| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:05:19
...can't seperate player knowledge from character knowledge.
I’m not sure if I’m alone in this mater, although I’m sure others will have had to deal with similar problems when DMing a group, my gaming group is a strange mix of veteran gamers and new gamers. I don’t have any problem with the three veterans as they are experienced enough to be able to differentiate between what they know and what their character knows. However the issue arises with the newer gamers (I say new they’ve been playing 2 times a week for a year now), some of them have gone off and against our wishes and advising have purchased various monster manuals which they have then read.
Now the problem arises with them not being able to separate player and character knowledge so their characters will seemingly jump to the most random conclusions about what it is they are facing (and its painfully obvious it’s the player who knows the knowledge not the character). I’ve already implemented various tactics so that they don’t know the one weakness and are able to kill it before it even spots them, however I was wondering if anyone has any other tactics and little tricks to use on gamers who can’t separate one from the other?
This is the first time I’ve come across this problem as all the other groups have been able to separate the knowledge so any hints or tips would be gratefully received and I’ll let you all know the outcome of them.
Brightest Blessings
Heidi |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 12 Sep 2006 : 15:52:51
I have players blatantly ask me what bypasses a new creature's Damage Reduction. WTF |
| stormcrow1618 |
Posted - 02 Sep 2006 : 18:32:44
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
quote:
Originally posted by Wandering_mage
Always consider rolling for knowledge. Its a fun way to resolve the problem quickly. 
I totally agree with that...but to use that option I had to (as a house rule) create a sub-skill for knowledge, knowledge: creatures and monsters, as it made no sense to me that you need the 8+ knowledge skills to have knowledge on each monster type...
quote from a player (who was playing an escaped gladiatoral slave) about a year ago:
quote:
I need (knowledge) religion to know we need to find the lich's phylactory to permanently defeat it???
I've always used Knowledge: Monster Lore, but I would consider even taking it a step further, by requiring characters to buy ranks in specific monster types, such as Knowledge: Aberrations, Knowledge: Giants, or Knowledge: Undead.
If meta-gaming gets bad, I'm big on passing notes between players and the DM describing character actions so that the players realistically don't always know what the others are doing. In this case, one player would pass me a note saying that he's casting fireball, and the others would say that they're running up to attack. Then, I describe the actions each character is taking: "The warriors run up and attack, and just as they're swinging their swords, the wizard begins chanting from behind you. Suddenly your world erupts in flames." The biggest problem with this is that it slows combat to a crawl, but the players tend to learn rather quickly. I don't use it often for combat actions, but it's always great for rogues who want to loot without the other players knowing, etc.
Also, if I suspect that players are using OOC knowledge, I ask them to justify how their character would know such-and-such. If they can't come up with a reason that I find satisfactory, they don't know, and I ask them to revise their actions accordingly.
I frown on meta-gaming, but I do so from the perspective of a veteran gamer with eidetic memory, which means that I sympathize with other experienced players who simply know a lot of details about monster stats and other rules, and I understand that sometimes players unintentionally act as if their characters know what they know. However, players who intentionally buy source material and memorize it to give their characters an edge are another matter entirely, and such actions are a good way to get ejected from one of my games. |
| Kalin Agrivar |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 15:47:06
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
However,
On the other hand about those knowlege checks, I've had some DM's that went, "Tough, you failed the roll and your char has NEVER heard a thing about trolls even though she is a 18 int and 12+ wis character. So no, she doesn't know that trolls are harmed by fire or acid, she's stupid."
Great, that's lame because trolls have existed for decades to centuries and people have spread tales about trolls by now.
So when I do have PC's roll for checks, it's over things that are rare. But most people know things about skeletons, zombies, goblins, orcs, trolls, etc. It's the really rare beasties that I might have someone roll a check for.
doesn't the DC of a knowledge check refer to the difficulty, rarity and/or availability of that knowledge?
using the (average MM I) troll for instance, identifying a troll for someone in troll coutry may be a DC 0 while someone that lives in a troll-less region it may be 5-10 (as there are alot of tales of trolls)...knowing their regenerative powers and how to foil it would be about the same...but their great climbing ability maybe less known (DC 10-15) and the "drop food when you run away" trick to escape even less known (DC 15-20)
I think if it is something every one would know then the DC would be low, even to 0 (automatic knowledge) and the less likely the player would know that fact, the higher the DC of the skill check...
and Any DM that would do
quote:
"Tough, you failed the roll and your char has NEVER heard a thing about trolls even though she is a 18 int and 12+ wis character. So no, she doesn't know that trolls are harmed by fire or acid, she's stupid"
is being a poor DM... |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 10:20:13
One time I gave a player the RoF sourcebook to read up on svirfneblins. When she was done reading that she flipped through the book until she reached the monsters-section, (and no one knows my temper here) so I verbally ripped off her head in front of the entire group. It was a cure... |
| Faraer |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 10:07:31
Someone who knowingly betrays your trust and regularly spoils your fun isn't your friend. The fact that it happens in the context of a game is not particularly relevant: it's still people doing things to each other.
