Help Support Nerdarchy by Shopping at YOUR Favorites Places on the Internet. Just use these links and shop as usual. Nothing changes for you- Amazon- amzn.to/2jf0boA Nerdarchy the Store- goo.gl/M4YZEQ Drive Thru RPG- goo.gl/6nf5zh Easy Roller Dice- goo.gl/1n0M1r D&D and Think Geek Gear- goo.gl/LZAV5z Find Us- Patreon: www.patreon.com/Nerdarchy Website: www.Nerdarchy.com Facebook: facebook.com/Nerdarchy Nerdarchy Discord- goo.gl/qXEuGw Instagram: instagram.com/Nerdarchy/ Twitter: twitter.com/Nerdarchy
Nerdarchy maybe the high level wizard may have to make his saving throws against going insane, my GOD he is messing with 😈S, kind of like wish spells, a person might want to be careful what they wish for, or making deals with 😈's, wow, can that kind of things go haywire.
In some ways this is a good problem to have. A player is interested in spending out of game time to learn more about the game and setting. Turn it into an in game scenario so characters can discover cool things. This goes right along with the idea in the video of rewarding players.
Considering most of the players I have met and heart about from other DMs, I would greatly reward that player for the innitiative. A player that shows intterest in the World he plays in and engages with the game outside of a play session can be a great asset to the group, if he does it right. There is such a thing as good meta gaming.
Reading through the module to figure out all of the secrets that are supposed to be unfolded with the party through triumph is not a good thing. It ruins it for all the other players and makes it feel less genuine. Especially when the other players are noobs man. It shouldn't be up to the player to learn about the world, a good dm makes the world feel lived in through dialogue and visuals.
One other point that I'm not sure you explicitly mentioned: if the player's doing research for player knowledge because it's an interesting setting, then that's just proof the DM's doing his job well.
See, here's the thing... most gaming tables, you're gonna have that one guy who studies the rule books like he's got a final coming up. That doesn't hurt anything. That's normal. The point when it becomes a concern is when the player assumes that because they know something, that means their character also knows it. I mean you could throw them a curve ball by having the canon lore be inaccurate if you wanted to. Unless it's an exhibition game, like adventurers' league, there's nothing stopping you from doing that. You, the GM, tell your players what their characters know of your game's lore.
That exactly, LIkke i played with a dm who hated people metagaming yet when I ran things he knew all the flaws despite there was little to no reason for his character to know some of them. Given the circumstances of the world they played on. He was really grumpy when I gave Trolls resistance to fire and acid.
You can do it in AL as well. They HIGHLY recommend you don't but that is just a recommendation, as long as you don't change the xp or loot then everything is fine.
Like how my Half-Orc Fighter has proficiency in Dungeoneering. I'll just ask the dm if the monster is commonly found underground, in dungeons, tombs, etc. If they do, then there is a good chance my character has basic knowledge of them, like Names, one or two attacks, and depending on my Dungeoneering check, maybe a weakness. Not that it normally changes his attack style.
Meta-gaming is when the player uses knowledge he has of the game that the character would not have. Extra planar stuff if in the wheel house of a high level Wizard, so not a problem.
When you have a player that’s looking into details about the world your DM’ing in is one of the best compliments from the players. The fact that a player is that into your game where he’s spending his own time learning about your world is a sign that they are really liking your adventure. I’d encourage it. Just be sure to lay out what their character knows and what they don’t know. It’s up to the player to say “hmm my character wouldn’t know that”. If they don’t then tell them they are out of character and gig them xp. If they do follow what their character knows then reward them and give them and inspiration point.
My advice is two fold. First, talk to the player and make him aware that you are uncomfortable with him using out of game resources to try to gain an in game advantage. Sadly, it sounds like this is already what you've done because "he's using his 18 intelligence as an excuse" and the word "excuse" says it all. He's not doing this for a level of fairness, he's doing this to "cheat". He wants an unfair advantage that he wouldn't otherwise have without playing it out in game. He can make an intelligence (arcana, history, religion, etc.) check to find out this information or see if he knows it in game the same way a rogue or fighter would have to roll their physical stats in game. As someone roleplaying a fighter I can't bend a metal bar and take it to my GM and say "I did this, so my fighter should be allowed to do this other thing because 18 strength". Second, put your big boy GM pants on and say no. I don't know where this idea of not saying no came from. This whole mantra of "say "not, but..." or "no, and..." but don't say "no" ever!" is ridiculous. If the players in your game are taking such liberties and walking all over you as the GM then say "no". If it's just the one player, let him know if he keeps acting this way he can leave, if it's all the players, you gotta find a better gaming group. It is not on you as the GM to let the players run wild and do whatever they want, and however they want to do it. If you're going to let the players get away with anything they try every single time then there's no incentive for them to try anything because no matter how little effort they put in they will always succeed. Tell him to leave the out of game knowledge at the door and when he's at the table he better role play it, or at the very least roll play it.
Pretty sure the high level wizard will have Knowledge Arcana which specifically covers the inhabitants of other planes, at least enough to cover what’s presented in the source books. That doesn’t mean you can’t throw them some major curveballs.
Some times when I am gaming and my dm does something I will say "well John knows what is going on... can I roll something to see if my character knows what is going on?" For example our group dm couldn't straighten out what type of dragon was evil (he forgot to read the blocks about monsters) so he decides he wants a gold dragon to wreck a town... my response was "ok so I know metal dragons aren't evil... so can I roll to see that my character does too" his response was "wait what do you mean"
@@johncameron1935 The Gold dragon is ticked off about the damage the people have been doing to HIS hunting grounds. "You stuck up self centered puny creatures! How dare you cut down the forests for cropland, ruining my deer hunting! Since I can't find a deer for lunch, YOU are lunch!" Perfectly within his rights under Draconic Law.
1) Tell the guy not to do it again. Even if his character has 18 INT, it's ultimately your call whether he gets a roll, and he cannot preempt you. It doesn't matter whether people think "everybody does it" - if someone reads a module you're running, it's unacceptable, no matter the character's stats. This is an identical situation. 2) Assuming the player gets the point, give him an INT roll. Have the player tell you exactly what he read, pretend to think about, then grudgingly allow the character to have the info (no matter the roll). 3) Make sure at least some of the information is not only inaccurate, but drastically wrong. It can be one detail, but a significant one (a creature is immune to something rather than being vulnerable to it, e.g.). Then, have them confront the object of their inaccurate knowledge. When THAT PLAYER starts to complain, tell him the monsters have 18 INT also, and also do research. 4) That's pretty much it. You don't even have to change anything else. They will be paranoid enough after that.
I am remembered of a situation I faced, playing with someone who knew the Monster book, so each time we faced whatever he was always going ''It's ok, they only got XYZ HP max and can do/is vulnerable to ABC''. Also his attacking style was such 1st round- cast fireball 2nd round- cast lightning 3rd round- Cast Magic missile 4th round cast invisibility+flight and ran away. Oh- and then we have to take 8 hours rest as he had no spells and REFUSED to use anything else; no crossbow, no sling, no dagger, nothing! NOt to mention he knew exactly how to play...every other person's characters. I spoke to the GM, and he told me he simple added more HP to the monster or have them use some skills they didn't have. He too wasn't having much fun..
I'd say allow them the base info when it comes to the biggest movers and shakers of the planes. The character is a wizard, which is something that you don't really stumble into. It typically involves being taught by somebody with a massive library who normally has enough smarts to tell their pupils who not to piss off, regardless of the level. With that in mind, I'd give them a list of the Princes of Hell, with a similar caveat as such: "you are also however aware of Hell's politics enough to know that this information may be out of date, depending upon how fiercely they defend their titles, or have been attacked by ambitious foes." This not only rewards the genius level intellect of the character, but it also prepares the player (who came to you saying that they wanted to research and didn't just come in the next session asking to talk to certain lords & ladies of Hell that their character shouldn't know about) by letting them know that it's uniquely possible that most if not all of those names may not be useful anymore (although it's usually good form of you're gonna tell them the names you make at least SOME of them useful to some degree or another, even if they don't hold the same authority they did before.)
