I don't like having my players meta game and look up monsters to see what they need to do to best beat it. Whilst having everything to look up super easy is awesome, and players can easily look at monsters in their leisure, having it right next to their spells and character sheet is just a little dangerous during play.
Understand that having totally separate player and DM views is a bit extreme. But something to discourage players from metagaming and looking up the monsters they're fighting (even the temptation of) would be fantastic.
I don't like having my players meta game and look up monsters to see what they need to do to best beat it. Whilst having everything to look up super easy is awesome, and players can easily look at monsters in their leisure, having it right next to their spells and character sheet is just a little dangerous during play.
Understand that having totally separate player and DM views is a bit extreme. But something to discourage players from metagaming and looking up the monsters they're fighting (even the temptation of) would be fantastic.
Understood...
However, this may actually help. People can see what they are interacting with. (Pictures are always fun to keep things on the same page.) :)
More importantly, our players take the time to prepare spells, etc. (much like Geralt from "The Witcher" series.)
What a bummer to prep and not have information gathered throughout the game. (from their PC interactions, etc.) Sure, they build up to it - and, yes, they have info ahead of time, but stats alone wont ruin it for DM or Player. Drunkens and Dragons, (Runehammer games), on youtube, has mad DMing skills and info to help alleviate these concerns. :)
I agree with Dhaylen. Besides, I believe that it's the players responsibility to not be metagaming (aka ruining the game for themselves). Players who want to metagame, will do so regardless. No need to remove the resources from people who wont "abuse" it for metagaming imo
I see where you're coming from but TBH if someone is doing this they are only ruining the experience for themselves and their fellow players. It's only an issue if you make it an issue I suppose
Also you can make them roll a history check to remember that specific type of monster. And I know the struggle it is hard to keep their eyes off, so what I do is alter some of the feats to make it harder to meta game
In my group, there are players with varying levels of experience with D&D. Some who've been playing since 3.5 or even 3.0, others who came in during 4.0. In this time, they've played different campaigns, come across many monsters. For some, any of the information found in these entries is, at most, a quick memory fresh-up. They know what monsters' strengths and weaknesses are.
In my opinion, limiting access to information isn't going to help much. In any group, you'll be helped far more by agreeing with your players to limit meta-gaming, in the interest of everyone playing, including the DM. I've done things in-character that out-of-character I knew were sub-optimal or even bad, on the simple basis that my character didn't know that, and the action seemed logical to my character at the time. In some cases leading to far more interesting and fun situations!
If you ask your players not to look at the monsters and they do anyway, that's a table problem not a dev problem.
And as someone who both DMs and plays, that'd just be silly.
pretty much this, but I think at a given table, I can see the merits of not letting your players look at the monsters they are fighting. once we get to a point of playtesting with actual campaigns in this thing, middle ground could be sought by letting the DM omit certain monster information from a given monster at his game (i.e. show image only, show/hide ability scores, show/hide resistances and immunities/actions... et cetera.)
The players could, in theory, still look them up on their own, but A) it could be more work and B) that isn't something that the dev team need to worry about, no.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm not - nor was I ever - your "obstacle" until you've deemed me as such, nor am I your wallet, my hard earnt money is not yours by deault.
Je suis Consumer - We are the foundation, the floor beneath your rug. our support is the fate of every retail product, business, and franchise. for success you need support.
I will always miss what you were, but I will never miss what you've become.
I get the argument that this is a table issue more than a development issue, but if we're here beta testing it's worth bringing something like this up. A player's view vs. a DM's view chosen at start-up or the ability to lock out some info if screens can be linked into a party - there may be a simple or elegant solution that keeps this from being a problem in the first place, whether it's a table problem or a dev problem.
It might not be a big deal for your particular tables but there are tables where this will be a concern, where access to certain kinds of players or politics within a group of friends make it difficult to get a full table of like-minded individuals. Even as a player, I'd appreciate the simple removal of the temptation to metagame - one less thing to stress over. There will be no perfect solutions, but there very likely are better solutions than simply blaming players and ignoring it. That's why we're here.
The issue with a player abusing their access to monster stats to get some advantage at the table that isn't fair for them to have is not an issue with whether the monster stats are available to the player or not.
Players can read the Monster Manual all they want to, whether their DM says "Go ahead, I don't care." or "Don't you dare, that's 'metagaming' and 'metagaming' is evil!"
So making some kind of extra thing that someone has to do in order to see monster stats isn't going to actually change anything; a player can still switch over to a "DM view" and look at monsters whenever they want, even if that includes some kind of actual-DM-taxing extra purchase.
Also, I've found that people who are the sort to seek out unfair advantages (which in this case only applies because the DM in question considers knowing what monsters are/do is "unfair", which I don't actually agree to be the case since that would mean that I, as a DM, am never allowed to be a player because I remember things I've read) are also the type to do so no matter how inconvenient someone else tries to make it.
