D&D General Should a low level character know to burn a troll?

[ad_hoc]

Is there? Mass communication is a pretty modern thing. And even the Internet, the ultimate in mass communication, is plagued by pseudoscience and nonsense. Word of mouth would be far, far worse.

While true, I think, "kill it with fire" is just a general strategy for most scary situations.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The problem with a simple “yes” answer is that it suggests that if the players don’t know, their characters still do. So, what, the DM should tell them?

Like I said previously, there is an option missing.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

If you're assuming yes, its common knowledge that every character would know . . .

- Should the DM outright tell them how to stop the troll regenerating if it was a beginner game and none of the players knew?

 

[Morrus]

If you're assuming yes, its common knowledge that every character would know . . .

- Should the DM outright tell them how to stop the troll regenerating if it was a beginner game and none of the players knew?

Do you as a DM give your players common information? Do you tell them what currency is worth, and who the king is?

 

[Yardiff]

Which monsters are considered 'common'? If your character grew up in an area where trolls were, at most, legend should your character know that a trolls regeneration is stopped by fire and acid?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Do you as a DM give your players common information? Do you tell them what currency is worth, and who the king is?

Yep.
I'm curious because some have strong memories of their 'first troll encounter' (or werewolf encounter, or similar). I'm interested whether they think that it would have been as fun if the DM just told them how to kill them, rather than the frantic bout of inter-party experimentation and improvisation that ensued.

 

[Charlaquin]

If you're assuming yes, its common knowledge that every character would know . . .

- Should the DM outright tell them how to stop the troll regenerating if it was a beginner game and none of the players knew?

I wouldn’t say they should, necessarily, but I certainly wouldn’t say they shouldn’t. Personally, that’s the sort of information I would give to players with a relevant proficiency.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The characters in The Hobbit all seem to know what trolls are, and the reader is expected to as well.

"They were trolls. Obviously trolls. Even Bilbo, in spite of his sheltered life, could see that: from the great heavy faces of them, and their size, and the shape of their legs, not to mention their language, which was not drawing-room fashion at all, at all."​

"For trolls, as you probably know, must be underground before dawn, or they go back to the stuff of the mountains they are made of, and never move again."​

No one expresses surprise when they turn to stone.

 

[Campbell]

In a challenge oriented game having to pretend not to know something that you know sucks. If the game is not challenge oriented dramatic irony can be a fun thing to play around in, but I do not feel not setting fire to a troll is very compelling dramatic irony.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yep.
I'm curious because some have strong memories of their 'first troll encounter' (or werewolf encounter, or similar). I'm interested whether they think that it would have been as fun if the DM just told them how to kill them, rather than the frantic bout of inter-party experimentation and improvisation that ensued.

That’s a fun experience, but is think it’s best reproduced by using custom monsters (so no players will actually know their weaknesses) that are not well-known in the setting (so no characters would be expected to know their weaknesses.) Trolls are pretty common monsters in most fantasy settings and their aversion to fire is pretty common knowledge in geek culture.

 

[Arilyn]

Trolls in D&D world are actually real, not like vampires in the real world. If we assume that farmers have trouble with trolls raiding livestock, then sure, makes sense.

D&D assumes a literate society, so there will be more books spread around then our Medieval society. Bestiaries might be super common, considering how monster ridden the land is.

 

[Yardiff]

That’s a fun experience, but is think it’s best reproduced by using custom monsters (so no players will actually know their weaknesses) that are not well-known in the setting (so no characters would be expected to know their weaknesses.) Trolls are pretty common monsters in most fantasy settings and their aversion to fire is pretty common knowledge in geek culture.

Yes and No, D&D trolls are different from Tolkien trolls.

 

[Campbell]

If you know fire kills trolls there is no compelling way to play this out. The prototypical meta game aversion play leads to just as ridiculous a result. Your wizard stops using fire bolt. You struggle in vain against the troll. Are you allowed to flee or would that be meta gaming because you know you can't win? There is no way to play this with integrity.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yes and No, D&D trolls are different from Tolkien trolls.

Sure, but my point is, these days you can’t count on a first time D&D player not to know that D&D trolls are weak to fire.

 

[Yardiff]

If you know fire kills trolls there is no compelling way to play this out. The prototypical meta game aversion play leads to just as ridiculous a result. Your wizard stops using fire bolt. You struggle in vain against the troll. Are you allowed to flee or would that be meta gaming because you know you can't win? There is no way to play this with integrity.

Why would the wizard stop using his got to cantrip?

I've never had a problem role playing not knowing some specific information about monsters or whatever.

 

[Campbell]

Why would the wizard stop using his got to cantrip?

Generally strong meta game aversion does not lead to playing as if you did not know, but to avoiding the appearance of using meta game knowledge. You have to be above reproach. I have seen this sort of thing play out in real games more than once.

 

[Yardiff]

Generally strong meta game aversion does not lead to playing as if you did not know, but to avoiding the appearance of using meta game knowledge. You have to be above reproach. I have seen this sort of thing play out in real games more than once.

I don't consider it avoiding meta game info, I consider it role playing my character.

 

[5ekyu]

Yes, imo, for my games unless trolls were rare.

 

[Morrus]

Yep.
I'm curious because some have strong memories of their 'first troll encounter' (or werewolf encounter, or similar). I'm interested whether they think that it would have been as fun if the DM just told them how to kill them, rather than the frantic bout of inter-party experimentation and improvisation that ensued.

The question is more about experienced players who know about monster weaknesses, rather than new players who don’t.

 

[Thakazum]

If DMs want the challenge to be in the hows of how to defeat a monster, then it shouldn't be used as-is straight from the monster manual. Don't use the word "troll" to describe what they are seeing. Describe the creature instead. Before the encounter occurs, change around its strengths and weaknesses.

Obviously, if the setting is so full of monsters and magic where everything is classified and categorized with that information being dissemenated to even the peasantry, the characters should have a chance to know how to fight them.