In addition in the times during your sessions you could give him some hints of the smaller politics of the place they're at the moment, he deduced from behavior he saw, conversations he overheard, etc. Maybe after some time even give him a warning if he acts to much based on this information someone might start to fool him, not all devils are dumb. He could make at the beginning of every session an Arcana, History, Investigation and/or Religion maybe even Insight check and based on what kind of information he gets. based on the result tell him he: - he can't really tell if the information is accurate; nat 1 - he's pretty unsure but tends to lie or truth (d10 behind screen >= 5 right answer) - he's unsure but tends to lie or truth (d10 >= 4 right answer) - he's sure and tends to lie or truth (d10 >= 3 right answer) - he's pretty sure and tends to lie or truth (d10 >= 2 right answer) - he knows if the information is good/bad; nat 20 If he agrees you could make the check(s) for him behind the screen and give him information based on just one number I intetionally didn't give DC's since I belive it should be determined by the GM based on how crucial or hard to get this Information would be to get. Maybe you even break down the Information in parts and for Part1 the History Check is needed at DC 5; 10; 15; 20, Part 2 needs the Investigation Check at DC 7; 12; 17; 22 and Part 3 Arcana at DC 2; 7; 12; 17. This way he play his high intelligence and might get more/better/more usefull information as he can find in books but there is also danger that it's inaccurate.
Well basically I'd just say "Yeah this is MY hell. These guys don't exist here". I'd let the wizard roll history checks to see if he knows the rulers of the hell in my world.
One of my favorite things to say to players that have lots of meta knowledge is "okay ya that is how the rules/lore books present it, but not how it works in my version" But if ya if he wants to work with the DM to learn what his character would know that great and a sign of a great player
Teifling Diviner-Wizard/Knowledge-Cleric would likely have more information on the 9 Hells of Bator, than other characters with similar inteligence scores.
We have an easy way to settle all disputes in our games, does my character know..., can I jump on it's back, can I use the rope to, etc. ROLL FOR IT. DM gives you a DC and you choose high or low to beat it. Easy.
Even if not looking stuff up there and then, experienced players will have meta knowledge. So I may know what an illithid is but my character knows nothing of them. So if we encounter a tentacle-faced brain-sucker, I mustn't spoil it for the other players by shouting, "It's a mindflayer! He is a genius level psionic!" Also, the character will have knowledge about the world they live in even experienced players won't have. I think that is the answer here, is that the character needs to make some knowledge checks - with bonuses and penalties depending on his background - and then the player has to live with it, even come up with explanation. Maybe he skipped the lecture on Hell, or was instead the ace student in diabolism at Wizard Academy. Who knows? The dice will tell all.
Knowledge is power, most nerds enjoy learning to some degree. If I was in D&D I'd know everything just as I know general human history from 200,000+ years ago to today.
The research does not tell the PC the current situation in the area...change it up...make power shifts...upgrades...overlaps with other planes...new leadership etc etc
A player can either ask for knowledge checks every 2 minutes just in case their character knows something they themselves don’t or they can read the basic information and ask to make a roll when they want to use some of that information. Run enough games and they are going to absorb this sort of information regardless of if they seek it out or not. It’s not just that he has 18 int, he has probably specced into knowledge skills as well. He’s a wizard. A wizard’s job is to know things.
The biggest problem I see here is the possibility of the player arguing with the DM over the correctness of information the DM presents about HIS version of hell. I would allow the player to use whatever resources are at their disposal, with the caveat that MY word overrides anything he may find in a out of game resource.
As a new GM, first of all, these videos have been really helpful for my first campaign- Now we're nearing the end, I might just be ready to GM for the first time XD I've found the best way to curb metagaming is to scare the shit out of my players with it- using a really big Spectator and posing it as a Beholder is one example, but even going beyond that. I set an assassin on my 3rd-level party, one of the players (who is just as new as me) took one look at his health then almost noped the fuck out. He hasn't looked over my screen since.
Another option would be to allow the player to THINK he has valid information, but is unaware that demon lords A and B actually have a hidden agreement to take down C. (or any combination thereof) This makes things really fun when the PC's get to the boss fight and all hell breaks loose. Quite literally.
Great video guys... some pretty good advice overall... Okay, as a VERY LONG time GM and an avid collector of myth, lore, legend, folk-tales and a general concerted-effort word-merchant, I've had this kind of situation crop up from time to time for YEARS... And for the record, NO! This kind of effort on behalf of a player is not a problem. Let me elaborate a bit. (yeah, wall o' text coming) I am known for a passion to run most of my games based more on the OLDEST "IRL" versions of legends and lore than whatever the monstrous manuals and other source books say about it. I use the general stats and some consideration toward certain powers or weaponry listed in game mechanics, but the spice comes from the oldest stories or a mix of older stories that I have found. AND sometimes, that means there's a player in the group who just happens to have "better" research on the subject than I do. I USE THE GUY!!! Sure, he has "meta-knowledge" so we have to have "that" conversation about how we'll allow or disallow his Character having any of it. I'll make the call, and that's about it. Usually, once "the conversation" about in-game conduct is concluded, the Player with better research generally shares the stories with me, either by lending the material, or just to the best of his knowledge regales me and answers questions... It's a lot like the "good old days" of storytelling around the campfire whence such stories came about. Sometimes, I've also had Players who purposefully buy up and research sourcebooks purely for the meta-knowledge to plan ahead for in-game stuff, and it rarely works according to their plans. This is simply because, while yes, I did in fact use that particular book for this campaign, it's not a small book and the Player has had to research and plot around its ENTIRE contents. SO... I'm still at my leisure as far as WHEN I will employ any certain variety of danger or hazard mentioned. I'm also entirely at MY leisure about HOW MANY of those hazards I will employ, either at a time, or in how many confrontations scattered throughout the campaign. In essence, unless you like stumbling around under a veritable mountain of equipment (the stereotypical pic' "The Complete Adventurer") there really is no guaranteed advantage for out of game research. It sounds like some of the substance of "that conversation" has been had already, but it wasn't conclusive. I did notice the "He's using his character's 18 Int as an excuse." line, too. Well, that's fine and dandy for the basic Int checks to see what he might still remember from the "general knowledge" he COULD HAVE gleaned if his character paid attention in Wizards' Academy or "The Nether Realms 101"... UNLESS, of course, he actually has some particular and Role Play-able reason for the hellish knowledge. It could fall under any of the Arcane Knowledge family of skills or his favorite school of Wizardry like the video suggests. Now, if you're truly suspicious of Meta-knowledge abuse, there are ways to test him. I have a tendency to do so with Players anyways, but especially once I've had "that conversation" with one. It's a simple enough routine. Pick something relatively small, and toss a "hook" or "mcguffin" into the scene about any certain "book-related" entity. You should pick something you're confident he's already read about, BUT avoid anything you've actually named or described to that point. Just ease out the detail as part of some perception based descriptive and leave it. It is a "mcguffin" so it can drive a plot (thus you already have a plan for it) but it doesn't have to be an important mcguffin. Just see what this Player does with it. If he takes all the initiative to name it and follow up before consulting, he's prone to use of meta-knowledge, and you know that and you have the choice to call him out, force a die roll, or voice the complain in your own style and method. If he legitimately asks to roll for knowledge, on the other hand, he's willing to play right instead of jump the gun. You probably don't have a problem player, and in fact, you should likely reward his willingness to "play along" even with the meta-knowledge. It's GREAT to have players who do research and don't spill the beans (or soup if you prefer). If the mcguffin just lays there, he's probably still not a problem player, and doesn't particularly pay attention or retain whatever all he's researching, so no harm = no foul. I generally test two or three times, just remember subtlety. Lots of plot hooks get tossed and languish as Players walk right past without a moment's hesitation. But smart-ass Players love to show they're the smartest in the room, so THAT is the trick for this little trap. I'd advise that you probably don't have a problem until you actually do. (sounds weird, but works)... It's still usually better to have "that conversation" and "make a ruling" or "make a call" on the mechanic for meta-knowledge than to try and punish Players with mechanics off the bat. You still (just like the vid' said) have all the ownership of the world, including the hells. SO you can switch around and change the political dynamics a bit. Hold a revolt, swap houses or even reskin demons and devils... You can redraw the entire maps of all nine hells if you want to. I often "make shit up" as I go anyways. It's just easier and quicker to throw together conflicts and let the Players generate the actions and story dynamics than it is to try and corral Players to my personal hopes in a Plot and Course. Players fuck shit up. It's just what they do... and that's the bottom line. :o)
If I was DMing this I'd say no to the player doing his own to stop them stumbling across anything that I don't want them too use in game and give them that info. It sounds like the player wants to role play a smarter person than they are so give them the info they need out of game so they can shine in game.
