Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 8061490" data-attributes="member: 97077">You don't need a &quot;skill&quot; to recall lore in the first place. An ability check would only be called for if there was an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure. The DM could decide you just recall it. Or not.A player who establishes that the character thinks a certain fact is true may or may not be correct. This character and another character who has the relevant skill proficiencies may both try to recall lore to verify that fact. The character with the investment in those skill proficiencies will tend to better than the one who doesn't, if the DM calls for a check.One doesn't need to care about &quot;metagaming&quot; to change lore and monsters from time to time. I change them to better suit the challenges I want to present, not to thwart &quot;metagaming.&quot; It just so happens it does that. Which, again, raises the question as to why people who are concerned about &quot;metagaming&quot; don't do it.Which rules are being ignored? We've already established through direct quotation that a group's stance on &quot;metagaming&quot; is a table rule, not a rule.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 8061490, member: 97077"] You don't need a "skill" to recall lore in the first place. An ability check would only be called for if there was an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure. The DM could decide you just recall it. Or not. A player who establishes that the character thinks a certain fact is true may or may not be correct. This character and another character who has the relevant skill proficiencies may both try to recall lore to verify that fact. The character with the investment in those skill proficiencies will tend to better than the one who doesn't, if the DM calls for a check. One doesn't need to care about "metagaming" to change lore and monsters from time to time. I change them to better suit the challenges I want to present, not to thwart "metagaming." It just so happens it does that. Which, again, raises the question as to why people who [I]are[/I] concerned about "metagaming" don't do it. Which rules are being ignored? We've already established through direct quotation that a group's stance on "metagaming" is a table rule, not a rule. [/QUOTE]

Verification