If they aren't doing it knowingly, the friendship will deteriorate unless you either tackle the problem directly or just decide that this person, who may be great company at other times, doesn't fit your roleplaying group. Ignoring the problem, or trying to bandage its symptoms with in-game tricks, won't help anyone.
The exception is someone so unstable that removal from the game would be very painful, in which case you obviously need to tread carefully.
There isn't an easy solution, but there is a solution: talk. Down a Scooby Snack/glass of meths for courage. |
| Conlon |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 05:40:50
This is a bit of a touchy subject because it can require a confrontation with a player, who is probably also a friend. There are some interpersonal dynamics there that you don't want to mess with over a recreational game. However, the player should be made aware that as the DM, you spend several of your own hours away from the gaming table trying to come up with ideas and situations which will bring some excitement and laughs to your friends. Perhaps you should tell them that you feel they are sabotaging your attempts and making the game less fun for you. That sucks considering you are trying to make things fun for them, and making a sacrifice of your own to do it.
Since there is no one, easy answer for this, how about printing off this thread for your friends and have them read it. That way they'll see that you are seeking advice from strangers regarding something that you feel is important and is affecting your enjoyment of this GAME. Perhaps this will be the eye-opener that they need.
Good luck |
| Faraer |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 03:32:05
A traditional Realms method is to use normal monsters but change their appearance so they aren't recognizable. And as Conlon says, if a character doesn't have the knowledge, you shouldn't let them act on it.
But I have never once heard of serious metagaming or a comparable problem being fixed by in-game means. The problem isn't in the game, it's in the attitudes and relationships of people. The only thing that might work is to talk to these players, find out why they do it. explain to them why they shouldn't, and stop allowing them to waste your time DMing for them if they don't stop.
If as DM you ask someone not to buy a book, and they buy it, they are betraying your trust. Don't put up with that naed.
In particular, why do you keep playing with the particularly bad player? I would get rid of them first and see if things improve. |
| Conlon |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 02:15:15
I believe that if you are the DM, then you must make the decision that if the character would not have the knowledge necessary to perform the action that the player is planning, then they just can't do it. Simple. "Although you have read the Monster Manual and know that this is a troll, your sea-elven character has never heard of a troll, and does not realize that fire is required to defeat it." It is that simple.
If your players haven't encountered the creature previously, I would advise a knowledge roll with a difficulty based on the monster's population in the geographical location that the players are familiar with. If they are from the Silver Marches and haven't seen an orc, it is quite likely that they'll know a thing or two about them anyway, and when seeing one for the first time, will probably know what it is. However, they most likely will not know a phaerimm from an alhoon.
As a DM, if you want to keep things fairly realistic, you just have to be firm at times. It will end up being more fun in the long run. Of course, that is just my opinion. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 01:11:32
Your best bet as others have stated is to use the various knowledge skill checks to see if they know anything about what theyve run into the DC for the skill check should vary depending on how well known a creature is (Goblins would have a low D, Shades on the other hand would have a much higher DC)
If your players insist on using knowledge their characters dont have then might want consider using following each time they do it.
1) Party gets no XP from encounters where they use info they shouldnt have
2) When you determine the parties XP award for the encounter artificially raise the Partiess average level by 2 which will give them a smaller XP reward |
| Kuje |
Posted - 29 Aug 2006 : 00:31:05
However,
On the other hand about those knowlege checks, I've had some DM's that went, "Tough, you failed the roll and your char has NEVER heard a thing about trolls even though she is a 18 int and 12+ wis character. So no, she doesn't know that trolls are harmed by fire or acid, she's stupid."
Great, that's lame because trolls have existed for decades to centuries and people have spread tales about trolls by now.
So when I do have PC's roll for checks, it's over things that are rare. But most people know things about skeletons, zombies, goblins, orcs, trolls, etc. It's the really rare beasties that I might have someone roll a check for. |
| Reefy |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 23:38:57
I also like the idea of a Knowledge skill for creatures and monsters; currently I let my players try and identify animals or obviously strongly magical creatures with Knowledge nature and arcana respectively.
I also favour XP for good roleplaying or particularly good ideas - in my experience nobody gets upset, it tends to inspire the others to work harder next time. And I've never let the bonuses get so unreasonable as to make things completely unbalanced. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 23:23:46
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
quote:
Originally posted by Wandering_mage
Always consider rolling for knowledge. Its a fun way to resolve the problem quickly.
I totally agree with that...but to use that option I had to (as a house rule) create a sub-skill for knowledge, knowledge: creatures and monsters, as it made no sense to me that you need the 8+ knowledge skills to have knowledge on each monster type...