I would appreciate a player taking this initiative at my table rather than me have to tell them what they would know, assuming they had the applicable in game reason for knowing these things. It certainly requires the conversation informing them that not everything may be as they read it. It crosses the line if said player tries to correct you about your narrative or "rules lawyer" you with this information. If a player took it there, they would get a stern talking to.
I enjoy DMing at my game store so much. The best part is constantly booting players for being annoying.Like being a power gamer or using terms like munchkin.
When I DM I just ask/check the following from the player's... Backstory, Background, Class, Relevant Skills involved and inform then that either they "have no idea" (nothing less than a Nat20 would get them even the slightest of hints), "they can make an educated guess" (high DC roll), they are familiar with the subject (regular DC roll), or they actually know this (just reveal them enough information to act on without guiding them in a fixed direction). When I play I just ask if my character knows this or if he even heard something about it because of this or that thing written in my character sheet, whatever the answer I roll with it (unless is clearly unfair like a Ranger/Druid not being able to identify a common animal or plant, or a Wizard/Cleric not capable of distinguish between Arcane and Divine/Unholy magics at work. On this particular case... it sounds too convenient, so if there's nothing on his backstory and character sheet to support this I would call on his metagaming directly or just trollhim with wrong or outdated information, Hell politics are volatile to say the least.
Well, another point is that some of your players will often be other DMs that quite well versed with the general canon politics of the Planes and you can't really blame them for knowing what questions to ask (because they most likely won't be straightforwardly metagaming, rather meta-metagaming). The suggestion of stirring things to your liking is most applicable here I think. Now I would suggest an entirely different approach (which of course is suited for my style of game). I am a big planescape fan, so I tend to put a bit of a satiric element to the planes by humanizing them a step further, thus making the Celestial/Infernal bureaucracies even more relateable. For example I've introduced to my games "Watchtower on the Styx" - your weekly guide to the affairs of the Lower Planes; learn all the scorching hot news about the Blood War; the latest fashion trends in flesh carving and celebrity gossip on the Abyss'es Lowest! And there it just so happens that most of the dark knowledge in the dusty tomes of warlocks and necromancers actually came from the yellow press down bellow, which quite often is seeded by the Powers themselves (or at least their PR dep)
I don't get metagaming. Doing the exact right thing every time just makes things so boring. Like my monk, the only member of the party without spells or a magic weapon, rushed headlong to fight some shadows alone because it was what he would do. That's what D&D is about it's not "winning", it's roleplaying. At least that's how I see it
So as a player and as a GM I have no problem with this depending on how the player uses the information aka is it something the character would really know and why, so explanation, I consider myself to be really smart and I know a fair bit about a lot of different things even though I have never been trained in them (I can normally tell people around me what the Doctor will tell them and the kind of test that will be done when they go see them, I’ve never been train but with most things a bit of learning plus some common sense go a long way) so when someone makes a character with a high int or wis I’m fine with them knowing a lot of things but knowing fine details is something completely different, fine details is something you need to spend years learning maybe even a full lifetime. This is why I like players to make up backstorys for their characters it lets a GM say no your character wouldn’t know that because of there backstory (if can’t do a backstory then a timeline helps, for me it’s birthplace and what type of place was it then were where they at the age of 5 then every 5 years after that) or to remind players that they may know more than they think because they say spent 5 years as bar owner in X city
Love the "and maybe he drinks." But, let's get honest. Everything supernatural in the game is some level of metagame. The reason we have spells is so that player characters can do things that the player knows are advantageous. We research class features to decide what we want to play. We research spells in the books because we want to know what would be more fun. A player researching their own game is good, not bad. It means they're invested. What the DM allows in is entirely different. Played the other way, it would be entirely inappropriate for a DM to NOT provide information to a player running a high INT character or with skills like religion or arcana.
Mabe make them take a skill check, to see if he can use the meta-knowledge. Only ONE roll for each bit of lore. Allow them to use the aplicable modifyer. If they fail, they can't redo it. They are without the information untill they discover it ingame.
I agree with both of them do a combination of intelligence rolls history rolls religion rolls and change the names of the Demons and you are pretty much good to go no matter how much he researches out of game his character will only know what his character does. It's fine wanting to learn about the world you are playing in what if you want it to be a surprise which you most likely did then he shouldn't be researching this outside of the game he should trust you to put this information in front of them in the format of an adventure.
Talk to the player. Is he new? What is his usual culture of play? Is he usually the gm? Find out why they are putting in the extra work. 'I have 18 int' might be daunting for them. Make it clear that its not their job to know everything. Make it clear that you may change things and/or ask for a check to see if the character knows stuff. If you're uncomfortable with it, tell them that.
Well I have never DM'd but isn't this similar to a high level rogue finding certain locks really trivial to pick after awhile or high level barbarian finding certain athletic checks trivial now. You could see the information and decide if such things would be common knowledge or more obscure creating numbers that the player has to beat to get that info. If the player brings up certain points you agree with you can give advantage on the rolls and if he fails the rolls you can RP it as, you try to recollect the information of hell but it doesn't all come together merely on the crisp leaving you frustrated. After all even highly intelligent creatures can forget things momentarily and take time to remember specially if a lot of that intelligence is being used to keep spells fresh in the mind.
Just make them roll for it. Every time they are using information you KNOW you haven't given them, or that they haven't discovered prior. Just say "give me an arcana/history/religion/ check" and then inform them properly. Keep in mind that what YOU say will take precedence at the table. Even if the wizard knows better, the other players might not, or if they do theyre going to listen to you. "Asmodius is the kimf of the hells, we can use this to our advantage" says the wizard, with no prior check to gain this information. "Is he? Give me a ______ check." says the DM rolls a 4+15 "You know that each level of the hells are run by their own devil king or queen." "What do you MEAN Asmodius ISNT the king of the hells?" says the player. "Who's Asmodius? Give me a ______ check." says the DM rolls a 16+14 "You know that Asmodius is lord of the 9th level of hell, the very lowest level of hell." informs the DM "and they get more powerful the lower you go." assumes the player "You're welcome to think that." says the DM Remember that to have this information in game the character needs to have studied the hells at some point. A slave isnt going just magically have tons of insider information about the hells poof into their brains JUST because theyre here now. You don't need to turn hell on its head just to throw this player off the trail, just challenge his knowledge when he's making assumptions. If he fails a check just say "You're welcome to think that." or "You don't know." Remember that devils are clever and THEY know how often people assume they know everything about them. Its how they get people to defeat themselves.
So... the idea of going and doing research about a topic, trying to find out information pertinent to a relevant situation is reasonable, if it is done in game. A character going off to research a topic in campaign is a clear cut situation, of course. However, here where the player is doing so outside of the game entirely, that does set of Alarm bells for me personally, based upon past experience with players doing 'research'. The issue seems to be one of details as to the order of things. Scenario A, what this sounds like) The player has gone off and started looking for this information, then told the DM about his decision bringing up his 18 INT as justification/excuse. The issue that strikes me here is that it sounds like a decision the player made, and then set out to pursue such knowledge, and 'informing' the DM of this. Scenario B) The player had a thought, 'hey, my character has a high INT, I might know something'. Here the player ought to check with the DM. I know if I was DMing I would not allow a player to understand a topic such as Fiendish politics simply by being smart. To use a real world comparison, there are entire fields of modern political science dedicated to understanding regional Politics of say, The Asia Pacific as example. Now Stephen Hawking would presumably have a 20 INT at least, were he in D&D. However, were he in a room with say, an Academic studying regional politics there, or even possibly a well versed student, he would likely not know as much as they do on such a specialized subject. Ignorant of how you rule this, the issue seems to be that the player made a ruling that he should have consulted with the DM, then informed the DM of his ruling. As we do not know his specific character, we will assume he does not have specifics about Planar politics in the 9 hell's, and so the idea of the player outright going to read up on that topic rubs me the wrong way, because they are outright looking for information their character may not have. As to the specific question though, there are circumstances in which it might be more reasonable. Say the party was planning an expedition there, and took a notable amount of time to prepare. There the INT 18 might seem a reasonable case for them having done research on the topic before they left, depending on how lenient the DM feels. So to shorten this up as it is definitely far longer than it ought to be, it sounds like the player went off and did research, informing the DM that they were doing this, rather than checking what he would consider to be acceptable, which is where I am immediately concerned. As a DM, the call is on him, though X layer of Hell's planar politics is a Tad specialized a topic to have a deep knowledge of simply by being smart in my personal opinion.
