D&D General Just Eat the Dang Fruit

[Bayushi_seikuro]

Again, depends on how you "witness" the other character making a saving throw. The saving throw itself is not something that characters will realize is going on without a concrete effect. A character being visibly weak or acting drugged first however....might possibly justify the flawed character roleplaying out struggling with their willpower against consuming the fruit. And generally speaking, drugs and poisons in the real world are rarely rapid/instantaneous when ingested.

Without a concrete, discernible effect - they should just eat it.

I agree with this. Consider the stereotype of American Thanksgiving - eating enough turkey and assorted goods that you essentially just get food-coma for hours. It's expected. And as you said - drugs and poison are rarely instant in the real world. With the culture having the expectation of hospitality, even the fact these people are somewhere they shouldn't make a difference.

That's why the infamous Red Wedding was so brutal and well-executed. It's how Cu Chulainn was betrayed - his twin vows of not eating dog meat, and his vow not to refuse hospitality - he couldn't refuse to eat the dog meat that was provided, which cost his invulnerability.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

It really is a play style thing.

For myself, my character will eat the fruit unless there's an obvious reason not too. But I like to RP from my character's perspective. The old "what would they do, given what they know?"

But for those who play the game more as a game... I totally get that someone would not. Now if I was GMing a game of this nature I'd have the good sense not call for any rolls until everyone had said what they're doing in the situation.

 

[Longspeak]

Players always use OOC knowledge.

DM could make secret saves. Or wait until every partakes, or a reasonable bit of time lapses.

As for the players, letting the phrase "saving throw" alter your decision isn't great, but I've seen it more than I haven't. For that reason I often use one of the above two options. For me personally.... It depends on the character. In one game I switched off the tape player when the man said "I will now read the demon summoning passage from the Necronomicon." In another I was all "What's the weird wax seal and strange runes over the lock? Ah, I scrape it off so I can pick the lock!"

 

[Burnside]

Is it metagaming? Yes.

Is it an "issue"? Depends on the table I guess. Wouldn't be an issue at my table. I have given up on trying to force players not to metagame with this sort of situation.

With some of the groups I run, it honestly would not occur to them to feign ignorance that a saving throw was just rolled.

On the other hand, some of the tables I run or play at would automatically not metagame because that's the way they like playing.

I leave it to players to determine what kind of game they want to play when it comes to stuff like this, and proceed accordingly and try to support their chosen style. I don't think metagaming or NOT metagaming in this situation is objectively better or more fun - very much depends on the group.

I am also in favor of leaving all the dice rolls up to the DM and rolled secretly, so that the "issue" of separating player and character knowledge of roll outcomes does not exist. However, every time I have floated doing this among my players and fellow DMs, people are aghast (I also would find it a lot of work as DM tbh).

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Metagame by Burnside.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

Is it metagaming? Yes.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter, please.

Again, with metagaming, there's 'good' and 'bad' in my opinion and this story shows both kinds.

'Good' metagaming: eating the fruit because it's an established trait and because in-world, your character would take the fruit due to the culture's value on hospitality. You didn't 'steal' it to be like 'haha, I set off the obvious trap Because It's What My Character Would Do <tm>!'

'Bad' metagaming: all others refusing the food outright without any thought to the fact it's been established that this culture is about hospitality. I see a setting like that where it is absolutely possible for heroes and villains to die and talk garbage about each other under a respected flag of truce. Hell, they even played soccer/football during Christmas in WWI.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I’ve been in two kinds of groups: type A would figure e out how their characters would respond to the offer assuming they don’t know about the roll / don’t know it’s dangerous (or at least try) so the game can proceed as though no roll were made. They might suspect the host anyway given the situation.

Type B would never have trusted the fruit in the first place, and would be insighting the heck out of everyone anyways.

 

[MarkB]

The DM described a wave of exhaustion washing over your character. Is that something your character would be able to hide? Would they even attempt to? If not, that seems like a sufficient visual cue for the other players' characters to be suspicious.

And ultimately, as far as I'm concerned, character traits are guidelines for portraying a character's actions, not rules. Play up that aspect of your character and maybe you earn inspiration for acting in-character, but if you feel like the character would go against it under a particular set of circumstances, there shouldn't be any penalty for that.

 

[J.Quondam]

I tend to GM poisoning, disease, etc, with behind-the-screen rolls, unless it's for something obvious or the PCs are explicitly suspicious. It's GM discretion whether an unsuspecting PC "made the save" in a way discernible enough to make other PCs notice (or even notice themselves).

More importantly, though, "If I see fruit, I eat it" is a truly awesome flaw.

 

[Yora]

The GM's mistake was to ask for a saving throw before every player had declared to eat a fruit or not.
If it's a tasteless poison, it's going to take a minute or two to kick in. (Probably even much longer than that.)

 

[Shadowdweller00]

More importantly, though, "If I see fruit, I eat it" is a truly awesome flaw.

Agreed. If taken intentionally, it's one of those things you write knowing that the character will be drugged or poisoned going in.

I once made a drow Divine Soul who had sought aid from Eiliastraee when his house decided to kill him. I decided that she had given him powers but also instilled a compulsion to dance whenever he heard music. Part of the point and fun of the character in the first place was seeing what crazy situations the flaw would get him into. And crazy situations there were