D&D 5E (2014) Is looking in the books O.K

[Satyrn]

I think all of us at my table refrain from looking at the Monster Manual during play simply because we think it would be less fun if we did so.

 

[transtemporal]

No, really not cool. Ask him to stop. If he doesn't, stop the game. You're not required to let him blatantly cheat at the table.

 

[Dausuul]

I now find myself wanting to make a character who, every time he's confronted with a monster, announces confidently "I know what this is!" and then proceeds to name the wrong monster, and describe in detail the combat abilities of some other wrong monster.

 

[alienux]

No, definitely not, but if they ask about a monster, I'll generally let them make a nature check to see if their character knows something about the monster.

 

[iserith]

I now find myself wanting to make a character who, every time he's confronted with a monster, announces confidently "I know what this is!" and then proceeds to name the wrong monster, and describe in detail the combat abilities of some other wrong monster.

I have a player in my campaign who plays a character that thinks any monster-related clue they find signals the presence of an owlbear.

(It's a shame they'll likely encounter an owlbear next session and he won't be there.)

 

[Flamestrike]

Its a 'hell no' from me.

Never heard of it happening before. Its nearly as bad as reading the adventure module.

 

[Flamestrike]

I have a player in my campaign who plays a character that thinks any monster-related clue they find signals the presence of an owlbear.

(It's a shame they'll likely encounter an owlbear next session and he won't be there.)

Actually thats hillarious.