D&D 5E Is looking in the books O.K

[iserith]

I prefer to focus on the bad outcomes that can be associated with "metagame thinking" more than the act itself. I can't police people's thoughts, nor do I trouble myself with asking why they decide to do a thing. That's not my role as DM. Rather, I remind the players not to allow "metagame thinking" to give them an expectation that is later proven to be wrong which can lead to the bad outcome of a dissatisfying play experience. It's like the DMG's example of "The DM wouldn't throw such a powerful monster at us..." That could lead to the death of the party.

Thus we have my Table Rule, which is posted for every game: '"Metagaming,' defined as using player skill or knowledge that a character might not necessarily have, is fine. I want you to draw upon your skill as a player to try and succeed... As well, assumptions can be risky so it's skillful play to verify your assumptions through in-game actions before making choices based on them. If you can justify your character's actions or knowledge by establishing appropriate fiction (e.g. Mialee knows about trolls' vulnerability to fire because of elvish tales she heard as a youngling), so much the better.

So, read the Monster Manual all you want. Even at the table if it's not distracting. But make decisions based on that information at your own risk.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I don't allow it when I DM as I think it's kind of tacky. If a player wants to know something specific from the MM, I'll often allow an Int (Nature/Arcana...) check and answer as appropriate.

However, I'm pretty lenient on what PCs do know, since I assume the players have all consigned the MM to memory. My in-game rationale is that monster lore is pretty ubiquitous, the stuff of folk tales and adventurer tavern talk over the ages. Therefore if a player says they ready fire when they fight a troll, I don't complain they're metagaming. It's pretty common knowledge, especially for adventurers. Though some monsters may not fit the template... ;>

 

[Li Shenron]

It can be allowed, i do not see much problems in a game where the players know exactly what they are fighting. It definitely doesn't mean they are going to win,only that they don't have to guess. You could even show the monsters current HP openly.

That said,i don't run the game like this, i keep the monsters stats secret. And by the way i very often tinker with monsters stats and abilities, thus peeking into the MM can be even misleading in our case.

 

[hejtmane]

I am DMing a game in 5e and was wondering if it was "allowed" or "O.K" for the players to look at the stats of the monster they are fighting in the Monster Manual....i am leaning toward not allowing it because seeing its stats and knowing what can hurt it more or what will do less damage i consider meta-gaming.

When we are playing I give a vague description unless it is something they would know like a gnoll, troll, Orc and so forth. The issue is that the players can buy their own Monster Manual and memorize most the monster it has been happening for 30 years. The only good thing is I now have the Tome of beast and just got Volo's so that makes that harder but the players will meta game anyways because you can not prevent access outside the game and yes players will read and memorize things.

Now during the game session I keep the books with me and a lot of times I print copies of the Monsters I pretty much lined up or I have a stats written out or base stats with a page # for the details during the sessions. Thinking you can prevent meta gaming is a waste of time the best you can do it limit it to their memory and be vague in some of your descriptions of the monsters that they would not know by sight.

 

[iserith]

Since the OP and others have brought up "metagaming" as a reason to prohibit the Monster Manual being read at the table, I'm earnestly interested in finding out people's opinions:

What if you just decided, today, that you don't care about "metagaming?" You cared about it for years, but as of today, you're done thinking about it or doing anything in particular to prohibit it. You're over it, for whatever reason you choose to imagine.

What impact would that have, if any, on your future gaming sessions?

And if you didn't care about "metagaming" anymore, would you still be bothered if players perused the Monster Manual at the table?

 

[JonnyP71]

No, as others have died the players should play according to the characters experience.

I had a hand where tge BBEG was a wareboar. Despite knowing his weapon was useless the barbarian charged him reading and continued to hit him through the whole fight despite ask the IC evidence that he wasn't hurting it. His character is supposed to be simple and lives hitting big things with his axe, so guess who got inspiration that session.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

Our Barbarian plays in exactly the same way - mainly against undead and demons. My character (a bookish professor who keeps notes on creatures encountered) has told her many many times that if the enemy looks like it has been dead a long time already that she should use her magic hammer, but no, she charges in with her favourite axe....

 

[Jer]

And if you didn't care about "metagaming" anymore, would you still be bothered if players perused the Monster Manual at the table?

I actually don't care about metagaming anymore, but I would still be bothered by players reading the Monster Manual at the table during an encounter. Slightly more upset than when someone is checking facebook during an encounter, less upset than when someone spills their Coke all over the table.

Mostly I'd be upset that they actually think I'd run a straight by the book monster these days. I'd be offended that they hadn't been paying any attention to my DMing style all of these years. But I'd also be a bit miffed that they feel the need to "win" the encounter so badly that they're going to resort to reading the stats to figure out a way to beat it. I'd figure it was a mark against my ability to run the kind of game I want to have if I'd somehow managed to train my players to think that they need to go to those kinds of efforts to "win" an encounter.

 

[Bawylie]

At my table, please refrain from looking in the books or your phone with the following exception:

If you're casting a spell or summoning a creature or referencing a rule, have the text ready by the time I call your turn.

If you're reading the MM bc you want more info on a monster, you should understand I design a lot of my own monsters and the MM ones I consider typical examples, not specific. So you can't take for granted that the monster in the MM is the one you're fighting. I spend a lot of time designing encounters for you - this frequently means tailoring and tweaking.

In any case, don't waste table time. And don't worry too much about the text bc it is subject to revision.


-Brad

 

[Shasarak]

Personally I would not be hypocritical enough to ban Phones at my table.

 

[pemerton]

if you didn't care about "metagaming" anymore, would you still be bothered if players perused the Monster Manual at the table?

As a general rule, I don't care about "metagaming". Eg I expect my players to build PCs and make plans based on their knowledge that I tend to use lots of undead and demons as foes, like to use "unexpected" reinforcements in combat encounters, etc.

That said, I prefer to manage the revelation of monster/NPC stats in the interests of pacing, suspense etc.