D&D General Just Eat the Dang Fruit

[Zardnaar]

I understand this in the case of "don't eat the random food you find in the dungeon," or in an espionage plot, or something similar. But in the case where you're already in a friendly NPC's private dwelling, not on guard (i.e. disarmed, in a friendly way), just kinda hanging out, then there's really no good reason not to eat the food. If they wanted to kill you, it would be much more tactical and efficient to just, you know, kill you. Same goes for times when you're captured and being kept in a cell/dungeon.

I blame AD&D and their poisons.

 

[iserith]

At this point I should probably let you all know that this NPC, as it turns out, was not on the up-and-up and subsequently attacked us!

 

[iserith]

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.

Come to think of it, I can't remember the last time Brick had a fruit that wasn't poisoned!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

At this point I should probably let you all know that this NPC, as it turns out, was not on the up-and-up and subsequently attacked us!

Curse his sudden but inevitable betrayal!

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Come to think of it, I can't remember the last time Brick had a fruit that wasn't poisoned!

And this brings up the topic of the GM meta-gaming. If the GM is meta-gaming they shouldn't whinge when the players do it back at them.

 

[Maxperson]

My fellow characters and I are exploring a lost city buried beneath the sands of a vast desert. Shortly into our first foray, we come across a well-appointed dining chamber and its occupant, a friendly and immaculately dressed fellow who invites us to partake of refreshment. He is joined by several servants who attend to us. Hospitality is big in the culture of this region, and though it's a bit odd that this dude and his servants are in this buried city, it's the first friendly face we've seen in a while.

Bowls of fruit and wine are brought out. My character, Brickyard Lot, has a flaw that reads: "If I see fruit, I eat it." This has notably gotten him into trouble before (and the party doesn't trust him with pocket goodberries). Anyway, naturally I'm eating the fruit before the bowls can be set down. "A wave of exhaustion washes over you," says the DM. "Make a Con save." I roll the dice and succeed, belching and happily continuing to eat.

The food and drink is offered to my comrades, of course, but having seen me need to roll a save, nobody wants to partake. Does anyone see any issue with this refusal? If so, what are the issues and how do you resolve them. If not, why not?

Let's consider another angle as well: Say my character has the aforementioned flaw, but isn't the first to eat the fruit. I witness another character make a saving throw after eating it. I then refuse to eat the fruit or drink the wine, despite the flaw. Does this change the calculation at all as to whether this is an issue that needs to be addressed?

I bolded the part that helps me answer the question. That sort of thing is visible. Even if you make the save, you had to fight that unnatural wave of exhaustion off. I'd probably see if it was noticed with a perception check(unless it was stated that they were watching you), but assuming it was noticed, not eating is just fine.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I also agree with those who say the DM called for the save prematurely. In exploration and/or social situations, as DM, I have each player say what their character is doing in the scene before resolving any outcomes. This not only avoids "I saw him roll a saving throw so I'm not doing that same thing" type situation but also allows for Working Together (the out-of-combat equivalent of Help), guidance, resistance, or Bardic Inspiration to assist your other party members with certain tasks/actions. This also would have provided the explicit in-fiction opportunity for another character to be watching the host's expression as Brickyard ate the fruit or to be observing Brickyard as he ate the fruit or really to be doing anything else in the scene other than eating the fruit, too - thereby avoiding the metagaming concern in the scene that seems to cause consternation at some tables.

 

[Scott Christian]

This would have been better handled had the DM waited to make you roll. Maybe a slower reactant, one that takes a few minutes to succumb to. This way, the other members of the group have time to decide whether they eat.

In any case, as a DM, I would never put poison in the fruit if a character had that flaw. It seems... too... well, contrived? That said, I guess one time in a campaign could work. But poison is one of those funny things, you can't use it too much or it gets old really fast.

 

[Seramus]

I understand this in the case of "don't eat the random food you find in the dungeon," or in an espionage plot, or something similar. But in the case where you're already in a friendly NPC's private dwelling, not on guard (i.e. disarmed, in a friendly way), just kinda hanging out, then there's really no good reason not to eat the food.

Sure, definitely. In this specific case, what @iserith describes creeps the heck out of me. If the setting has similar myths to Persephone (or any of the similar myths in our own world) I would be at full alarm with my head on a swivel.

I don't know if @iserith intended it be creepy, or if the DM portrayed it as creepy, but what's in the opening post IS CREEPY!

 

[Vaalingrade]

Come to think of it, I can't remember the last time Brick had a fruit that wasn't poisoned!

I mean, you did take a trait that is basically 'DM, please poison every fruit in the game'.