Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 8061428" data-attributes="member: 7025508">I'm not sure that it is that much more extreme that the Prime Minister of Thay. The point is to show that the knowledge skills exist for a reason and that calling your metagaming 'thinking' instead of 'knowing' doesn't really change the fact that you're bypassing the intent of the rules.If it was the key and this was the only point to gain this critical information then it would be a badly made adventure. But yes, the information probably matters somehow. Yes, you can do this, sure. But I have tried to already ask this before, but I don't think you answered. Why only apply this approach to knowledge? If we are just going to ignore the knowledge skills because a failure might cause inconvenience to the characters, why not apply that to everything. Why just not let characters to declare that they succeed in any task? Why not just let them declare that they win a combat? It is the same thing.And it works, and you don't even need a GM, I have freeform roleplayed a lot. I just really don't think that D&D is intended to be played like that. The skills exist for a reason, including the knowledge skills.Sometimes people can guess correctly. But if we are at the situation where that really isn't a plausible explanation, then it really the same situation like if you would suspect someone cheating with their dice rolls or something like that. It really is not a game issue any more. But I can trust that my friends don't cheat so this would never come up.The latter obviously. Which already tells us that overwhelming majority of people consider using OOC information for their advantage unacceptable so even unscrupulous ones wouldn't do so openly. So if the game indeed is intended to be played using such information they certainly have done absolutely terrible job at communicating it!</blockquote>

Verification