Dnd meta gaming.

May 16, 2023 8:22 PM

MrPhucket

Views

30389

Likes

984

Dislikes

33

I’d argue the last one is Men In Black level wisdom. Might still be meta gaming if wisdom was their dump stat though.

I remember joking about suggesting setting children on fire because they had a grown man's voice, just a little jab I made for the DM.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

IF YOU'RE GOING TO TROLL CANYON BRING FIRE IS NOT METAGAMING! If it's called troll canyon people have survived to tell the tale, probably because they brought fire or acid, and will literally tell anyone who'll listen.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Knightville, New Brunswick is called that because there are a whole lot of knights there.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

A quick google will neither confirm nor deny the historical presence or absence of knights in Knightville, but asking around or looking at a map that has a big red circle and danger trolls on a particular area is totally reasonable for your character to have done at some point in the timeskipped most of a day shopping/drinking/planning to go to Troll Canyon. Heck, if you had a job in/near troll canyon, they'd probably brief you on the troll situation as that may affect your rate of pay.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

#4:

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Look if i was urban exploring an abandoned jail or something and i see a sweet old man with a hotdog cart offering me something to eat, im not buying a hotdog, that there is a ghost trying to get me! Its common sense

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Tbh, a lot of these are reasonable to know in character, or at least reasonable guesses. My objection to metagaming is when a character is unaware or separate from events, then comes in talking about or reacting to what happened when they shouldn't know

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"8 year old white girl, middle of the ghetto, bunch of monsters, this time of night, with Quantom Physics books, she about to start some shit Z. She's about 8 years old, those books are way too advanced for her. You ask me I say she's up to something, and to be honest I'd appreciate if ya eased up off my back about it. Or do I owe her an apology?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unless you were sent to rescue a child, chances are the whimpering child in the mega dungeon is something awful. At the very least use dispel magic and detection spells.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The child is a 9th level demon that has nothing to do with the campaign and I put it there to screw with you because you spent an hour trying to seduce the mimic. So you better not fuck with it. - Me, the DM.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

IMO, what this calls "helpful" is the absolutely worst (most fun-ruining) form of metagaming, especially when that type of player gets pissed that the monsters I run never obey the monster manual.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I think you're misreading it. Here the player knows the AC is in a range based on previous attacks (a 12 missed, but a 14 hit, so its AC must be 13 or 14). It's not based on meta knowledge of the monster manual, otherwise he'd say something like "oh slimes have an AC of 14") Speeding along straight to damage (while still calling out your roll on the off-chance of doing something as a reaction) is helpful because you're speeding up the game.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I usually just roll damage anyway unless I rolled terribly. The DM can just ignore the damage roll if it's a miss.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have pulled exactly that last one in a ruined city that was over run by the undead. The cleric realized that the child was moving. And saw the puncture wounds on the person who it looked like died “protecting” the kid.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Anyone listens to actual plays? I recently found out Rolling With Difficulty and it's hitting *right* in my nostalgia bone

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I love meta-gaming to elevate the fun and drama.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I tried making a dagger from the tooth of a zombie Beholder, the DM let me do it but then I just had a kind of gross dagger

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I would say thinking a lone child who is unharmed on the 8th level of a dungeon is suspicious can be 100% in character. Even without meta knowledge a character can see that is strange.

3 years ago | Likes 212 Dislikes 1

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I did something like this in a game. I just tried to stab her in the foot to start initiative

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

My character decides that must be one badass kid and without checking with anyone else invites her to join the party. Actually, this might be an interesting story. The vampire is so curious and surprised that they agree and must continue to pretend to be a kid with suspiciously good survival instincts.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It is strange, and suspicion is fine. Instantly stabbing a child through the heart because they're not where they're supposed to be is another story. A clever GM would use this as a teaching opportunity - acting like psychopaths has consequences. Hope there aren't any paladins in the party.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Honestly, *all* of these examples can work with in universe knowledge. If you're an adventurer and/or live near trolls, you probably know they're weak to fire. If you're fighting a monster and miss with certain swings but hit with others, you can zero in on the bare minimum you need to hit it. If you fail a knowledge check or believe local superstitions, you might not know how zombies work. And then the MIB "small child completely calm and unharmed in a dangerous area full of monsters" thing.

