D&D General It's not a video game.

[Swarmkeeper]

I am principally a DM, so I have exposure to a large number of modules. I honestly can’t fathom starting a campaign (or even an adventure) and not volunteering to the DM that I have played the adventure before. I would also expect any player to do the same.

That’s where I feel this whole “is this really cheating argument breaks down”. If the people who read the module ahead don’t think they are doing anything wrong, why hide it?

Not mentioning it does not necessarily = hiding it. But, yes, I am with you on feeling the need to mention to a DM if I’ve played/DMed a module/AP before. But that’s me. I don’t care what other players do.

I’m currently running a 5e West Marches-style Curse of Strahd campaign with one other DM. We didn’t even bother asking the players if they have played it before or read the book. We simply have a warning about metagaming: test your assumptions in the game world, people, because things might be different than you the player might expect. That’s it.

Things run smoothly because:
1. We’ve switched things up ever so slightly and added a bunch of side adventures that aren’t in the book at all. Not because we were forced to, but because it is a fun part of DM prep.
2. We have players that are there to play a fun, cooperative game. No one is acting like a jerk.
3. When the other DM is playing or when I am playing, we take nothing for granted, share the spotlight, and - just like the other players - engage with the game world via our PC.
4. Random encounters are a thing - even the DM doesn’t know what will happen next until the dice are rolled.

So, yes, I get it that a player hiding the fact that they’ve read or played a module/AP before could be troublesome - but ONLY if that player is going to be a disruptive jerk for having done so. In which case we’re back to square one of the Jerk Fallacy: a jerk player does not prove universally that having foreknowledge of an adventure is cheating.

 

[Reynard]

This discussion has veered hard toward the issue of cheating. I was initially more interested in the question of a) whether this happens as often as it appears online, and b) what the real motivation for such behavior might be. It struck me as related to the way people view success in video games (hence the thread title) but many responses in this thread suggest it is a pretty old practice.

So a follow up question to totally flip the subject: what if a group embraced the idea heavy metagaming? It would probably look a lot like LitRPG. I think.about running a game like that sometimes, up to and including respawning. Has anyone done that?

 

[iserith]

So a follow up question to totally flip the subject: what if a group embraced the idea heavy metagaming? It would probably look a lot like LitRPG. I think.about running a game like that sometimes, up to and including respawning. Has anyone done that?

You'd probably have to explain what you mean exactly by "metagaming" and "respawning."

In my games, you are free to "metagame" as much as you want. But here's what my table rules say about that: "Metagame, but Verify. We will never question the reason for another player's choices for his or her character as long as it achieves the goals of play. Use your player skill and knowledge to succeed, but be aware that assumptions can be risky so it's skillful play to verify your assumptions through action before making choices based on them. Monsters and lore may be frequently modified from what you may expect." So go ahead - crack open that Monster Manual while we play. Just be aware you're taking an unnecessary risk in a game already full of risks.

I'm not entirely sure about "respawning," but there are times where I take death off the table as a result, if it makes sense for the theme (Eberron pulp action heroes, for example, or D&D/supers mashups). Not sure that counts though for your question.

 

[Flamestrike]

This is slightly off-topic, but it is a cool topic. My issue with pre-canned builds is that the players who use them don’t really understand them and so get frustrated when a build that is supposed to be powerful doesn’t perform as intended against a DM that like to use a variety of enemy types and combat situations.

Like the Hexblade Pallock that gets stuck in a web and sits out the battle because an 8 str mesns they can’t free themselves.

Ill never play a 'build' without the fluff and the character. I'll start with a concept, and then make the 'build' work for that concept.

If that means occasionally taking a 'suboptimal' choice because it fits the fluff and flavor better so be it.

 

[loverdrive]

So a follow up question to totally flip the subject: what if a group embraced the idea heavy metagaming? It would probably look a lot like LitRPG. I think.about running a game like that sometimes, up to and including respawning. Has anyone done that?

I did run something similar -- it was a game within game -- the characters were doing a Isle of the Ape speedrun... And it was fun as hell.

On a tangential note, I do think that regardless of type of game you're playing, embracing metagaming is a good idea. What's this game about? What's the genre? What's the theme? What are dramatic questions that need to be answered in this scene/session/season? How much time do we have left today? are all questions that the character has zero idea about, but should be considered by a player.

 

[jasper]

I no longer DM modules as written and never tell the players they are playing in a module. Learned that lesson long ago (80s) when one player bought the module and read it secretly. He eventually outed himself by insisting too strongly they search a room (because he knew there was an important magic item behind a secret door) when other players just wanted to move along.

Un possible. Back in the day. All players respected the DM. The ones who thought of doing this threw themselves into active volcanoes to put out the volcanoes. And we liked it. It is the truth. How many active volcanoes are there today?

 

[loverdrive]

Un possible. Back in the day. All players respected the DM. The ones who thought of doing this threw themselves into active volcanoes to put out the volcanoes. And we liked it. It is the truth. How many active volcanoes are there today?

Damn, I've almost choke on my beer!

 

[Ancalagon]

I haven't read the entire thread yet so if this has been suggested already, I apologize but...

Use old stuff. I'm running a 2nd ed adventure (converted to 5e), from Dungeon magazine. No one has even heard of it.

I despise people who do what the OP describe.

 

[Oofta]

I did run something similar -- it was a game within game -- the characters were doing a Isle of the Ape speedrun... And it was fun as hell.

On a tangential note, I do think that regardless of type of game you're playing, embracing metagaming is a good idea. What's this game about? What's the genre? What's the theme? What are dramatic questions that need to be answered in this scene/session/season? How much time do we have left today? are all questions that the character has zero idea about, but should be considered by a player.

There's a difference between establishing theme and tone versus reading a mod so that you know where to look for secret doors.

The former is typical, whether the latter is okay should be discussed.

When I play video games I regularly read up on stuff before I play and look up hints if I get stuck. But I would never (intentionally) use monster knowledge or my knowledge of a mod without checking first. I don't want to spoil the fun for the other players, including the DM