NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 6205424" data-attributes="member: 29398">Perhaps, but what it *says* in that high funny voice should be enough to almost completely define it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  Two characters who are game-mechanically identical should in theory be easy to differentiate at the table just by how they're role-played and what personalities they are given.So how does that fit with worldbuilding?  Do the DM and the players collaboratively build the world, its history, its peoples etc.^ before the campaign starts?  I ask this because most of the backstory can come from a world's history and cultures, which not all characters might know much about.^ - assuming you're not using a pre-fab world e.g. Greyhawk, Golarion, etc.I've seen this in action as well, and don't like it much; I don't at all mind if a DM mixes up the mechanics a bit to throw us off just to avoid some metagaming - as long as she's consistent in what she does, of course.  But yes, it becomes almost unaviodable eventually.The bigger issue is non-mechanical metagaming, where player knowledge is greater than character knowledge - far too many players in my experience are simply incapable of sticking only to what their character knows...e.g. if the players know the chamberlain is a spy for the enemy realm - but the characters don't - any meeting with said chamberlain will inevitably go much differently (despite all protestations to the contrary) than if the players had been kept in the dark.Lan-"when I do a high squeaky voice people run screaming for the hills"-efan</blockquote>

Verification