Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9334932" data-attributes="member: 6790260">If the DM is going to rewrite, or create, new spells that players will have access to, then it is incumbent on the DM to share those new rules with the players. You can, maybe, argue that keeping certain rules secret from the players until they are &quot;seen in action&quot; (e.g., an enemy uses them) is justified, since they aren't necessarily available to players until after that. But once the rules have been &quot;deployed&quot; in-combat, yes, absolutely, the DM should be furnishing their players with the details of those rules.I am adamantly opposed to the idea that the DM should ever run their games as a total &quot;black box&quot; where the players never know what's going on. You cannot make meaningful, informed decisions in that kind of environment. That doesn't mean the DM has to be perfectly up-front about literally 100% of everything they ever do (that would quickly get tedious!), but changes to rules that affect players should be discussed to some extent. The specific numerical statistics of a creature, such as what its HP or AC might be? Nah, don't need to specify that unless there's good reason to. The mechanics for how a spell works so they can try to make good decisions about how to respond to it? Yeah, I definitely think that if one of your DM-controlled creatures casts a spell on a player character, you should be telling the players what's going on.If the players aren't allowed to know what's going on, aren't allowed to figure out how things work, they can't make informed decisions. If you can't make informed decisions, you can't play the game. You can do some forms of roleplay (though there are still some limits on that, too), but you can't do gameplay without being able to make informed decisions. Roleplaying games are still games. A lot of folks conveniently forget that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9334932, member: 6790260"] If the DM is going to rewrite, or create, new spells that players will have access to, then it is incumbent on the DM to share those new rules with the players. You can, [I]maybe[/I], argue that keeping certain rules secret from the players until they are "seen in action" (e.g., an enemy uses them) is justified, since they aren't necessarily available to players until after that. But once the rules have been "deployed" in-combat, yes, absolutely, the DM should be furnishing their players with the details of those rules. I am [I]adamantly[/I] opposed to the idea that the DM should ever run their games as a total "black box" where the players never know what's going on. You cannot make meaningful, informed decisions in that kind of environment. That doesn't mean the DM has to be perfectly up-front about literally 100% of everything they ever do (that would quickly get tedious!), but changes to rules that affect players [I]should[/I] be discussed to some extent. The specific numerical statistics of a creature, such as what its HP or AC might be? Nah, don't need to specify that unless there's good reason to. The mechanics for how a spell works so they can try to make good decisions about how to respond to it? Yeah, I definitely think that if one of your DM-controlled creatures casts a spell on a player character, you should be telling the players what's going on. If the players aren't allowed to know what's going on, aren't allowed to figure out how things work, they can't make informed decisions. If you can't make informed decisions, you can't [I]play[/I] the [I]game[/I]. You can do some forms of roleplay (though there are still some limits on that, too), but you can't do [I]gameplay[/I] without being able to make informed decisions. Roleplaying games are still games. A lot of folks conveniently forget that. [/QUOTE]

Verification