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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="SableWyvern" data-source="post: 258355" data-attributes="member: 1008">I think most of the posters so far have missed one important point.But, before I get to that, I will say that I have always trusted the vast bulk of my players to seperate player/character knowledge. If your players can't do that, your problems will not be solved by banning certain books.However, when starting my 3e campaign, I found myself in the rare situation where no-one in the group had any previous experience with 3e. There are in fact, only a few with a reasonable knowedge of previous incarnations of d&d.I chose to use this as a tool to help increase everyone's enjoyment, and I have kept pretty much everything not PHB away from them.An example of the result that I have been able to achieve through this method is that when a player is striving for a PrC, he knows only the pre-reqs, and an in-character idea of what that PrC is about. When the PC gains that PrC, he will have the added enjoyment of suddenly discovering a whole new range of abilities open up before him. A sense of "wow" that is a lot harder to achieve with veteran players.I am sure that my players could roleplay their characters not knowing exactly what their PrC will entail, if that is the case in-game. But there is no way to roleplay the players sense of enjoyment when his hard work pays off, his character hits a goal, and the player himself is rewarded with sudden new scope.Another reason to keep in-character knowledge from players is because, quite simply, it is not always possible to seperate the two.Example: Bob the player knows that Gibber Beasts love to sunder magic items. His character Durgash knows only that Gibber Beasts have a fearsome and nasty reputation, and that he loves his holy +3 longsword of doome.When given the option of engaging or not engaging the Gibber Beast, Bob's first instinct is to withdraw. Then, being a good roleplayer, he realises that he is afraid that Durgash will lose his beloved weaponm, and he can't let that infulence his decision. So he thinks he'd better charge in, as his character often does. But then, he thinks, wait a minute, that grizzled adventurer we just met told us to stay away from the Gibber Beast at all costs....And on it goes. Bob does not necessarily know what decision he would have made without this extra bit of info floating in the back of his head. A bad roleplayer will use player-knowledge in situations where he shouldn't. A good roleplayer may be tempted to overcompensate for player knowedge, to avoid any sense that he is cheating.Why force that predicament on a player, if you can help it?So, in summary, I see two positives for restricting player information:1. It adds to the sense of wonder and enjoyment the the player has the opportunity to experience.2. It removes from players the responsibility to try and factor in sub-conscious motivation when they make in-character decisions. Just because a player is good at seperating character/player knowledge doesn't mean that the DM shouldn't make it even easier if he can.That said, there is nothing wrong with making everything available. I'm about to run a short campaign with a different group, and I'm not hiding anything except the plot specifics, because I have at least one player who I know would love to just pour over all my new 3e stuff, and who will get more enjoyment from reading through the magic item descriptions in the DMG than he will finding out about it in character.Neither method is inherrently right or wrong. Just, be aware, there can be good reasons for keeping info from players that don't have anything to do with trust issues or DM power-trips.</blockquote>

Verification