities and vulnerabilities of the end boss' pet that we were supposed to find out (or not) from dealing with a set of NPCs, then it's the game element that's wrong?
Uh huh.
The absolute statement that any game element that is broken by players bringing in outside knowledge is the fault of the element is trivially shown as false.
It's just a spectrum from there. Characters having information about monsters not because that character has ever encountered them or heard of them, but because the player has in another campaign. Knowing an item is cursed from recognizing the description from the DMG even though the character would have no way of knowing. Some groups have a tolerance for that sort of thing, others don't.
It's also why I don't understand AL play.
Not really a good example of how player knowledge ruined the game but of how published campaigns should all have multiple angles of change to prevent static results.
Key takeaway: don't run published campaigns as printed.