If there is a large library the PC has access to it might not be as bad but still something to consult the DM about since pretty sure not every library has information on the 9 hells.
Researching the rulers of the 9 Hells shouldn't be that bad since they fight for different circles. I mean he is a wizard in the game so he's reflecting what a wizard would be like in real life. It is completely up to you how you actually run them stat wise anyway so he could never find a correct answer on that. Very rarely are these super high up god-like creatures fully officially realized in 5e. Also, with game design you should be making things point to other things in the game so that people don't feel the need to look something up. You don't just wake up in the 9 hells face to face with Dispater having no idea who he is. There are going to be stories told and a whole adventuring leading up to fighting him. If all else, it's a compliment that this guy actually cares about the lore of the game that much that he is actually interested in spending his own time getting more into the world.
High intelligence is the excuse for having the knowledge, but its not that the character would know everything, but might know some things. Have the character make a religion skill check (religion is effectively extra-planar knowledge), and then you the DM tell the player what his character knows based on the result. Assuming, of course, that you're actually using what the player would be reading..
is it considered meta gameing if the GM randomly took an Charakter and banner from a game and you found out about it while you did Play the game, (happend to me GM took an npc that Comes up in the fight bevor Tiamata in neverwinter, and i just was like ok that Sound very familiar -.- and it went exatly to that finaly)
Oddly enough, one of my bugbears is actually the reverse of the situation presented in this video: players with characters who _should_ be extremely competent in an area having the character end up looking like idiot due to the player's ignorance. Fans of Critical Role will doubtless recall many cringeworthy examples of this. A character with an INT of 18 is supposed to be a fucking genius. Unless the player themselves is actually a genius, that's going to take a bit of research on the part of the player to pull off believably. Yes, you should still make the player roll to determine the specific knowledge their character possesses. The player having a good grounding in the setting, however, gives them an idea of what they should be rolling _for._
I have a quick question, you mentioned a 18 intelligence is genius level. So what would you consider an 8 intelligence? this is on a barbarian I am running I've been playing him as somewhat educated in certain areas and at the least basic but still intelligent, say someone who got through high school and has a few places of more experience but didn't go to say collage. Same question what would you consider a 12 to be? this is on a fighter who has the solder background and was n officer, but I always thought he was fairly smart to a degree certainly smart enough to become an officer but intelligent in most areas but once he starts dealing with say magic it gets a bit harder to deal with since he himself can't use it. I'm just curious what you would consider the respective levels of intelligence between the two of them would be thanks.
Here's the thing. He has 18 intelligence yes, so obviously he knows things. But it should be decided when he makes the character what kind of information is his particular area of interest and what he could likely know. In some settings things like the lords of hell may not be easily available knowledge especially with specifics. But then you have ability checks for arcana, history, and religion so if you want your character to know things role for it and figure out what can be known. It shouldn't be that hard to be able to pass with 18 int.
Don't forget that getting involved in politics of any sort can be dangerous and the player could find himself drawn into something he never wanted to be a part of. His captor might notice his knowledge and start using it.
I think that's a great idea for a video...I made a grappler that would shove ppl to the ground then grapple them as a bonus action and drag them off cliffs or into rivers to drown (dm modified hold breath rules)
I did some research and was surprised to find that bard is a pretty good grappler. I want to make a pro wrestling themed guy. 3 levels bard and x lvl fighter.
I’ve never quite understood the idea that players at a table shouldn’t have access to information out-of-game about the game, as if it was some kind of sin or faux pas to be knowledgeable about the game you’re playing in. It’s what the CHARACTERS know and how well the players are able to limit themselves inside what their characters know when role playing that is the important thing. You’re always going to run into bad/ignorant players who insist their character has been everywhere and done everything and knows everyone, no matter if you hide information or tut-tut at people looking in Monster Manuals. It’s about making sure your players understand there is a clear delineation between out-of-character and in-character and agree to abide by it. So that said, can we leave off this harping on wanting players to be as clueless about a game as you can engineer? If it’s important to you do as Ted suggests and make your own content/monsters, don’t waggle your fingers at people educating themselves on the game system. Knowledgeable players, who understand OOC vs IC, are better players overall.
Yay to me ! I'm the first comment! I can appreciate you guys having a positive outlook on this situation , but as a dm , if the player didn't discuss this with his/her dm before "researching" about devils and the hells then I think that's a dick move. Dave's right, there are a lot of mitigating factors but an 18 INT doesn't mean that knowledge just flows into your head. There's no reason to ruin surprise and/or learning as you go. As always...Great stuff guys!
As a GM/DM, you have no right to determine for others what materials they may or may not read. It matters not one whit that you're the GM at this table for this group. That bit of temporary authority does not grant you any rights over what others do when not at that table playing that game. You have zero right to dictate what the players may or may not know. It's perfectly legitimate to, through appropriate game mechanics and die rolls, determine what the CHARACTERS know, but not what other players know. It's perfectly legitimate to say to players that you would prefer that they not read things like the monster manual or volo's guide to hell and the abyss or wherever, but you have no right to dictate what the players themselves may or may not know. You are not a dictator. There is no "Punishment" to hand out. Ok, look at it this way, each of your players, you're teaching them the game. They learn the rules, both from the book and from what happens in game. Eventually, many players will find that they've developed as players to the point where they now also want to occasionally want to run a game and eventually maybe even run a campaign. All of us GMs were once upon a time Players first. You telling them that they may not know something stunts their growth as players on the road to being GMs. Since it's published materials, and it's the "Official" source material, and not necessarily the way things work in your gaming world, what does it even matter if they read that material anyway? It's irrelevant!
I had a problem once , we were playing 5e, and the NPCs were acting to assholly, and the sessions were not so enjoyable, so i went and researched the adventure that we were playing, and most of what the DM was running as an adventure was made up, DM was having an assholish power trip. Never went back. I stopped playing D&D there and started to read the adventures and modules as adventure books. I´m my own GM. = )
Don't see the problem. If the encounter you built can be "broken" by knowledge, build a better encounter. I don't put trolls in an encounter so I can order my players to spend a couple of rounds flailing ineffectually at it before I "allow" their characters to use fire. I put trolls in an encounter to lock down the PCs who have fire attacks. The Wizard has a shitload of awesome things they can do that make encounter design challenging. The can't do any of those things if they have to spam Firebolt every round to stop it regenerating.
Help Support Nerdarchy by Shopping at YOUR Favorites Places
on the Internet. Just use these links and shop as usual. Nothing changes for you-
Amazon- amzn.to/2jf0boA
Nerdarchy the Store- goo.gl/M4YZEQ
Drive Thru RPG- goo.gl/6nf5zh
Easy Roller Dice- goo.gl/1n0M1r
D&D and Think Geek Gear- goo.gl/LZAV5z
Find Us-
Patreon: www.patreon.com/Nerdarchy
Website: www.Nerdarchy.com
Facebook: facebook.com/Nerdarchy
Nerdarchy Discord- goo.gl/qXEuGw
Instagram: instagram.com/Nerdarchy/
Twitter: twitter.com/Nerdarchy
Nerdarchy maybe the high level wizard may have to make his saving throws against going insane, my GOD he is messing with 😈S, kind of like wish spells, a person might want to be careful what they wish for, or making deals with 😈's, wow, can that kind of things go haywire.