3 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Sort of depends on how advanced you assume the culture of the setting is. If it's authentically medieval, you can't guarantee that commoners know *anything*. If trolls are common as hell in that very specific area, and you're *from* there, sure. Otherwise it's a crapshoot.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

It works in modern times too. I may know the weaknesses of some creatures from my culturally relevant fairy tales but I don't have the first clue how I'd defend myself from a Yōkai lol

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Aye, I know how to kill a troll, and they ain't even friggen real. A world with actual trolls you would know how to deal with them.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Now if this was a "peaceful & monster free" world, and all of a sudden Oblivion gates open, and trolls spill through, sure you wouldn't know

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The hitting one isn't really an IC/OOC thing. The character wouldn't need the DM to check to know they hit the monster.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's not what that one is. That one is the players figuring out the exact AC via multiple attacks. The guy is saying since he hit on a 15, he knows the AC has to be 13 or 14, implying someone else (or maybe him last round) missed on a 12. Which, again, isn't "meta-gaming"; dialing in an enemy's AC is both a regular mechanic of the game and something that can easily be explained in-character (the characters are working out how hard/fast/etc they need to attack to land a hit).

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Agreed. Going "oh, she's clearly the vampire, we should kill her" may go a bit into meta-gaming, but finding this person EXTREMELY suspicious within the context of that environment, is totally valid.

3 years ago | Likes 68 Dislikes 0

I think that would tend more towards disconnect than metagaming.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

if you know in character that there's a vampire, I don't see what that'd be too much

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I would say the first one seems like common sense. I mean, it's named Troll Canyon. I'm sure the fact that they're vulnerable to fire is well known by now.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I’ve read Stephen King. Stake that little shit.

3 years ago | Likes 53 Dislikes 0

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Salem's Lot takes forever and a day to finally pick up it's own plot, but it's so very worth it. The single best representation of vampires in any form of media, no contest.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

I don't know, Midnight Mass I think gives it a run for its money.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

That 1st sentence is true for just about every King story.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

True, but Salem's Lot takes the crown imo.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

As a DM, if I'm putting a little girl on the 8th floor of a mega-dungeon, I'd be disapointed if my players took it at face value.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If there's a vampire, it's totally reasonable for them to take a child to their 8th floor mega-dungeon.

3 years ago | Likes 394 Dislikes 0

Also a stake is a solid choice in both cases IF you aim for the heart. ^^

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean, tricking paladins and clerics of good deities into murdering innocents and thus losing their powers sounds like a pretty dramatic thing that a bored vampire would do.

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Take-out.

3 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 0

A smart vampire who knows adventurers are wrecking up their mega-dungeon would 1,000% put an innocent child in one of the floors as an attempt to get a suspicious party to kill the child and wreck their confidence, unity, and morale all in one move.

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Might be a fresh turn, might be a trap, stake them just to be sure, kiddo was done for once they left the surface anyway

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

yeah but why take the chance?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Child-looking vampires is an often used trope, tho, as there are fanged bastards that turn people into vampires at the ripe age of 12 for reasons. An easy, popular example is Babette

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Recently rewatched a good example with 'the innocents are now the threats', Blood+. Scene where they've discovered a bunch of children who were kidnapped, mid-battle all of those kids are revealed to be pseudo-vamps that are now most are transforming and kind of hungry.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Blood+ is a good example, a classic. More fresh What we do in the Shadows has also a rather amusing example of the trope, with two vampires stuck as young preteens using their looks to hunt pedos for a snack

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sound like the weird unresolved c-plot of ahs hotel.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sounds like something a child vampire would say so that we don't unalive them.....

