D&D General Just Eat the Dang Fruit

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, but by the same token you’re assuming that any visible effects would occur pretty immediately. Usually it takes hours for an ingested drug or other toxic agent to take effect, because it needs time to be digested.

Then maybe they should make the save hours later.

 

[Charlaquin]

Then maybe they should make the save hours later.

That’s what I said, yeah.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Fellas, is playing your character metagaming?

No, don’t be silly.

Doing anything that might lead to character survival is metagaming.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Someone who was looking at this scenario told me another angle worth considering is what incentive the players other than me even have to eat the fruit.

I ate the fruit, knowing full well the situation was suspect, because I was trying to get some sweet, sweet Inspiration. So I portrayed my flaw accordingly.

After that save though, the rest of the players have zero incentive to be a "good little RPer" and expose themselves to risk. Instead, for eating the fruit, they get the shaft. Maybe they get to walk away with some level of satisfaction that they were "true to their character," but if death results, that's probably not all that great a payoff.

What does everyone make of that? What incentives do you see that would encourage the players to "not metagame" in this situation?

I think there are two answers here:

1. Staying in character is fun in and of itself. Playing someone else is a core type of fun offered by DnD

2. If you want a story where things happen, sometimes you need to instigate. Playing paranoid survivalists can get dull if it means you avoid all the prepared encounters.

 

[iserith]

I think there are two answers here:

1. Staying in character is fun in and of itself. Playing someone else is a core type of fun offered by DnD

2. If you want a story where things happen, sometimes you need to instigate. Playing paranoid survivalists can get dull if it means you avoid all the prepared encounters.

1. Is someone necessarily not "staying in character" by refusing the fruit? I would say no. Even if a player's primary motivation was to refuse the fruit to avoid risk, I'm sure anyone can come up with a reason the character did that which is reasonably consistent with how they normally act in substantially similar situations.

2. In this particular case, I see no incentive. Or at least, nothing tangible like what my character received (Inspiration). The players engaged with the scenario, just most of them did not eat the fruit. It's not like they noped out of the whole scene.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think there are two answers here:

1. Staying in character is fun in and of itself. Playing someone else is a core type of fun offered by DnD

2. If you want a story where things happen, sometimes you need to instigate. Playing paranoid survivalists can get dull if it means you avoid all the prepared encounters.

Both dirty metagame attitudes. to the mines with you!

 

[Charlaquin]

I think there are two answers here:

1. Staying in character is fun in and of itself. Playing someone else is a core type of fun offered by DnD

Yes, but also you stop being able to have fun playing your character if they die, so this can be a disincentive as well.

2. If you want a story where things happen, sometimes you need to instigate. Playing paranoid survivalists can get dull if it means you avoid all the prepared encounters.

Personally I think it’s on the DM to prepare encounters that don’t require the players to play against their own characters’ best interests to happen. And in fact, if you can count on your players to play to their own characters’ best interests, you can better plan your encounters around that assumption.

 

[Hriston]

Yeah, I think that if the DM did want justification for why people were not interested in the fruit (again, I find it unusual to care about that, but nevermind), then a player could cite the "wave of exhaustion" being perceptible on Brick's face and posture or something. Then it would be up to the DM to object to that I guess (e.g. "I meant that only for Brickyard.").

I agree that character-motivation (as opposed to player-motivation) for the character’s actions is not needed, but in the event that was something the table had decided was important to them I think the DM has provided that by establishing at the table the fictional event “A wave of exhaustion washes over [Brickyard].” I think there might be an assumption on the part of some posters that this situation is being treated similarly to one in which the party has split up with no viable means of communicating their various experiences of the environment to one another which seems odd considering they’re all in the same room together as described. There also seems to be a particular focus on the saving throw. I’d be curious if posters concerned with character-motivation would object to the refusal if no save had yet been called for but only the wave of exhaustion had been described.