In some ways this is a good problem to have. A player is interested in spending out of game time to learn more about the game and setting. Turn it into an in game scenario so characters can discover cool things. This goes right along with the idea in the video of rewarding players.
it's not fun when they read the module you and your party is going through and metagames to oblivion
Considering most of the players I have met and heart about from other DMs, I would greatly reward that player for the innitiative. A player that shows intterest in the World he plays in and engages with the game outside of a play session can be a great asset to the group, if he does it right. There is such a thing as good meta gaming.
Reading through the module to figure out all of the secrets that are supposed to be unfolded with the party through triumph is not a good thing. It ruins it for all the other players and makes it feel less genuine. Especially when the other players are noobs man. It shouldn't be up to the player to learn about the world, a good dm makes the world feel lived in through dialogue and visuals.
One other point that I'm not sure you explicitly mentioned: if the player's doing research for player knowledge because it's an interesting setting, then that's just proof the DM's doing his job well.
See, here's the thing... most gaming tables, you're gonna have that one guy who studies the rule books like he's got a final coming up. That doesn't hurt anything. That's normal. The point when it becomes a concern is when the player assumes that because they know something, that means their character also knows it. I mean you could throw them a curve ball by having the canon lore be inaccurate if you wanted to. Unless it's an exhibition game, like adventurers' league, there's nothing stopping you from doing that. You, the GM, tell your players what their characters know of your game's lore.
That exactly, LIkke i played with a dm who hated people metagaming yet when I ran things he knew all the flaws despite there was little to no reason for his character to know some of them. Given the circumstances of the world they played on. He was really grumpy when I gave Trolls resistance to fire and acid.
Yeah and DMs have bad guys through Counter spell twice from their flaming skulls and wizards against your magic missile.
You can do it in AL as well. They HIGHLY recommend you don't but that is just a recommendation, as long as you don't change the xp or loot then everything is fine.
Like how my Half-Orc Fighter has proficiency in Dungeoneering. I'll just ask the dm if the monster is commonly found underground, in dungeons, tombs, etc. If they do, then there is a good chance my character has basic knowledge of them, like Names, one or two attacks, and depending on my Dungeoneering check, maybe a weakness.
Not that it normally changes his attack style.
Meta-gaming is when the player uses knowledge he has of the game that the character would not have. Extra planar stuff if in the wheel house of a high level Wizard, so not a problem.
When you have a player that’s looking into details about the world your DM’ing in is one of the best compliments from the players. The fact that a player is that into your game where he’s spending his own time learning about your world is a sign that they are really liking your adventure. I’d encourage it. Just be sure to lay out what their character knows and what they don’t know. It’s up to the player to say “hmm my character wouldn’t know that”. If they don’t then tell them they are out of character and gig them xp. If they do follow what their character knows then reward them and give them and inspiration point.
My advice is two fold. First, talk to the player and make him aware that you are uncomfortable with him using out of game resources to try to gain an in game advantage. Sadly, it sounds like this is already what you've done because "he's using his 18 intelligence as an excuse" and the word "excuse" says it all. He's not doing this for a level of fairness, he's doing this to "cheat". He wants an unfair advantage that he wouldn't otherwise have without playing it out in game. He can make an intelligence (arcana, history, religion, etc.) check to find out this information or see if he knows it in game the same way a rogue or fighter would have to roll their physical stats in game. As someone roleplaying a fighter I can't bend a metal bar and take it to my GM and say "I did this, so my fighter should be allowed to do this other thing because 18 strength".
Second, put your big boy GM pants on and say no. I don't know where this idea of not saying no came from. This whole mantra of "say "not, but..." or "no, and..." but don't say "no" ever!" is ridiculous. If the players in your game are taking such liberties and walking all over you as the GM then say "no". If it's just the one player, let him know if he keeps acting this way he can leave, if it's all the players, you gotta find a better gaming group. It is not on you as the GM to let the players run wild and do whatever they want, and however they want to do it. If you're going to let the players get away with anything they try every single time then there's no incentive for them to try anything because no matter how little effort they put in they will always succeed. Tell him to leave the out of game knowledge at the door and when he's at the table he better role play it, or at the very least roll play it.
Pretty sure the high level wizard will have Knowledge Arcana which specifically covers the inhabitants of other planes, at least enough to cover what’s presented in the source books. That doesn’t mean you can’t throw them some major curveballs.
Some times when I am gaming and my dm does something I will say "well John knows what is going on... can I roll something to see if my character knows what is going on?" For example our group dm couldn't straighten out what type of dragon was evil (he forgot to read the blocks about monsters) so he decides he wants a gold dragon to wreck a town... my response was "ok so I know metal dragons aren't evil... so can I roll to see that my character does too" his response was "wait what do you mean"
Raizosuzaku oh snap a red dragon disguised itself as a gold and went to do evil to try and wreak havoc on good dragon reputation!
John Cameron that is actually a really good idea... I'll have to use that some time
@@johncameron1935
The Gold dragon is ticked off about the damage the people have been doing to HIS hunting grounds.
"You stuck up self centered puny creatures! How dare you cut down the forests for cropland, ruining my deer hunting! Since I can't find a deer for lunch, YOU are lunch!"
Perfectly within his rights under Draconic Law.
1) Tell the guy not to do it again. Even if his character has 18 INT, it's ultimately your call whether he gets a roll, and he cannot preempt you. It doesn't matter whether people think "everybody does it" - if someone reads a module you're running, it's unacceptable, no matter the character's stats. This is an identical situation.
2) Assuming the player gets the point, give him an INT roll. Have the player tell you exactly what he read, pretend to think about, then grudgingly allow the character to have the info (no matter the roll).
3) Make sure at least some of the information is not only inaccurate, but drastically wrong. It can be one detail, but a significant one (a creature is immune to something rather than being vulnerable to it, e.g.). Then, have them confront the object of their inaccurate knowledge. When THAT PLAYER starts to complain, tell him the monsters have 18 INT also, and also do research.
4) That's pretty much it. You don't even have to change anything else. They will be paranoid enough after that.
I am remembered of a situation I faced, playing with someone who knew the Monster book, so each time we faced whatever he was always going ''It's ok, they only got XYZ HP max and can do/is vulnerable to ABC''. Also his attacking style was such
1st round- cast fireball
2nd round- cast lightning
3rd round- Cast Magic missile
4th round cast invisibility+flight and ran away.
Oh- and then we have to take 8 hours rest as he had no spells and REFUSED to use anything else; no crossbow, no sling, no dagger, nothing!
NOt to mention he knew exactly how to play...every other person's characters.
I spoke to the GM, and he told me he simple added more HP to the monster or have them use some skills they didn't have. He too wasn't having much fun..
I'd say allow them the base info when it comes to the biggest movers and shakers of the planes. The character is a wizard, which is something that you don't really stumble into. It typically involves being taught by somebody with a massive library who normally has enough smarts to tell their pupils who not to piss off, regardless of the level.
With that in mind, I'd give them a list of the Princes of Hell, with a similar caveat as such: "you are also however aware of Hell's politics enough to know that this information may be out of date, depending upon how fiercely they defend their titles, or have been attacked by ambitious foes."
This not only rewards the genius level intellect of the character, but it also prepares the player (who came to you saying that they wanted to research and didn't just come in the next session asking to talk to certain lords & ladies of Hell that their character shouldn't know about) by letting them know that it's uniquely possible that most if not all of those names may not be useful anymore (although it's usually good form of you're gonna tell them the names you make at least SOME of them useful to some degree or another, even if they don't hold the same authority they did before.)
In addition in the times during your sessions you could give him some hints of the smaller politics of the place they're at the moment, he deduced from behavior he saw, conversations he overheard, etc. Maybe after some time even give him a warning if he acts to much based on this information someone might start to fool him, not all devils are dumb. He could make at the beginning of every session an Arcana, History, Investigation and/or Religion maybe even Insight check and based on what kind of information he gets. based on the result tell him he:
- he can't really tell if the information is accurate; nat 1
- he's pretty unsure but tends to lie or truth (d10 behind screen >= 5 right answer)
- he's unsure but tends to lie or truth (d10 >= 4 right answer)
- he's sure and tends to lie or truth (d10 >= 3 right answer)
- he's pretty sure and tends to lie or truth (d10 >= 2 right answer)
- he knows if the information is good/bad; nat 20
If he agrees you could make the check(s) for him behind the screen and give him information based on just one number
I intetionally didn't give DC's since I belive it should be determined by the GM based on how crucial or hard to get this Information would be to get.