3 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 0

Plot twist: the little girl is the vampire, and the pale dude in the black cape is a thrall she keeps around as an insurance policy in case of adventurers.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Well I know what I'm doing to my players next time there's a vamp >:D

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

*casually stabs child through face. Solely because they didn’t like her face. Is possibly a psychopath, who knows?*

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/thieves-cant/list?title_no=184879&webtoon-platform-redirect=true for source. (I know it has a link on the bottom but when I typed it in I got nothing. User error has not been ruled out)

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The “helpful one” makes combat so much smoother and I don’t really consider it metagaming too much, just like, basic memory of the last few rolls…

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I mean, even swat cuffs all people found on a dangerous scene until alibis and backgrounds can be verified, iirc. And that girl is mighty sus.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

SWAT secures everyone for that reason and so they don't run around and get shot. But they (in theory) don't shoot everyone just in case.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yet none of this really falls under meta, meta for dnd 5e would be "I'm currently at 25/50 hitpoints" "my strength score is _"

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In our games, if the party was heading to Troll Canyon, they would definitely research trolls before going there. Thus the first panel would not be metagaming, just some normal prep for the adventure. Also the 3rd and 4th could be something you are saying in character and not metagaming. The AC bit could be considered metagaming, but everyone tracks the AC anyway and you need to tell the DM what you are doing, so definitely not the worst metagaming.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

Pretty much. If I roll a 14 and it doesn't hit, but then I roll a 15 and it hits, well.... I definitely know the monster's AC now.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Agreed. And a good DM will occasionally flip the script and have "Troll Canyon" be the hideout of a band of fiends who ousted the trolls, but kept propagating the troll rumors to make sure everyone came in with fire attacks, which they are immune too.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Or take it one evil step further and fill it with Black Trolls https://www.5esrd.com/database/creature/troll-black/

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Or, you know, it can just be a place name and the GM can have a giggle as the players research trolls and gear up to fight trolls without looking up the history of the actual area. Kinda like someone planning a trip to Paris, Texas and taking a few months of French classes ahead of time.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Those numbers have no in game meaning. It's the type of metagaming that brings everyone out of their role. Fucking hate that shit.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 10

Expecting me to stay 100% in character the entire time? Disallowing abstraction for your personal immersion? Fuck that shit, and fuck anyone who expects that of others. It's a communal game, not your personal guided disassociation session.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

It also speeds up combat, which is often a slog. If you have to check with the DM after every roll to see if it hit, even though everyone has already figured out its AC based on what has/hasnt hit previously, you’re just making it unnecessarily complicated.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

You give your scores, the DM tells you what happened.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Roll-players vs role-players.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

...after I hit with a 14, expecting me to ask if I hit with a 16 just slows down the game.

3 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

In fairness, sometimes AC changes, if you assume you hit because the number hit last time. You'd be upset if you cast shield of faith and got hit on the same number as before, don't do that to the dm.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Then I saw little Tiffany. I'm thinking, y'know, eight-year-old white girl, bottom of the dungeon, bunch of monsters, this time of night with quantum physics books? She about to start some sh*t, Zed. She's about eight years old, those books are WAY too advanced for her. If you ask me, I'd say she's up to something. And to be honest, I'd appreciate it if you eased up off my back about it. Or do I owe her an apology?"

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I would argue only the second one is metagaming, since it uses knowledge from outside the game that the character couldn’t know. A decent knowledge check could get you that other info, especially if you have faced that type of enemy before. Knowing trolls are susceptible to fire would make sense, as would knowing the dangers of a zombie bite or knowing that vampires may lure you to their lair and appear less threatening at first

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The zombie bite one is labeled incorrect because in DND zombies aren't infectious. Well, they might have normal diseases but I digress.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That’s a good point :)

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Aside from the incorrect panel, none of these really are meta knowledge? Trolls being vulnerable to fire is probably one of the first things commoner children learn. The helpful panel isn't applying the knowledge in-character, they're just pre-rolling damage according to what others have already rolled and hit with. Psychopathic may *actually* be psychopathic, but it's explicitly anti-meta. The incorrect panel could be less right if one was not just referring to D&D RAW.

