Kinda changing rules without telling players.

[tburdett]

sure, and he told them that silver hurt them. without a metagame knowledge of mechanics, they aren't going to know that being hurt by silver = being hurt by silver or +1 or better weapons.

Unless, of course, you are willing to accept the fact that wizards and clerics have an understanding of the spells that they cast, and furthermore, an understanding of the uses to which such spells can be put.

Is it reasonable to me that one might extrapolate that a wizard or cleric knows that Magic Weapon or Greater Magic Weapon can bypass the supernatural toughness (DR) of some creatures? I would say, without a doubt, yes. Is it reasonable to me that they would also know what supernatural toughness the spell would not overcome? Again, yes.

Just my opinions, of course.

 

[Tsyr]

Unless, of course, you are willing to accept the fact that wizards and clerics have an understanding of the spells that they cast, and furthermore, an understanding of the uses to which such spells can be put.

Is it reasonable to me that one might extrapolate that a wizard or cleric knows that Magic Weapon or Greater Magic Weapon can bypass the supernatural toughness (DR) of some creatures? I would say, without a doubt, yes.

Just my opinions, of course.

Yeah, otherwise it gets sorta silly... It's like... "Hey guys! The Master at my temple showed me this *great* spell the other day! I liked it so much, I memorized it! Maybe I'll try it in the upcomming battle!"

"That's great, Novice Bill! What's it do?"

"I dunno... But it's great!"

 

[Ds Da Man]

Yeah, come on Doc, meta-gaming knowing that a silver weapon may hurt a were-creature? My 7 year old daughter knows that! Now you're telling me a 2nd level mage with Int of 16(maybe) or higher doesn't know that his magic weapon spell will effect lycanthropes?
While I do agree with your right to change any of the stats or damage type or anything else with a creature in the MM, without telling your pcs, certain rule changes should be told. (Though if the were-creature DR has changed thats no ones business.)

 

[Wolv0rine]

My own personal opinion, I think, is rather simple on this issue. I expect my DM to tell me about the world I'm playing in. If my DM wants to run a Dead Earth world, I want to know -- because I don't want to play in a Dead Earth world, and I'll either wait until the DM runs in another setting, or find another group if possible. If my DM wants to change anything that affects gameplay, I want to know. Do I want to know so I can have every minute piece of stat knowledge at my fingertips? No. Do I want to know so I can have every contingency planned for? No. I want to know so that I can decide if those changes affect my desire to play in that DMs game. Most changes, granted, won't have that affect. But some will, and only I can decide which ones those are.

You can change any rules that you want, but the players have to know that something's different, so they can decide if they are okay with that idea. If/when your players figure out the changes you've instituted, they could decide that they really don't like that rule and don't want to play with it, then they'd be justified in being pretty peeved to know you never even told them there was a change to begin with. Telling that there's a change, even telling them the subject that change affects, is not the same as baring every inner secret to everything, ever. It has nothing to do with them knowing the exact DR on anything, or knowing how to beat anything. It has to do with a player having a say in the game he's playing in. It's an interpersonal moral issue, not a question of what the DM gets to do.

It's akin to walking into someone's house you've just met, and having them suddenly begin screaming at you for having not taken off your shoes when they never gave any indication or implication that this was even an issue.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

As far as fairness goes, I think that changing the ruling is fair enough. As long as you're not doing it to take the fun out of the game it's fine.

However, I think that you needed to acknowledge your player's problem. Why? Because it's easy for it to seem that you're screwing him over with the ruling. If you're going to try and do something like changing a rule on the fly, make sure that you are willing to listen to the players when they're not ready for the rule. A simple "I acknowledge that you're using a magic weapon. I understand your concern about the DR penetration. However, you don't seem to be wounding it." Will go a long way. Make sure you let them know that you're listening to them, but that there's a reason for your actions.

If you did that, and there's still problems, then maybe you do need to slap down the final arbiter bit. I had to do that once, I didn't like it, but it helped immensely to cut down on some of the "but if you use bluff and beat a DC 15...." stuff that was stifling my campiagn.

Cheers, and good luck in the future

 

[S'mon]

So was I being unfair? Sure I changed a rule without telling the party. But the rule I changed is one that their characters in question would know NOTHING about at all. The only confusion on their part would be due to META knowledge that they should not be using. Basically shame on the cleric for casting Magic Weapon if he did it knowing it would automatically defeat the DR and shame on the other player for continually reminding me of something that his character wouldn't have a clue about.