Maybe you even break down the Information in parts and for Part1 the History Check is needed at DC 5; 10; 15; 20, Part 2 needs the Investigation Check at DC 7; 12; 17; 22 and Part 3 Arcana at DC 2; 7; 12; 17.
This way he play his high intelligence and might get more/better/more usefull information as he can find in books but there is also danger that it's inaccurate.
Well basically I'd just say "Yeah this is MY hell. These guys don't exist here". I'd let the wizard roll history checks to see if he knows the rulers of the hell in my world.
One of my favorite things to say to players that have lots of meta knowledge is "okay ya that is how the rules/lore books present it, but not how it works in my version"
But if ya if he wants to work with the DM to learn what his character would know that great and a sign of a great player
Teifling Diviner-Wizard/Knowledge-Cleric would likely have more information on the 9 Hells of Bator, than other characters with similar inteligence scores.
We have an easy way to settle all disputes in our games, does my character know..., can I jump on it's back, can I use the rope to, etc. ROLL FOR IT. DM gives you a DC and you choose high or low to beat it. Easy.
Even if not looking stuff up there and then, experienced players will have meta knowledge. So I may know what an illithid is but my character knows nothing of them. So if we encounter a tentacle-faced brain-sucker, I mustn't spoil it for the other players by shouting, "It's a mindflayer! He is a genius level psionic!" Also, the character will have knowledge about the world they live in even experienced players won't have. I think that is the answer here, is that the character needs to make some knowledge checks - with bonuses and penalties depending on his background - and then the player has to live with it, even come up with explanation. Maybe he skipped the lecture on Hell, or was instead the ace student in diabolism at Wizard Academy. Who knows? The dice will tell all.
Knowledge is power, most nerds enjoy learning to some degree. If I was in D&D I'd know everything just as I know general human history from 200,000+ years ago to today.
The research does not tell the PC the current situation in the area...change it up...make power shifts...upgrades...overlaps with other planes...new leadership etc etc
On a side note, you can make your layers of hell/hel? look more like the ORIGINAL Phyrexia...9 layered plane of evil.
Researching lore as a wizard is not a bad thing, he can know such things.
A player can either ask for knowledge checks every 2 minutes just in case their character knows something they themselves don’t or they can read the basic information and ask to make a roll when they want to use some of that information. Run enough games and they are going to absorb this sort of information regardless of if they seek it out or not. It’s not just that he has 18 int, he has probably specced into knowledge skills as well. He’s a wizard. A wizard’s job is to know things.
The biggest problem I see here is the possibility of the player arguing with the DM over the correctness of information the DM presents about HIS version of hell. I would allow the player to use whatever resources are at their disposal, with the caveat that MY word overrides anything he may find in a out of game resource.
As a new GM, first of all, these videos have been really helpful for my first campaign- Now we're nearing the end, I might just be ready to GM for the first time XD
I've found the best way to curb metagaming is to scare the shit out of my players with it- using a really big Spectator and posing it as a Beholder is one example, but even going beyond that. I set an assassin on my 3rd-level party, one of the players (who is just as new as me) took one look at his health then almost noped the fuck out. He hasn't looked over my screen since.
Another option would be to allow the player to THINK he has valid information, but is unaware that demon lords A and B actually have a hidden agreement to take down C. (or any combination thereof) This makes things really fun when the PC's get to the boss fight and all hell breaks loose. Quite literally.
Great video guys... some pretty good advice overall...
Okay, as a VERY LONG time GM and an avid collector of myth, lore, legend, folk-tales and a general concerted-effort word-merchant, I've had this kind of situation crop up from time to time for YEARS... And for the record, NO! This kind of effort on behalf of a player is not a problem. Let me elaborate a bit. (yeah, wall o' text coming)
I am known for a passion to run most of my games based more on the OLDEST "IRL" versions of legends and lore than whatever the monstrous manuals and other source books say about it. I use the general stats and some consideration toward certain powers or weaponry listed in game mechanics, but the spice comes from the oldest stories or a mix of older stories that I have found. AND sometimes, that means there's a player in the group who just happens to have "better" research on the subject than I do. I USE THE GUY!!! Sure, he has "meta-knowledge" so we have to have "that" conversation about how we'll allow or disallow his Character having any of it. I'll make the call, and that's about it. Usually, once "the conversation" about in-game conduct is concluded, the Player with better research generally shares the stories with me, either by lending the material, or just to the best of his knowledge regales me and answers questions... It's a lot like the "good old days" of storytelling around the campfire whence such stories came about.
Sometimes, I've also had Players who purposefully buy up and research sourcebooks purely for the meta-knowledge to plan ahead for in-game stuff, and it rarely works according to their plans. This is simply because, while yes, I did in fact use that particular book for this campaign, it's not a small book and the Player has had to research and plot around its ENTIRE contents. SO... I'm still at my leisure as far as WHEN I will employ any certain variety of danger or hazard mentioned. I'm also entirely at MY leisure about HOW MANY of those hazards I will employ, either at a time, or in how many confrontations scattered throughout the campaign. In essence, unless you like stumbling around under a veritable mountain of equipment (the stereotypical pic' "The Complete Adventurer") there really is no guaranteed advantage for out of game research.
It sounds like some of the substance of "that conversation" has been had already, but it wasn't conclusive. I did notice the "He's using his character's 18 Int as an excuse." line, too. Well, that's fine and dandy for the basic Int checks to see what he might still remember from the "general knowledge" he COULD HAVE gleaned if his character paid attention in Wizards' Academy or "The Nether Realms 101"... UNLESS, of course, he actually has some particular and Role Play-able reason for the hellish knowledge. It could fall under any of the Arcane Knowledge family of skills or his favorite school of Wizardry like the video suggests.
Now, if you're truly suspicious of Meta-knowledge abuse, there are ways to test him. I have a tendency to do so with Players anyways, but especially once I've had "that conversation" with one. It's a simple enough routine. Pick something relatively small, and toss a "hook" or "mcguffin" into the scene about any certain "book-related" entity. You should pick something you're confident he's already read about, BUT avoid anything you've actually named or described to that point. Just ease out the detail as part of some perception based descriptive and leave it. It is a "mcguffin" so it can drive a plot (thus you already have a plan for it) but it doesn't have to be an important mcguffin. Just see what this Player does with it. If he takes all the initiative to name it and follow up before consulting, he's prone to use of meta-knowledge, and you know that and you have the choice to call him out, force a die roll, or voice the complain in your own style and method. If he legitimately asks to roll for knowledge, on the other hand, he's willing to play right instead of jump the gun. You probably don't have a problem player, and in fact, you should likely reward his willingness to "play along" even with the meta-knowledge. It's GREAT to have players who do research and don't spill the beans (or soup if you prefer). If the mcguffin just lays there, he's probably still not a problem player, and doesn't particularly pay attention or retain whatever all he's researching, so no harm = no foul.
I generally test two or three times, just remember subtlety. Lots of plot hooks get tossed and languish as Players walk right past without a moment's hesitation. But smart-ass Players love to show they're the smartest in the room, so THAT is the trick for this little trap. I'd advise that you probably don't have a problem until you actually do. (sounds weird, but works)... It's still usually better to have "that conversation" and "make a ruling" or "make a call" on the mechanic for meta-knowledge than to try and punish Players with mechanics off the bat.
You still (just like the vid' said) have all the ownership of the world, including the hells. SO you can switch around and change the political dynamics a bit. Hold a revolt, swap houses or even reskin demons and devils... You can redraw the entire maps of all nine hells if you want to. I often "make shit up" as I go anyways. It's just easier and quicker to throw together conflicts and let the Players generate the actions and story dynamics than it is to try and corral Players to my personal hopes in a Plot and Course. Players fuck shit up. It's just what they do... and that's the bottom line. :o)
Change the appearance of the enemies.