3 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

The troll part is super campaign-setting dependent... But yes, this sounds more like a mismatch between the DM and the players in expectations about what sort of stuff the characters would know about, which is just a communication issue. And as you said, sometimes metagaming is *necessary* for a suspension of disbelief: "It doesn't make perfect sense to me that this girl would be here... But I know we're playing a heroic adventure, and the DM isn't perfect... so I'll go along" = metagaming. If >

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

you hear the DM describe in detail some ruins you walk past on the journey, you as a player can probably guess that they contain some interesting that the DM has planned and they'd like you to explore... If you allow that to influence your decision to go along and go explore them (and intentionally come up with some in-game justification for it), that's metagaming... but probably positive vs trying to be some sort of hyper-simulationist. If you start that earlier and intentionally create a >

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

character who is curious about that sort of stuff, to make it easier for DM to involve you with story hooks... That's metagaming! You're utilising your real-world information about the campaign and your DM when creating your character. But that's okay, that's useful, that's *necessary* for a good game when the alternative is just creating whatever and then trying to simulate that fictional character perfectly.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

My GMs are always willing to share future parts of the game with me cause I refuse to meta game. Some of our party is bad at it and it's kinda frustrating.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Relatively new to D&D, so I always get to ask if my character knows relevant info. Sometimes my DM doesn't even tell me what I know, just that I know what to do. It's actually quite entertaining not knowing nearly as much as my character.

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

That's why I try to only play homebrew worlds/games. I've been playing for years, so it's really easy to accidentally metagame in vanilla games. I like the surprise/awkwardness of dealing with a new foe.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

what about not knowing the names of things "you see a flapperghast" ok, go fight it or run for your life?

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It can be hard to play a maxed intelligence character.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Or a charisma-focused one.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Maybe to you ;)

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh honey there's no "maybe" about it for me lol

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Why is #3 "Incorrect?" Are we just assuming outcomes, here, or am I missing something else,?

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

They've mixed up Hollywood zombies and D&D zombies. Or maybe they failed a knowledge check and are roleplaying being wrong for fun.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

In a lot of fantasy games, zombies aren't usually the product of a spreadable infection. Much of the time they're raised by accident or design by dark magic or the like. Having one bite you doesn't mean you turn into one; that's a thing that happens in "modern" zombie settings where there is no magic.

3 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

Thanks. I've started playing DnD, but haven't come across zombies, yet. I did come across slaad tho, and failed a Con Save- so there's that.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Condolences.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

...slaad?

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Egg-sack-tly

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Zombies don’t do that in dnd. So they are using knowledge from other series and incorrectly applying it. Their character they are playing wouldn’t think that so it is meta gaming.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

There's nothing to say they can't think that though. It can just be an old wives tale where they grew up. Doesn't have to be mechanically correct. Same way there's loads of local myths and folklore across regions & cultures. Dock leaves don't cure nettle stings, but parents telling kids to rub a leaf on the stings isn't metagaming IRL. You can just let people burn resources trying to "cure" the zombie infection if they're that convinced, doesn't have to do anything mind you.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

I think your giving the player the benefit of the doubt here. If they did this for role play purposes I’d be all for it.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

In any TTRPG, the GM decides what things can and can't do. That is rather the entire point of playing a TTRPG rather than something like Hero Quest or Descent or Gloomhaven. The GM can decide the zombies in his campaign jerk off on their enemies and their jizz is white phosphorus.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The only time metagaming is problematic is when the player has foreknowledge of the adventure. Just knowing the mechanics isn't metagaming.