Opinions?

It's not unfair but you should make clear to the players what's happening:

"Your enchanted weapons seem to be having no effect on the creatures..."

After all, maybe they were creatures with DR 30/+5 or something...

 

[ced1106]

Silver weapons??? Everyone knows you can only kill of lycanthropes with belladona-coated weapons. And wights and spectres? They have to be blessed, of course.

Player: "I attack it the spectre with my silver weapon."
GM: "It goes through its non-corpeal body with no effect."
Player: "But... silver affects spectres!"
GM: "(Rolling dice) You seem to remember this piece of knowledge from, 'Shady Al', the merchant who sold you the knife."



Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[S'mon]

I think your ruling is fine Doc, what do folks think of the adjustments I've made to the Kyton? I took the holy silver idea from the Pit Fiend block that Wizards released.

I think letting holy silver affect the kyton is fine. I think lowering the DR to 10 in the middle of the adventure is going too easy on the PCs for my tastes - if they screwed up, let them get beaten _the first time_. They should have a chance to escape (admittedly difficult vs a devil), and return better equipped.

Kyton is listed as CR 6 in the MM, which is admittedly a bit low - I've upped it to CR 7. What level is your PC group? If they're eg 4th level, one wouldn't expect them to have +2 weapons. If they're 6th level, they should be able to beat the kyton with spells (SR 17) and power attacks (AC 18) - a well designed 5th level fighter or barbarian PAing can easily do over 15 dmg/hit, before criticals. Eg: Fighter-5 with STR 18, +1 greatsword, & wpn spec does 2d6+9/hit, or up to 2d6+14 power attacking.
With a typical +1 bastard sword he does 1d10+7 base, but can always choose to use it 2-handed and PA.

 

[S'mon]

While is was wrong for their characters to whine about it, i think that the players have the right to know of rule zeros and house rules. YMMV
ken

They have a right to know about changes to the rules **in the PHB**, not the DMG or the Monster Manual! _Definitely_ not the Monster Manual!

Edit: BTW I played in a Neverwinter Nights persistent world for several weeks where there was almost no magic. My fighter-barbarianess PC had no magic weapon, but she still went down the sewers and hacked up wererats with her mundane bastard sword! STR 16-18, power attack for +5 damage and weapon spec. It's all the Real Man (or Woman) really need.

 

[Bran Blackbyrd]

Telling them that the rules are different is not the same as telling them what the rules are. There is a implied contract between the players and the DM, that there are rules that the game is played by. Changing those rules without even mentioning that they have been changed, violates that implied agreement as far as I am concerned.

You do have the right to change the rules as you see fit, but I do feel quite strongly that you have an obligation to at least inform them that things are not going to be standard and to make it clear that they are not going to know what they are.

I absolutely agree with this.

Originally posted by Lord Pendragon
I suppose I simply don't see it as metagaming for a player/PC to know the rules of the game. I see the rules as the "physics"....the "laws of reality" of my world. Those are things they should know. Now specifics, such a whether a certain were-rat clan is vulnerable to silver, or perhaps cold iron due to their fae blood, are my pervue. But the basic rules of the game belong to the players as much as the DM.

I can't agree with this more.

Originally posted by DocMoriartty
I dont agree because these are rules that players should not know as rules.

I know already that this will, more than likely, get me flamed, reference the last paragraph in such a situation.

This smells of 100% hi-test DM power trip arrogance.

Almost without fail, every time I have encountered a DM that demands that the DMG and MM remain off limits to players, that DM clearly either wants to "win the game", or "needs" to be in total control for some personal reason.
In the first sceanrio, the players only know the rules in the PHB, but the DM knows all the rules and it turns into the DM using his math to beat down the players.
In the second scenario, the DM demands control over virtually all aspects of the game, arbitrarily decides the fates of the players, and expects all his decisions to go unchallenged.

I don't handle my PCs with kid gloves, but I don't suck the joy out of the game for them either. I'm not god, I'm just a friend that likes to play the same game they do. I don't own it, and neither do they. The simple fact is; If I walk away, there's no more game and if they walk away, there's no more game. If people are playing for fun like they should be, these issues over who should know what usually don't come up. When people are playing to satisfy some deep-seated neurotic desire however...

Not that I'm saying you're doing any of this, just that your words remind me of things I've seen before from other DMs. I will be the first to admit that most of the gamers I met back in the day were not exactly the creme of the community, nor were they posterboys for well-grounded emotional health.