Quote from: LordVreeg;807785Sorry, metagaming is not roleplaying.  So it's not at my tables.
Everyone has fun differently, and I don't mind when PCs try for lore rolls, etc, when dealing with stuff their characters would not know.

But I am pretty unbending when they trot out knowledge their PCs would not have (yet).

One setting-based solution to this issue, if the players are persistent and metagaming is not permitted, is to have monsters all be varied enough that you can't really pin down the rules of the kill that easily. It isn't ideal for every monster PCs encounter, but for the bigger threats can be useful. This was basically how Ravenloft got around the issue with Vampires, Werewolves, etc. The players could try to metagame, but it amounted to very little in these circumstances.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;807789One setting-based solution to this issue, if the players are persistent and metagaming is not permitted, is to have monsters all be varied enough that you can't really pin down the rules of the kill that easily. It isn't ideal for every monster PCs encounter, but for the bigger threats can be useful. This was basically how Ravenloft got around the issue with Vampires, Werewolves, etc. The players could try to metagame, but it amounted to very little in these circumstances.

Yes, as you know, I run only my own stuff, so it is easier to control this.  And that really adds to immersion, as there is so much that is 'discovered'.
But I also keep players for decades in this setting, and most of the games have a pretty good attrition rate, so I have to worry about new characters possessing Player knowledge.

Bestiary

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;807789One setting-based solution to this issue, if the players are persistent and metagaming is not permitted, is to have monsters all be varied enough that you can't really pin down the rules of the kill that easily.

Runequest, set in Glorantha, did this for all chaos monsters. A chaos creature might (or might not) have one or more chaos features that could be randomly determined by the GM from a long list or by just inventing more stuff. Some features might have observable traces like 12 point armor skin might look like scales or rocks or whatnot, but others might, like explodes when killed doing X damage to all within Y meters, might come as a total (and unpleasant) surprise.

The problem from a game (not necessarily "art of role-playing") perspective was raised in D&D Supplement III (1976), which included the Artifacts section - magic treasures whose specific characteristics were to be chosen by the dm (from fairly extensive tables).

As one who prefers not to need to pretend to ignorance (to the extent we can reasonably avoid it), I approve of tools like that: providing helpful inspiration for refs whilst not over-informing players tempted to read.

I'd say that with experienced (or simply well-read) players, it's usually most convenient to assume that what is widely published here about the game world is similarly common knowledge there. Who indeed has more incentive to collect such lore: someone betting the fortunes of a mere game piece, or someone risking his very life? Of course, the accuracy of what is commonly received may be unreliable (see for example medieval bestiaries).

This does suggest to me the advisability of some restraint on the part of game-line publishers, but responsibility ultimately rests on the shoulders of the gamesmaster. It is not in any case a position for the very lazy or unimaginative, and ignoring or changing what does not fit the needs of one's campaign is no more extraordinary an expectation in this regard than in any other.

If something is supposed to be mysterious, make it actually so by making up something that's not familiar to the players! Often it takes only a minor twist to throw them off the scent of something otherwise an old standard.

Quote from: Old One Eye;807153Does your world have taverns?  Do adventurers stop by taverns to have a drink?  Do they talk to other patrons when having said drink?  If so, word has just spread in that town of the critters said adventurers have encountered.

These are, of course, taverns much akin to those in our own history.  You know, the ones where travelers swear that they've seen dragons, hippogriffs, manticores, Amazons with their bow arm breasts cut off ... things like that.

You just might be more sanguine about the honesty and reliability of your average drunk wanderer, trying to impress the locals, than I am.

For my part, no, of course not: players don't get to use their past knowledge any more than their PCs get to know the formula for gunpowder, who's really behind that death cult or how to rig a Leyden jar.

Beyond that, it's relatively simple: I don't feel the need to be bound by the sourcebook as far as critters go.

Quote from: Ravenswing;807884For my part, no, of course not: players don't get to use their past knowledge any more than their PCs get to know the formula for gunpowder, who's really behind that death cult or how to rig a Leyden jar.

How do you handle situations where the players know something the PCs don't, like a monster that has a weak spot if you hit it between the eyes or something.

Do you make the PCs roll for some sort of Arcana or Nature check? What if the players just decide "oh hey my character got this inspiration that maybe this spot is the right place to fire"? Like, where do you draw the line between the player "influencing" the character. Because you could easily say that this is just the player trying to shoehorn his OOC knowledge into the game, while you could also say that it's roleplaying the character figuring it out.

Quote from: JeremyR;807310I don't think this is a problem, really. Characters should probably know about monsters in their world, just like people in the real world know about dangerous places and animals.

I've never seen a rattlesnake in real life, but if I see a snake that starts to rattle its tail, I'll know to run away.

I've never seen a vampire, but know they have to be killed by cutting its head off.

Then again, maybe not. Some have to be burned or immersed in running water.

I have always had great fun taking standard issue monsters, changing them in minor ways (name, appearance, Achilles heel) and thereby challenging the players and their PCs without having to reinvent the wheel. Katherine Briggs' Encyclopedia of Fairies is something every DM needs on his bookshelf, for it has not only hundreds of creatures from folklore and mythology, but a like number of stories to be pillaged.

For example, I took the vampire and changed it into the Baobhan Sith, a female Scottish vampire/faerie creature that is susceptible to iron rather than garlic, communion wafers, etc. Everything else from the hit dice to treasure type to XP value remained the same.

I also took regular goblins, renamed them sluagh (an old Gaelic bogey monster) and had the villagers tell the newly arrived PCs that they dare not go outdoors at night for fear of what the sluagh would do to them. I had a bunch of mid-level PCs almost in a panic, worried that some horrible creature like Grendel was about to attack them. Again, the stats remained the same -just a new name and a new coat of paint.