That works for me... I know back when I was playing (I've not had a group to game with for a long time), I'd occasionally know things my character didn't -- so I'd pass the DM a note, asking if I knew this bit of info. I also knew that I was smarter than my character, so I'd occasionally make an intelligence check to see if my character had an idea that I just thought of.
One thing that monster entries in 2E had that 3E dropped was "frequency". With that, you knew of a critter was common, uncommon, rare, etc. I wish they'd kept that -- because you could use that as a modifier for the monster knowledge check. You can still do it, I suppose, but it's more difficult without that knowledge... |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:49:35
Or use a ... ahem...third party book. Green Ronin has a nice variant Monster Manual out there...I think it was Green Ronin anyway...
Or whoop their asses with some rival NPC adventurer group, that is comprised of...I'm tempted to say Yuan-Ti...or drow...no, wait... let the NPC party be orcs, half-orcs and humans. And since you know the rules AND are the DM mix their feats so properly that they will be a challenge to overcome in a head to head confrontation...force them to think.
P.S. : I know people who have played as long as I have (20 years) and I sure as hell would never call them gamers. |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:47:40
quote:
Originally posted by Beirnadri Magranth
just have the players not have any access to the secret weapon or spell that is the creature's weakness
Ok, thanks for the tip I may place that into the game at some point  |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:46:12
quote:
Originally posted by Wandering_mage
My bard walks into a tomb that he quickly realizes is an elven tomb. He warns the other characters not to touch anything or take anything with checking with him first. Has used knowledge that he did not get in game but....being a bard I thought, well heck some adventure was probably complaining about how he lost his party in an elven tomb they were trying to pillage from over a mug of alle at an inn and I overheard him. A likely situation I would argue. The DM was cool with it too. I was right not to touch anything also. One the players still took something from the tomb and we were attacked. 
Always consider rolling for knowledge. Its a fun way to resolve the problem quickly.
If I can see of a way of how the character would have that knowledge I tend to let it slide, however rolling for knowledge is something that I will start using from now on.
Thanks for the veiw point and tip |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:42:32
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkfeather
You can also create a "new" monster using the stats of other well known monster, but describing it completly different. Myself, for example, used the Howler's stats to create a demonic horse-like mount (I just didn't want to use a nightmare). I removed the quills and the howl ability, and described it like a horse with wolf's fangs and goat's horns. As a final touch, I gave it the special qualities of an Abyssal petitioner (without the acidic vapor quality) and a charge attack with the horns. Voilà! Now a have a different monster, that the players will never figure out what it really is.
I think I'll try something similar, it has also been suggested by someone I know that I should use the cover of a Monster Manual but have inside it a totally different book so that they have no idea whats coming up next.
Thanks for the suggestion |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:37:51
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
The players in question are as I understand it relatively new players, that's why I mentioned bonus XP's. I agree on the surprise variants, but that can be overdone and become almost demonstrative. Bonus xp's are not among my favorite things, but they are more a carrot than a whip and in my book that's the advantage.
To be honest I'm not sure if they can be classed as new players anymore, they've played twice a week (each time for more then 6 hours a time) for the past year. I've been prescribed to play D&D by my doctors as I recover from amnesia, as it helps with the various mental abilities that i've forgotten etc. So the gaming group has gamed even more recently which may mean they qualify as gamers rather than new gamers (but the lines all blured and fuzzy)
|
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:24:08
Maybe they are more succeptive to this:
suggest a game of poker, where all of them play with open cards, and they still have to bet money.
Sounds exciting, or? =) |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:19:13
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
bonus XP can sometime unbalance the PC party and the game and cause bad feelings if one player is a much better roleplayer than the other players...and if the poorer players get the bonus than the good player might get resentful...
All xp totals are kept secret and are only shown to other players if the person in question wants them to see it, so although you would think that that xp bonus's would cause problems the fact that they may get positive or negative bonus's actually has produced the best roleplaying the group has had.
Although I do agree it could have a negative effect so it will be cut back as things improve.
|
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:15:46
Another idea would be this:
Quit using dice and monsters for a while, let them roleplay. And if that doesn't work...tell them that the only thing that is spoken out of character at the table is their numbers calling of die-rolls, and spell announcements, and actions of their characters, everything else is IN character.
I once let my party be dumped by an avalanche because the player of the dwarf shouted out after I announced that rule for a few hours. |
| Kalin Agrivar |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:13:00
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Morbannaon
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
....but the worst meta-gaming is "in-game" meta-gaming, .....
Both myself and my fiance who is also sometimes (when he can stand it) the DM for the group have pointed out the meta-gaming, but no mater what occurs they still don't get the message.
