Flexor the Mighty!
18/100 Strength!
I run an Old School Essentials game and play in a 5e backup game. The differences are stark because of how the mechanics of each game differ. I'm still struggling with these guys, who are all around 50 and playing D&D since the early 80's, just wanting to say well I search the room, and there are no rules for search checks. So it often goes like this.
Players "I'll search"
Ref "you search what?"
Players "The room"
Ref "ok your search of the room sets off a blast of gasses out of the wall when you search the wardrobe against the wall"
Players - "I would have never touched that!".
So I try to tell them they need to act like they are the PC and describe what they are doing.
We had a situation where they could only open the trap door in the floor of the room by search the table over it and looking under. Then they would see what must be a portal that is closed. They cold open it with a saying that I was ramming into their heads over and over due to some magic mouths and prior magic words to open portals. But while one player was getting the gist now and saying "I'm going to walk the walls searching the mosaics, running my hands over them and trying to find a secret door or opening." The rest of them are standing around with their minds in neutral and when the other player's search finds nothing they are like "well we searched the room we need to move on...". Not wanting to waste time I said "you did?" It took a bit for them to finally actually describe how they search the room and one player looked under the table seeing the portal and something to give them a clue how to open it. Another player used the clue to figure out the password to open it and on they went. Getting into your PC's head and actually working though how he would actually do a task is as much RP as a speech with the King.
Is that a skilled play situation? Kind of as I would think a skilled player would be thinking "how can I describe what I'm doing with enough specifics to accomplish my goal and avoid the Ref having to make a roll for something?" But that ties into my old 5e game where I would tell them if they are specific enough in what they are describing to me I may not need to roll on the uncertainty chart as the outcome will not be in doubt. They would kind of struggle with that thinking well there are dice and they must be rolled so why be specific?
They will do things like throw the coin with light cast on it, or send ahead summoned creatures so they are on the ball in many ways. Its the search issues they get hung up on. Saying "I'm going to use my pole to knock this widgit off the table" and avoid the trap that springs is good play and negates the need to make a save.
They are in a dungeon and didn't bring the appropriate gear? Still happens though.
I only view Metagaming as in well I know from reading the module that this is here, or that type of thing. Having the players do things they know are wrong x number of times before they can use acid on the troll isn't something I push. At heart I look at this as a game not acting and I expect them to use their own brains.
I might be getting off topic at this point though.
Players "I'll search"
Ref "you search what?"
Players "The room"
Ref "ok your search of the room sets off a blast of gasses out of the wall when you search the wardrobe against the wall"
Players - "I would have never touched that!".
So I try to tell them they need to act like they are the PC and describe what they are doing.
We had a situation where they could only open the trap door in the floor of the room by search the table over it and looking under. Then they would see what must be a portal that is closed. They cold open it with a saying that I was ramming into their heads over and over due to some magic mouths and prior magic words to open portals. But while one player was getting the gist now and saying "I'm going to walk the walls searching the mosaics, running my hands over them and trying to find a secret door or opening." The rest of them are standing around with their minds in neutral and when the other player's search finds nothing they are like "well we searched the room we need to move on...". Not wanting to waste time I said "you did?" It took a bit for them to finally actually describe how they search the room and one player looked under the table seeing the portal and something to give them a clue how to open it. Another player used the clue to figure out the password to open it and on they went. Getting into your PC's head and actually working though how he would actually do a task is as much RP as a speech with the King.
Is that a skilled play situation? Kind of as I would think a skilled player would be thinking "how can I describe what I'm doing with enough specifics to accomplish my goal and avoid the Ref having to make a roll for something?" But that ties into my old 5e game where I would tell them if they are specific enough in what they are describing to me I may not need to roll on the uncertainty chart as the outcome will not be in doubt. They would kind of struggle with that thinking well there are dice and they must be rolled so why be specific?
They will do things like throw the coin with light cast on it, or send ahead summoned creatures so they are on the ball in many ways. Its the search issues they get hung up on. Saying "I'm going to use my pole to knock this widgit off the table" and avoid the trap that springs is good play and negates the need to make a save.
They are in a dungeon and didn't bring the appropriate gear? Still happens though.
I only view Metagaming as in well I know from reading the module that this is here, or that type of thing. Having the players do things they know are wrong x number of times before they can use acid on the troll isn't something I push. At heart I look at this as a game not acting and I expect them to use their own brains.
I might be getting off topic at this point though.
