Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6992982" data-attributes="member: 97077">My players regulate what their characters believe and how they act. If they say they believe fire hurts trolls or simply declare an action to attack a troll with a fire bolt spell, then that's fine by me because that is their role in this game, not the DM's. What a player establishes a character believes, however, is not necessarily true, so making assumptions without verifying those assumptions with actions is risky.If a player asks me what his or her character believes about troll vulnerabilities, I shrug and I ask him or her to tell me - it's not on me to say what a character believes. (I then tell him or her to please stop asking questions and DO something.) If a player declares an action to recall lore about a particular monster, I adjudicate it as with any other action declaration, possibly asking for an ability check. A failed check still leaves the player in the same position: The character can believe and act how the player wants. It's just the player has no confirmation as to the veracity of those beliefs.As to how I generally run things since I wrote the original topic nearly two years ago, generally I have it be that a successful attempt to recall lore results in giving the player what they sought for their goal (usually specific, valuable information) whereas a failed check results in recalling something interesting, but perhaps not immediately useful. And, of course, no matter what, I'm always telegraphing the monster's resistances, vulnerabilities, immunities, and notable traits and attacks. The troll roars at the brazier and kicks it across the room, sending the hot coals flying, or takes a noticeably circuitous route to get at the wizard so as to avoid the campfire, for example. Any player paying attention should have a reasonable chance of inferring that the troll is especially fearful of open flame. Failing to make this effort to telegraph threats makes it a "gotcha" and I'm not okay with that.</blockquote>

Verification