Meta-gaming is one of the biggest problems we have with the group but luckily its only one gamer thats the worst and so on the sessions he doesn't turn up its all fine
Thanks for the tips
Well, sadly some players are sometimes poison to a group of role players and if you let them stay involved with you they ruin it for everyone, even to the point some players quit roleplaying all together..
if he/she refuses to stop meta-gaming, all you can do (at least) is to refuse to let him roleplay with you when you or your fiance are DMing...or kick him out of your group of role players completly (as a last resort)  |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:10:06
quote:
Originally posted by VonRaventheDaring
or you could always make it unique creatures that aren't immune to the normal monsters immunities and don't have the normal monster's weaknesses as well. I mean like some werecreatures are immune to silver but cold-iron hurts! I would also make them do knowlage checks, and ask them is that you or your character's knowlage, but i tend to be an ass! :D
I'm begining to place monsters in that are a mix of a lot of other things and so although look like one thing aren't that thing. I think its possibly the best way to go.
Thanks for the tips, I may have to give the knowledge checks a go 
|
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 22:06:23
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
....but the worst meta-gaming is "in-game" meta-gaming, .....
Both myself and my fiance who is also sometimes (when he can stand it) the DM for the group have pointed out the meta-gaming, but no mater what occurs they still don't get the message.
Meta-gaming is one of the biggest problems we have with the group but luckily its only one gamer thats the worst and so on the sessions he doesn't turn up its all fine
Thanks for the tips |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:58:23
I would advise against minus xp's as these can lead to bad feelings. If I were to give one final advise before going to sleep it would be to use a combination of all of the above. Some variants, some exceptions, some rewards when they act against their own knowledge, but in character, some nameless describing etc. This should at least keep them a little on their toes.
With time they may take the hint, if not... Good luck. |
| Kalin Agrivar |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:55:50
quote:
Originally posted by Wandering_mage
Always consider rolling for knowledge. Its a fun way to resolve the problem quickly.
I totally agree with that...but to use that option I had to (as a house rule) create a sub-skill for knowledge, knowledge: creatures and monsters, as it made no sense to me that you need the 8+ knowledge skills to have knowledge on each monster type...
quote from a player (who was playing an escaped gladiatoral slave) about a year ago:
quote:
I need (knowledge) religion to know we need to find the lich's phylactory to permanently defeat it???
|
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:54:03
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Well, there's always the old bonus xp for good role playing. Describing monsters, spells etc instead of naming them can be done but its a little cumbersome at times. Variants of monsters and abilities etc.
Bonus xp's would be my advise, but each group is different so its a little difficult to say anything final. If nothing else works, you will just have to talk to them and try to persuade them from reading the books.
Bonus xp has been implimented as well as minus xp if there is a particular reason. I have tried to persuade them from reading the books and most of them are fine with that but there is still two that refuse to listen to either myself or my fiance who's the groups other DM (although he rarely DM's for the group as he gets very irritated by them)
Thanks for the suggestion though
|
| Beirnadri Magranth |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:51:54
just have the players not have any access to the secret weapon or spell that is the creature's weakness |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:48:41
quote:
Originally posted by Snotlord
... and if that does not help: four fire ball lobbing goblins. My near-epic group of purple dragons knights recently got their arses kicked by a nest of goblin adepts armed to the teeth with wands.
Seriously, keep a steady supply of seldom used monsters handy, but go easy on the newcomers. Its a game, after all.
I bet they weren't expecting that
Thanks for the tip |
| Wandering_mage |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:48:10
As a DM and a player in the Realms if I am worried that I have too much knowledge of a subject as a player I ask the DM if I can make a quick knowledge roll. Then I ok the info I know with the DM if I roll well and share it through my character. If I roll poorly I just play dumb and the DM eventually gets around to revealing how to kill the nishruu, or who Galaeron Nihmedu is, and so on. Playing dumb is important so that your DM can once in a blue moon have the party come into contact with a popular Realms theme (NPC such as Storm, artifact such as the Nether Scrolls, or ancient elven lore). However some stuff I think about and consider possible knowledge my character would have. For instance:
My bard walks into a tomb that he quickly realizes is an elven tomb. He warns the other characters not to touch anything or take anything with checking with him first. Has used knowledge that he did not get in game but....being a bard I thought, well heck some adventure was probably complaining about how he lost his party in an elven tomb they were trying to pillage from over a mug of alle at an inn and I overheard him. A likely situation I would argue. The DM was cool with it too. I was right not to touch anything also. One the players still took something from the tomb and we were attacked.
Always consider rolling for knowledge. Its a fun way to resolve the problem quickly. |
| Lady Morbannaon |
Posted - 28 Aug 2006 : 21:47:35
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
Set them against opponents with class levels.
A fireball lobbing goblin should make them wonder
Well maybe one or two would be an idea 
Thanks |
|
|
