Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="swrushing" data-source="post: 2696340" data-attributes="member: 14140">Actually, i disagree.the key is the Gm doesn't have to tell the player what his character WILL DO, just tell him what his character knows.if a veteran fighter experienced at fighting orcs is run by an inexperienced player, then telling him things like "well, your character knows the orcs have darkvision and actually have trouble in bright light" after he suggests a nighttime raid is not "running his character" but providing the player with the info his character would have, so he can make in character decisions.this is much the same as making suggestions about spells, monster stats and such for characters who have that knowledge. is it me running the character if i tell the player running the ranger with favored enemy trolls that "trolls don't regenerate against fire and acid" when he sets forth a plan that fatally ignores this?Again, NOT TELLING HIM  "your characters uses fire and acid" but telling him "your character knows that fire and acid do this and that..."Whwther its experience at religious canon and approiate behavior, social cusoms and ettiquette, esoteric knowledge or what, i find it not at all infrequent that I as a GM point out "your character would know..." kind of stuff to the players as or after a plan is set. There is a simple reason for this... the player unlike the character, didn't grow up in the environment, didn't spend years training to fight orcs and didn't spend years learning religios dogma and so on and so on.sure, this happens more for the rookies than the more experienced players, but regardless, it isn't telling them what their character does or taking away their control. Its providing the player with the tools his character has.IMO</blockquote>

Verification