3 years ago | Likes 95 Dislikes 10

There's a fine line between being knowledgeable and being a rules lawyer too. If they dont start calling out rules corrections its fine.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Depends on whether you're doing it to "win" or to make the game more fun. Not using fire on trolls because it's MG is still Metagaming.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I was on a game where a player would interact and respond, in character, to information they couldn't possibly know because it was only said to another player. Like he constantly did this. I ended up quitting because it was so obnoxious

3 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

That and when they act like they know things their character doesn’t, so when I do rat things they act like they know when they never saw it

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then that is the time for the DM to tweak the encounters a bit. The module calls for a flock of Winged Devils to attack at this point? Lets swap them out for three Eaters of Hope.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Tehre is a difference between blatantly obvious - for example, knowing you only have so many spell slots, and a world in which you can know precisely the changes of an attack hitting expressed in numerical form.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There should be limitations to what your 1st level character knows or has been exposed/trained on.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

In the game I am designing with friends, we have built in that new characters know “legend” level knowledge that is mostly false but sounds good in a story by the campfire. And of course, the vampires and werewolves and other supernatural creatures spread those stories of fake weaknesses around as well

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah that's my problem cause I go into things knowing *all* the lore. "Your character wouldn't know that." "I read it in a book, my character can read, why not?"

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Your GM/DMs problem is that they run games with too much definite, specific lore AND abide by it. And presumably describe things to their players by their names. If a GM were, for instance, to physically describe what your character sees/has the time to notice, your character's strict book learning would be about as useful as it should be.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

One campaign I was in (which eventually died due to the pandemic) the DM was like "we're doing Curse of Strahd" so we were all like "okay let's make sure to gear up our characters to maximise damage against vampires" then the DM immediately took away all our shit at the start of the game so we were just level 1 mooks that didn't even have any weapons or armour.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean sure, but does your CHARACTER know the mechanics. YOU may know you need fire or acid damage to kill a troll, but does your CHARACTER know about trolls? You'd have to justify it with something in their background or survival, lore, or history knowledge check.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I mean, it's a fucking troll - let the long-range players take care of it with fireballs and arrows to the face, I'm not running up that fucker and trying to punch it 4 times with my martial arts monk because I don't want to die.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It can be frustrating when the players use it to bypass playing the game ie investigating, rolling checks. It can also kind of ruin the discovery for less experienced players.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

My table was known for changing the stat block as soon as players started meta gaming. Trolls now dislike the child instead of fire.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

*cold… although child weakness would really throw them off.

3 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

This was a confusing but ultimately entertaining typo. You should absolutely canonize it and have children be terrifying to something that doesn't age or is born full grown.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Trolls are also dumb enough to not know the difference between a child and a halfling. Many options are opening up.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"Weakness: Scared of children"

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

...that's kinda off-brand for trolls. According to the fairy tales I heard growing up, trolls consider children a delicacy.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I would disagree. If trolls aren’t common, you likely wouldn’t know their weakness. Although, in this meme the name troll canyon likely means they are. It really depends on the world you are playing in.

3 years ago | Likes 67 Dislikes 9

That's actually something I apply with my players. If it's relatively common, I often let them decide if their character would have interacted with that information (by reading a standard book, hearing of adventures, etc). If it's more rare, they might get a check. Extremely rare, they'll need to find the info through playing the game.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Trolls don't exist in the real world and I know they are weak against fire why wouldn't an adventurer who lives in world where they do exist know that.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'd say it'd need to make sense for the character. a fighter going "oh, troll canyon, is there a fire sword on sale?" might not make sense, but a wizard, who is basically the magical equivalent of "Uhm, Well, Ackshyually...." would absolutely know that little tidbit, since they haven't left their basement (sorry, 'study') since Year 204 of the third era.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Maybe if the fighter is fresh from being a country bumpkin, but an adventurer shouldn't be expected to have been lobotomized of any/all knowledge. If trolls are common enough to be acknowledged as existing and not mythological creatures, then you're likely to have encountered someone mentioning their weakness. Even if it's just 'did you hear that trade convoy down south got lucky because they had a fire mage?'.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

This is where Knowledge skills become useful. Knowledge (local area) can be rolled to know things about locally-found critters.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

but you have to watch out for the munchkins who don't specify the local area, and argue this means they know every area's local info