Player: "That's not what you described!"
DM: ""I'm sorry, my Balor Lords look like Picachu.... this time."
If I was DMing this I'd say no to the player doing his own to stop them stumbling across anything that I don't want them too use in game and give them that info. It sounds like the player wants to role play a smarter person than they are so give them the info they need out of game so they can shine in game.
I would appreciate a player taking this initiative at my table rather than me have to tell them what they would know, assuming they had the applicable in game reason for knowing these things.
It certainly requires the conversation informing them that not everything may be as they read it.
It crosses the line if said player tries to correct you about your narrative or "rules lawyer" you with this information. If a player took it there, they would get a stern talking to.
I enjoy DMing at my game store so much. The best part is constantly booting players for being annoying.Like being a power gamer or using terms like munchkin.
Great video again guys thank you for your content and your advice. 🤔
When I DM I just ask/check the following from the player's... Backstory, Background, Class, Relevant Skills involved and inform then that either they "have no idea" (nothing less than a Nat20 would get them even the slightest of hints), "they can make an educated guess" (high DC roll), they are familiar with the subject (regular DC roll), or they actually know this (just reveal them enough information to act on without guiding them in a fixed direction). When I play I just ask if my character knows this or if he even heard something about it because of this or that thing written in my character sheet, whatever the answer I roll with it (unless is clearly unfair like a Ranger/Druid not being able to identify a common animal or plant, or a Wizard/Cleric not capable of distinguish between Arcane and Divine/Unholy magics at work.
On this particular case... it sounds too convenient, so if there's nothing on his backstory and character sheet to support this I would call on his metagaming directly or just trollhim with wrong or outdated information, Hell politics are volatile to say the least.
Well, another point is that some of your players will often be other DMs that quite well versed with the general canon politics of the Planes and you can't really blame them for knowing what questions to ask (because they most likely won't be straightforwardly metagaming, rather meta-metagaming). The suggestion of stirring things to your liking is most applicable here I think.
Now I would suggest an entirely different approach (which of course is suited for my style of game). I am a big planescape fan, so I tend to put a bit of a satiric element to the planes by humanizing them a step further, thus making the Celestial/Infernal bureaucracies even more relateable. For example I've introduced to my games "Watchtower on the Styx" - your weekly guide to the affairs of the Lower Planes; learn all the scorching hot news about the Blood War; the latest fashion trends in flesh carving and celebrity gossip on the Abyss'es Lowest! And there it just so happens that most of the dark knowledge in the dusty tomes of warlocks and necromancers actually came from the yellow press down bellow, which quite often is seeded by the Powers themselves (or at least their PR dep)
I don't get metagaming. Doing the exact right thing every time just makes things so boring. Like my monk, the only member of the party without spells or a magic weapon, rushed headlong to fight some shadows alone because it was what he would do. That's what D&D is about it's not "winning", it's roleplaying. At least that's how I see it
So as a player and as a GM I have no problem with this depending on how the player uses the information aka is it something the character would really know and why, so explanation, I consider myself to be really smart and I know a fair bit about a lot of different things even though I have never been trained in them (I can normally tell people around me what the Doctor will tell them and the kind of test that will be done when they go see them, I’ve never been train but with most things a bit of learning plus some common sense go a long way) so when someone makes a character with a high int or wis I’m fine with them knowing a lot of things but knowing fine details is something completely different, fine details is something you need to spend years learning maybe even a full lifetime.
This is why I like players to make up backstorys for their characters it lets a GM say no your character wouldn’t know that because of there backstory (if can’t do a backstory then a timeline helps, for me it’s birthplace and what type of place was it then were where they at the age of 5 then every 5 years after that) or to remind players that they may know more than they think because they say spent 5 years as bar owner in X city
Love the "and maybe he drinks."
But, let's get honest. Everything supernatural in the game is some level of metagame. The reason we have spells is so that player characters can do things that the player knows are advantageous.
We research class features to decide what we want to play. We research spells in the books because we want to know what would be more fun.
A player researching their own game is good, not bad. It means they're invested. What the DM allows in is entirely different.
Played the other way, it would be entirely inappropriate for a DM to NOT provide information to a player running a high INT character or with skills like religion or arcana.
Great video and I want both that shirt and hoodie, very funny.
Mabe make them take a skill check, to see if he can use the meta-knowledge. Only ONE roll for each bit of lore. Allow them to use the aplicable modifyer.
If they fail, they can't redo it. They are without the information untill they discover it ingame.
I agree with both of them do a combination of intelligence rolls history rolls religion rolls and change the names of the Demons and you are pretty much good to go no matter how much he researches out of game his character will only know what his character does.
It's fine wanting to learn about the world you are playing in what if you want it to be a surprise which you most likely did then he shouldn't be researching this outside of the game he should trust you to put this information in front of them in the format of an adventure.
Talk to the player. Is he new? What is his usual culture of play? Is he usually the gm? Find out why they are putting in the extra work. 'I have 18 int' might be daunting for them. Make it clear that its not their job to know everything. Make it clear that you may change things and/or ask for a check to see if the character knows stuff. If you're uncomfortable with it, tell them that.
Well I have never DM'd but isn't this similar to a high level rogue finding certain locks really trivial to pick after awhile or high level barbarian finding certain athletic checks trivial now. You could see the information and decide if such things would be common knowledge or more obscure creating numbers that the player has to beat to get that info. If the player brings up certain points you agree with you can give advantage on the rolls and if he fails the rolls you can RP it as, you try to recollect the information of hell but it doesn't all come together merely on the crisp leaving you frustrated. After all even highly intelligent creatures can forget things momentarily and take time to remember specially if a lot of that intelligence is being used to keep spells fresh in the mind.
Just make them roll for it.
Every time they are using information you KNOW you haven't given them, or that they haven't discovered prior. Just say "give me an arcana/history/religion/ check" and then inform them properly.
Keep in mind that what YOU say will take precedence at the table. Even if the wizard knows better, the other players might not, or if they do theyre going to listen to you.
"Asmodius is the kimf of the hells, we can use this to our advantage" says the wizard, with no prior check to gain this information.
"Is he? Give me a ______ check." says the DM
rolls a 4+15
"You know that each level of the hells are run by their own devil king or queen."
"What do you MEAN Asmodius ISNT the king of the hells?" says the player.
"Who's Asmodius? Give me a ______ check." says the DM
rolls a 16+14
"You know that Asmodius is lord of the 9th level of hell, the very lowest level of hell." informs the DM
"and they get more powerful the lower you go." assumes the player
"You're welcome to think that." says the DM
Remember that to have this information in game the character needs to have studied the hells at some point. A slave isnt going just magically have tons of insider information about the hells poof into their brains JUST because theyre here now. You don't need to turn hell on its head just to throw this player off the trail, just challenge his knowledge when he's making assumptions. If he fails a check just say "You're welcome to think that." or "You don't know." Remember that devils are clever and THEY know how often people assume they know everything about them. Its how they get people to defeat themselves.
Ted your hoodie is awesome
So... the idea of going and doing research about a topic, trying to find out information pertinent to a relevant situation is reasonable, if it is done in game. A character going off to research a topic in campaign is a clear cut situation, of course.
However, here where the player is doing so outside of the game entirely, that does set of Alarm bells for me personally, based upon past experience with players doing 'research'.
The issue seems to be one of details as to the order of things.
Scenario A, what this sounds like) The player has gone off and started looking for this information, then told the DM about his decision bringing up his 18 INT as justification/excuse. The issue that strikes me here is that it sounds like a decision the player made, and then set out to pursue such knowledge, and 'informing' the DM of this.
Scenario B) The player had a thought, 'hey, my character has a high INT, I might know something'. Here the player ought to check with the DM. I know if I was DMing I would not allow a player to understand a topic such as Fiendish politics simply by being smart. To use a real world comparison, there are entire fields of modern political science dedicated to understanding regional Politics of say, The Asia Pacific as example. Now Stephen Hawking would presumably have a 20 INT at least, were he in D&D. However, were he in a room with say, an Academic studying regional politics there, or even possibly a well versed student, he would likely not know as much as they do on such a specialized subject.
