Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wolfwood2" data-source="post: 3317159" data-attributes="member: 39394">A little meta-gaming now and again is like a fresh spring breeze, lightening the hearts of players and GMs alike.  Rigid adherence to what is "in character" can only ruin games and cause boredom and unhappiness.  YMMV of course.Now that that's out of the way.It's pretty obvious what happened.  The player of the archeologist had a shotgun on his equipment list, and he assumed that anything on his equipment list was a part of his character and he could be expected to have access to it at any time.  Coming from a mainly D&D background this isn't surprising.The Keeper decided it wasn't worth his while to derail his game for a detailed discussion of when a character's equipment would realistically be available, so he says, "That's illegal by the way, but whatever," and continues the game.  No doubt this decision was influenced by the fact that the zombie was apparently shotgun-proof, so it wasn't going to drastically change the storyline either way.A different player is more concerned with the whole "immersive experience" thing than others in the group and gets upset.The proper thing to do is to talk with the player of the archeologist after the game about how equipment isn't that important in CoC and how thinking up clever solutions to a problem is usually more the point anyway.  Possibly coupled by promise from the Keeper that this won't be used to mess with his character and if it really seems beneficial that the archeologist had his shotgun along than they'll assume that he did.Nobody was the bad guy and nobody needs to get kicked out of the group over this.</blockquote>

Verification