D&D 5E player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)

[Guest 6801328]

Some people are simply incapable of accepting that any use of it could ever be bad.

Yes, I don't think any use of it could ever be "bad", but if we replace the word "bad" with "not in-line with table expectations" then the above characterization is inaccurate: there ARE player declarations that are not in line with table expectations, and some of those declarations may be driven by use of OOC knowledge.

BUT I also want to make it 100% clear that the problem is not the OOC knowledge, but rather the potential impact of the action on the game. It's an important distinction, because actions that don't rely on OOC knowledge can have a similar impact. It's the impact that matters, not the thought process that led to the action.

AND we think the solution is not to veto their choice, but to make sure they realize that the adjudicated outcome might not be what they expect.

So metagaming is the not the problem, and banning character thoughts/actions is not the solution.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, though in such a game I think it would be wise of the DM to make changes to the lore and/or stats of such entities, or at the very least to remind the players that they may have made such changes and that assuming anything about these creatures and acting on those assumptions without taking steps to verify them is a risk. And just because Mimd Flayers are unheard of in the setting doesn’t mean that no one would think to describe the creatures that flay minds by that name.

They don't flay the mind, though. They drill through your skull and eat the brain. So Brain Eaters or Mind Eaters would be appropriate. They they mind blast, so Mind Stunners might be appropriate. But no flaying is actually being done.

 

[Guest 6801328]

They don't flay the mind, though. They drill through your skull and eat the brain. So Brain Eaters or Mind Eaters would be appropriate. They they mind blast, so Mind Stunners might be appropriate. But no flaying is actually being done.

And yet somehow in at least one universe the name "mind flayer" stuck.

 

[Maxperson]

And yet somehow in at least one universe the name "mind flayer" stuck.

Rule of Cool most likely. Brain Eater just doesn't sound as good.

 

[Cadence]

Rule of Cool most likely. Brain Eater just doesn't sound as good.

I now have the urge to make one skilled with a very sharp blade. Mind Filleter?

 

[Guest 6801328]

I now have the urge to make one skilled with a very sharp blade. Mind Filleter?

In Achtung! Cthuhlu that would be Mein Filleter.

 

[Maxperson]

I now have the urge to make one skilled with a very sharp blade. Mind Filleter?

And it's lesser known cousin, the Thought Sauteer.

 

[Guest 6801328]

And it's lesser known cousin, the Thought Sauteer.

Sounds like an anti-metagaming DM.

 

[Seramus]

Years later, when encountering DMs who advocated for not worrying about metagaming, the memory of this experience definitely helped me to consider their perspective more favorably.

The awkward thing about metagaming is psyching yourself out of deductions you would have made if you didn't know. Like NOT solving a mystery you might have really figured out, because you already know the answer.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The awkward thing about metagaming is psyching yourself out of deductions you would have made if you didn't know. Like NOT solving a mystery you might have really figured out, because you already know the answer.

It's pretty amazing just how much metagame thinking one has to do to just to avoid metagame thinking.