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Likewise I dont consider "helpful" to be metagaming at all, esp if you gain that ac knowledge from other hits/misses. It gets a bit close if you start targeting based on hp values though. Had a dm get annoyed that I was so good as guessing approx hp left just based on how much we had dealt and what I guessed they would have to start with (with no knowledge of the stat block or any dm modifications, just had intuitive knowledge of what the dm expected of us)

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Clarification, annoyed here doesn't mean they wanted me to stop doing it, or it was causing problems, they just couldn't understand how consistently I was right, and things they don't understand annoy them until they figure it out.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I mean I’m pretty good at math and I’m baffled how you managed it. I could probably do that in shadowrun maybe but not D&D.

3 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This is the moment where an experienced player asks the DM "ehat does my character know about trolls?" And let them tell me how common or uncommon that type of knowledge is.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Exactly. I always like players that ask can I roll a still check for that knowledge.

3 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I mostly DM, so I go one step further as a player. I'll ask the question that implies maybe I need to roll, but I never ask directly, "can I roll?" In my experience, often a character will just know things, no check needed. Don't assume a chance of failure, until the dm decides there is one.

3 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Eh. Its just a skill check, plus depends on characters skills.

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

It’s a skill check if the DM thinks it makes sense. Not every dnd world is high magic. Some you could roll a 20 and still not have knowledge about the monster in front of you.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Then thats a bad DM, I've played with those before. I get if you don't roll high enough to make the DC, but you do have a chance thats what the skills are for. The nat 20 you might depending on how they do skill checks, if its RAW or homebrew.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

You don’t always get a chance. Rolling a skills check without asking the dm and declaring nat 20 I succeed is toxic player behavior.

3 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

That's something that should be discussed with your players beforehand. There's nothing wrong with assuming your character is reasonably knowledgeable about a given threat. If you really must, make it a monster knowledge check.

3 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 4

Exactly. Not every person on earth knows how fast a hippo is, or that bears can climb trees, or that tigers can jump almost two stories up. But if you make a living dealing with those dangerous animals, you probably know. At a certain level it becomes outright unrealistic for you to *not* know, because how else have you survived this line of work for so long?

3 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

One of the reasons I absolutely love reskins of monsters for thwarting those "I've memorized the entire Monster Manual and always act with that metaknowledge" characters.

3 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Right - I've only DMed once but all it takes is a teeny bit of creativity and issues like this go away. Players assume trolls are weak to fire? MAGMA TROLLS BAYBEEEEEE. After the party had been sufficiently humbled provide a means of narrow escape and see if they adjust to their newfound knowledge.

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I really think this depends on the world you are in and your characters backstory. Not every monster and their weaknesses are known by everyone. If every player assumes they can read the stat block of every monster, you are going to have a poor experience.

3 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 5

Your players are adventurers. Joe Schmo, who tends the farm down the road, may not be aware of the weaknesses of trolls, but it’s reasonable to assume that anyone who’s going to risk their life for whatever plot hook the campaign has would have done some research about the possible dangers they may face. So if Trolls are at least somewhat common in the world, they’d have definitely overheard “Fire works best” in one of the taverns somewhere.

3 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 4

They can certainly ask the dm to roll for it, but saying every adventurer knows the weaknesses of all monsters is lazy to me. Also if your players are in uncharted lands they shouldn’t know anything. It really depends on the setting of the game.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

If you're treating the monster's stat block as secret information you are the problem.

3 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 7

I really dislike players who claim to know the exact AC, hp, attacks, and weaknesses of every monster. That’s the definition of meta gaming. This ruins immersion. Additionally the DM has the authority to change any of that if they want to. I again would disagree and say your stance is the problem. Lucky we can simply play at different tables.

3 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

No, if you're pulling up the monster manual on your phone, you're gainsaying wisdom checks and ruining other's experience of a world if they don't play that way. Do you go to an escape room knowing how to beat it so you can be sure of an early lunch?

3 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0