Knowing the monster books like the back of your hand isn't much of a benefit in my campaign.

Quote from: EOTB;807265I don't find it fun to pretend a lack of knowledge on something like an Orc.  Reskinning is less effective than advertised, because the mechanical core of the creature is the same.

I would rather that experienced players benefit from the time they've put into the game than make them play with one hand tied behind their back every time they roll up a new character.  If they feel necessary, they can come up with an in-game reason.  But I will usually choose ease of play over character concerns.

Indeed. Unless the setting is such that the PCs have never seen or heard of an orc before, then they should at least have some basic knowledge of what one is. On the other hand I expect none of the characters to know what the heck a Chuul is or does.

Draconians in Dragonlance. At the start. What are these things? WTF my sword is stuck in this one that turned to stone??? But later they are relatively commonplace and the PCs should have a baser idea what one is. Possibly also what they do on death depending on the locale.

Sense of wonder, not sense of stupid...

Quote from: Elfdart;807912Then again, maybe not. Some have to be burned or immersed in running water.

I have always had great fun taking standard issue monsters, changing them in minor ways (name, appearance, Achilles heel) and thereby challenging the players and their PCs without having to reinvent the wheel. Katherine Briggs' Encyclopedia of Fairies is something every DM needs on his bookshelf, for it has not only hundreds of creatures from folklore and mythology, but a like number of stories to be pillaged.

For example, I took the vampire and changed it into the Baobhan Sith, a female Scottish vampire/faerie creature that is susceptible to iron rather than garlic, communion wafers, etc. Everything else from the hit dice to treasure type to XP value remained the same.

I also took regular goblins, renamed them sluagh (an old Gaelic bogey monster) and had the villagers tell the newly arrived PCs that they dare not go outdoors at night for fear of what the sluagh would do to them. I had a bunch of mid-level PCs almost in a panic, worried that some horrible creature like Grendel was about to attack them. Again, the stats remained the same -just a new name and a new coat of paint.

Knowing the monster books like the back of your hand isn't much of a benefit in my campaign.

This is pretty awesome. I love it. I'm going to use these ideas for starters.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;807893How do you handle situations where the players know something the PCs don't, like a monster that has a weak spot if you hit it between the eyes or something.

Do you make the PCs roll for some sort of Arcana or Nature check? What if the players just decide "oh hey my character got this inspiration that maybe this spot is the right place to fire"? Like, where do you draw the line between the player "influencing" the character. Because you could easily say that this is just the player trying to shoehorn his OOC knowledge into the game, while you could also say that it's roleplaying the character figuring it out.

Well, for one, GURPS makes provision for such skills.  Naturalist, Hidden Lore (Monsters), Occultism, Folklore ... they're all valid choices.  The better the roll, the more likely the info is both sound and useful.

For another, I'm not a huge fan of "This is an unstoppable juggernaut except for its left testicle, upon which a good shot will surely slay it" monsters. That smacks too much of the pull-the-right-lever-or-die dungeon fantasy BS I got past decades ago.  There are certainly useful strategies to engage certain beasts, and that's as far as that goes.  And that doesn't mean some critters stop being tough -- sure, you made the roll, and you remember reading that giant crocodiles have relatively soft underbellies.  Awesome, but that's still a very tough, very tenacious 30' lizard with teeth the size of short swords, and it's comin' for you ...

Most importantly, I don't play with metagaming assholes.  

Quote from: Natty Bodak;807292I would never for a moment think I was playing an RPG with one arm tied behind my back because my character had never see a certain monster, and couldn't use my personal knowledge of how trolls or clay golems work.  That just seems like all-arms-in-play roleplaying to me.

Its how I play actually. I the player might know a troll is killed only by fire. But my first level fighter doesnt know this unless trolls are pretty common in the area. Then again they may be pretty common in the area because no one knows they regenerate even if killed. My first level magic user might know. I usually do an intelligence check to see if I recall anything. Same as when I am GMing.

Which is why when getting into a campaign as a player I ask the DM what is common knowledge stuff the average starting PC would know?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;807893How do you handle situations where the players know something the PCs don't, like a monster that has a weak spot if you hit it between the eyes or something.

Expect the player to act like a grown up, and separate their own player knowledge from that of their character.

Quote from: Ravenswing;807884These are, of course, taverns much akin to those in our own history.  You know, the ones where travelers swear that they've seen dragons, hippogriffs, manticores, Amazons with their bow arm breasts cut off ... things like that.

That is kind of a campaign setting issue.  Generic D&D-land assumes that critters like orcs and trolls are fairly common.  If your milieu has orcs and trolls as rare as dragons and manticores in our own world, then reliable reports would certainly be circumspect.  

All in all, if a GM wants their players to be surprised by the capabilities of a troll, D&D may not be the best of fantsy rpg choices.

Quote from: Kiero;807949Expect the player to act like a grown up, and separate their own player knowledge from that of their character.

As I said earlier, how easily can you separate bright ideas you would have come up with in ignorance from knowing something because you know it?


Like a lot of these discussions, problems can come up even from well-meaning competent people.

Quote from: Will;808038As I said earlier, how easily can you separate bright ideas you would have come up with in ignorance from knowing something because you know it?


Like a lot of these discussions, problems can come up even from well-meaning competent people.

Yeah that's what I mean. A player says "hey let's do X" and then the GM has to read his mind to see if he said it because he knew the info or because he was playing his character that way.

I mean if they go through a lot of steps to show the character learning it, that solves the problem, but that won't happen every time.