Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7568026" data-attributes="member: 97077">I find it helps if you just don't think about what the player and character know about a particular thing. It's not useful information anyway except as needed by the DM to lay out the basic scope of options in the context of describing the environment. If the player describes the character as trying to recall something useful, the DM can narrate the result of that action (possibly calling for an Intelligence check beforehand) with some useful or interesting information.The thing is, if this is ever a real concern, this is easily dealt with on the DM's side of the equation. If some feature of the challenge is about not knowing a thing, then just change, for example, the location of the treasure or the weakness of the troll. Putting a situation in the game and then demanding the player forget everything he or she knows about it is setting up a very strange dynamic that is prone to error in my view. And if you get someone like me in the group, I can come up with a practically endless list of fictional justifications for the action. The DM is free to pick the one he or she meets whatever believability threshold he or she has.I address this sort of thing in my game's table rules: &quot;'Metagaming,' defined as using player skill or knowledge that a character might not necessarily have, is fine as long as it's fun for everyone and helps contribute to an exciting, memorable story. Assumptions can be risky though so it's skillful play to verify your assumptions through in-game actions before making choices based on them.&quot;In other words, as DM, I'm not concerned about what you know or what your character knows. If you want to establish that your character knows something, that's your business. You just might not always be right, and being wrong could be exceedingly bad (for the character), so plan accordingly.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="iserith, post: 7568026, member: 97077"] I find it helps if you just don't think about what the player and character know about a particular thing. It's not useful information anyway except as needed by the DM to lay out the basic scope of options in the context of describing the environment. If the player describes the character as trying to recall something useful, the DM can narrate the result of that action (possibly calling for an Intelligence check beforehand) with some useful or interesting information. The thing is, if this is ever a real concern, this is easily dealt with on the DM's side of the equation. If some feature of the challenge is about not knowing a thing, then just change, for example, the location of the treasure or the weakness of the troll. Putting a situation in the game and then demanding the player forget everything he or she knows about it is setting up a very strange dynamic that is prone to error in my view. And if you get someone like me in the group, I can come up with a practically endless list of fictional justifications for the action. The DM is free to pick the one he or she meets whatever believability threshold he or she has. I address this sort of thing in my game's table rules: "'Metagaming,' defined as using player skill or knowledge that a character might not necessarily have, is fine as long as it's fun for everyone and helps contribute to an exciting, memorable story. Assumptions can be risky though so it's skillful play to verify your assumptions through in-game actions before making choices based on them." In other words, as DM, I'm not concerned about what you know or what your character knows. If you want to establish that your character knows something, that's your business. You just might not always be right, and being wrong could be exceedingly bad (for the character), so plan accordingly. [/QUOTE]

Verification