Ignorant of how you rule this, the issue seems to be that the player made a ruling that he should have consulted with the DM, then informed the DM of his ruling. As we do not know his specific character, we will assume he does not have specifics about Planar politics in the 9 hell's, and so the idea of the player outright going to read up on that topic rubs me the wrong way, because they are outright looking for information their character may not have.
As to the specific question though, there are circumstances in which it might be more reasonable. Say the party was planning an expedition there, and took a notable amount of time to prepare. There the INT 18 might seem a reasonable case for them having done research on the topic before they left, depending on how lenient the DM feels.
So to shorten this up as it is definitely far longer than it ought to be, it sounds like the player went off and did research, informing the DM that they were doing this, rather than checking what he would consider to be acceptable, which is where I am immediately concerned. As a DM, the call is on him, though X layer of Hell's planar politics is a Tad specialized a topic to have a deep knowledge of simply by being smart in my personal opinion.
If there is a large library the PC has access to it might not be as bad but still something to consult the DM about since pretty sure not every library has information on the 9 hells.
Can someone explain to me what Min Maxing is? I'm a newbie
Researching the rulers of the 9 Hells shouldn't be that bad since they fight for different circles. I mean he is a wizard in the game so he's reflecting what a wizard would be like in real life. It is completely up to you how you actually run them stat wise anyway so he could never find a correct answer on that. Very rarely are these super high up god-like creatures fully officially realized in 5e. Also, with game design you should be making things point to other things in the game so that people don't feel the need to look something up. You don't just wake up in the 9 hells face to face with Dispater having no idea who he is. There are going to be stories told and a whole adventuring leading up to fighting him. If all else, it's a compliment that this guy actually cares about the lore of the game that much that he is actually interested in spending his own time getting more into the world.
This one is probably about me. I try not to be, but I catch myself, even, doing it sometimes.
High intelligence is the excuse for having the knowledge, but its not that the character would know everything, but might know some things. Have the character make a religion skill check (religion is effectively extra-planar knowledge), and then you the DM tell the player what his character knows based on the result. Assuming, of course, that you're actually using what the player would be reading..
is it considered meta gameing if the GM randomly took an Charakter and banner from a game and you found out about it while you did Play the game, (happend to me GM took an npc that Comes up in the fight bevor Tiamata in neverwinter, and i just was like ok that Sound very familiar -.- and it went exatly to that finaly)
Oddly enough, one of my bugbears is actually the reverse of the situation presented in this video: players with characters who _should_ be extremely competent in an area having the character end up looking like idiot due to the player's ignorance. Fans of Critical Role will doubtless recall many cringeworthy examples of this.
A character with an INT of 18 is supposed to be a fucking genius. Unless the player themselves is actually a genius, that's going to take a bit of research on the part of the player to pull off believably.
Yes, you should still make the player roll to determine the specific knowledge their character possesses. The player having a good grounding in the setting, however, gives them an idea of what they should be rolling _for._
Punishment dice.
I have a quick question, you mentioned a 18 intelligence is genius level. So what would you consider an 8 intelligence? this is on a barbarian I am running I've been playing him as somewhat educated in certain areas and at the least basic but still intelligent, say someone who got through high school and has a few places of more experience but didn't go to say collage.
Same question what would you consider a 12 to be? this is on a fighter who has the solder background and was n officer, but I always thought he was fairly smart to a degree certainly smart enough to become an officer but intelligent in most areas but once he starts dealing with say magic it gets a bit harder to deal with since he himself can't use it. I'm just curious what you would consider the respective levels of intelligence between the two of them would be thanks.
Here's the thing. He has 18 intelligence yes, so obviously he knows things. But it should be decided when he makes the character what kind of information is his particular area of interest and what he could likely know. In some settings things like the lords of hell may not be easily available knowledge especially with specifics. But then you have ability checks for arcana, history, and religion so if you want your character to know things role for it and figure out what can be known. It shouldn't be that hard to be able to pass with 18 int.
Don't forget that getting involved in politics of any sort can be dangerous and the player could find himself drawn into something he never wanted to be a part of. His captor might notice his knowledge and start using it.
Have you guys done a video on grappling in 5e? If not, would you?
Dustin Smith we have done a grappled build, but not on grappling specifically.
Nerdachist Dave
I think that's a great idea for a video...I made a grappler that would shove ppl to the ground then grapple them as a bonus action and drag them off cliffs or into rivers to drown (dm modified hold breath rules)
I did some research and was surprised to find that bard is a pretty good grappler. I want to make a pro wrestling themed guy. 3 levels bard and x lvl fighter.
Lore Bard with expertise in Athletics?
laoxep yup
Teds shirt is awesome is it in the nerdarchist store..??
I’ve never quite understood the idea that players at a table shouldn’t have access to information out-of-game about the game, as if it was some kind of sin or faux pas to be knowledgeable about the game you’re playing in. It’s what the CHARACTERS know and how well the players are able to limit themselves inside what their characters know when role playing that is the important thing. You’re always going to run into bad/ignorant players who insist their character has been everywhere and done everything and knows everyone, no matter if you hide information or tut-tut at people looking in Monster Manuals. It’s about making sure your players understand there is a clear delineation between out-of-character and in-character and agree to abide by it.
So that said, can we leave off this harping on wanting players to be as clueless about a game as you can engineer? If it’s important to you do as Ted suggests and make your own content/monsters, don’t waggle your fingers at people educating themselves on the game system. Knowledgeable players, who understand OOC vs IC, are better players overall.
Player vs character knowledge and time... issues
optimizing your game play IS playing the game correctly!
Yay to me ! I'm the first comment! I can appreciate you guys having a positive outlook on this situation , but as a dm , if the player didn't discuss this with his/her dm before "researching" about devils and the hells then I think that's a dick move. Dave's right, there are a lot of mitigating factors but an 18 INT doesn't mean that knowledge just flows into your head. There's no reason to ruin surprise and/or learning as you go. As always...Great stuff guys!
It is pronounced TEE-FLING!!!!!!
usernamedkjah and you commenting that doesn't change the fact that I will continue to correct poor pronunciation.
As a GM/DM, you have no right to determine for others what materials they may or may not read. It matters not one whit that you're the GM at this table for this group. That bit of temporary authority does not grant you any rights over what others do when not at that table playing that game. You have zero right to dictate what the players may or may not know.
It's perfectly legitimate to, through appropriate game mechanics and die rolls, determine what the CHARACTERS know, but not what other players know.
It's perfectly legitimate to say to players that you would prefer that they not read things like the monster manual or volo's guide to hell and the abyss or wherever, but you have no right to dictate what the players themselves may or may not know.
You are not a dictator. There is no "Punishment" to hand out.
Ok, look at it this way, each of your players, you're teaching them the game. They learn the rules, both from the book and from what happens in game. Eventually, many players will find that they've developed as players to the point where they now also want to occasionally want to run a game and eventually maybe even run a campaign. All of us GMs were once upon a time Players first. You telling them that they may not know something stunts their growth as players on the road to being GMs.
Since it's published materials, and it's the "Official" source material, and not necessarily the way things work in your gaming world, what does it even matter if they read that material anyway? It's irrelevant!
I had a problem once , we were playing 5e, and the NPCs were acting to assholly, and the sessions were not so enjoyable, so i went and researched the adventure that we were playing, and most of what the DM was running as an adventure was made up, DM was having an assholish power trip. Never went back. I stopped playing D&D there and started to read the adventures and modules as adventure books. I´m my own GM. = )
you could make it that whatever research he or she might have done is super wrong and inaccurate.
isnt that what religion skill is for?
Don't see the problem.
If the encounter you built can be "broken" by knowledge, build a better encounter.
I don't put trolls in an encounter so I can order my players to spend a couple of rounds flailing ineffectually at it before I "allow" their characters to use fire.
I put trolls in an encounter to lock down the PCs who have fire attacks. The Wizard has a shitload of awesome things they can do that make encounter design challenging. The can't do any of those things if they have to spam Firebolt every round to stop it regenerating.
DMs that cheat are pathetic. = )
The higher the intellect, the more metagaming is tolerated.