I can see both sides of this argument but my biggest concern (and where I think having a 'Hide from My Players' option is most relevant) is with homebrew content. If I generate an custom reward items that I want to be a surprise (or, in that vein of thought a custom 'boss' type monster), I would like that content to remain hidden until or perhaps beyond the players encountering it. I usually do this in order to better provide surprise to my more experienced players. My worry is therefore not with metagaming in the sense of individuals attempting to min/max or to cheat, but instead avid players who are excited for what kind of cool gear they can acquire or what kind of monsters are in x 'class' and peruse the content assuming that there are no 'spoilers'. Here, homebrew's would stick out like a sore thumb (due to the lack of artwork etc) and it would be difficult to blame the players for catching a glimpse at these surprises before they encounter them.
I can see both sides of this argument but my biggest concern (and where I think having a 'Hide from My Players' option is most relevant) is with homebrew content. If I generate an custom reward items that I want to be a surprise (or, in that vein of thought a custom 'boss' type monster), I would like that content to remain hidden until or perhaps beyond the players encountering it. I usually do this in order to better provide surprise to my more experienced players. My worry is therefore not with metagaming in the sense of individuals attempting to min/max or to cheat, but instead avid players who are excited for what kind of cool gear they can acquire or what kind of monsters are in x 'class' and peruse the content assuming that there are no 'spoilers'. Here, homebrew's would stick out like a sore thumb (due to the lack of artwork etc) and it would be difficult to blame the players for catching a glimpse at these surprises before they encounter them.
If content in the books isn't spoiled for the players because they know it exists, but not when or how they will encounter it in play, then home-brew content isn't spoiled just by the players knowing it was their DM that made it - the surprise of when it shows up, how it shows up, and what that means for the campaign/character is still preserved.
I agree with the OP. In tabletop play you use a DM screen to keep secrets from the players. Could I buy my own copy of Storm King's Thunder and the Monster Manual and look up everything I wanted to? Absolutely. But something has been put in place to let me know that I'm not supposed to be doing that. A simple checkbox saying "enable GM view" or something would be helpful, I think. It won't stop players who actively want to spoil things for themselves, but it will at least put a little measure there that tells new players "hey, we don't expect or want you to be looking at this if you aren't running the game."
If content in the books isn't spoiled for the players because they know it exists, but not when or how they will encounter it in play, then home-brew content isn't spoiled just by the players knowing it was their DM that made it - the surprise of when it shows up, how it shows up, and what that means for the campaign/character is still preserved.
In my opinion my players aren't spoiled by core content because they have seen it already. I make no such assertions about how a new player's enjoyment can be affected by perusing the monster list casually, which I would suspect *could* be detrimental or lead to unintentional spoilers.
One way to combat this is certainly along the lines of Irianne's suggestion but it also needs to be considered throughout site design. To me, one of the things it will greatly depend on is how the content is presented to the user / player. If I were to promote that the players use D&D beyond but avoid some of the functionality, actively avoiding that may be easier said than done when seamless, integrated content navigation could easily bleed spoiler type information through to player 'safe' zones (as dictated by your house rules rather than a specific feature). I certainly believe that none of my players go out of their way to read up on random modules on the internet, but if the content became highly integrated, easy to access and made for fun reading (normally representing good site design) then I could understand how a player would find themselves accidentally reading some of my future content and have several game sessions spoiled. Now, as a DM, if I believed there is a chance of this happening, I would be unlikely to promote this tools use.
Additionally, depending on the development time required to deliver it as a feature, having groups being able to opt out of all content would do little to affect a normal users. Either way I think its worth having a conversation about, especially if it improves the confidence I can have when advising my players to use it and helping me determine what this toolset will be most useful for.
My solution is to hack / change / modify otherwise make them go.. "It doesn't say that right here!" Funny how evolution can work even at a gaming table.
Over all I think just having the "this is metagaming" chat every so often at the table will be all that you need to keep that at bay. If you have a player who just can't help but force the game to their favor........ Find a new player.
As a player and someone that did a little DM stuff back in Adnd..... I'd say leave it alone. Honestly as a player I was sitting there arguing with my table mates saying things like... It's six seconds. You can't do 20 questions in six seconds. (He kept asking the DM stuff).
my cg paladin and another guys LG paladin were walking in the forest. A sprite comes out of the trees and before it can speak he smite crits it to death.
Some guys really don't care for the Roleplay aspect. I do. I asked the same players who his god in the forgotten realm setting was and he said Jesus. I was like... Uh... Assuming that's true would a lawful good paladin of "Jesus" have attacked someone that was randomly walking in the first. Dear God.
1) In tabletop play you use a DM screen to keep secrets from the players.
2) It won't stop players who actively want to spoil things for themselves, but it will at least put a little measure there that tells new players "hey, we don't expect or want you to be looking at this if you aren't running the game."
I've added numbers to your statements for clarity in my response to them.
To 1), I say this: No, I don't. I use a DM screen to put reference material and/or art in an easily visible position while minimizing the space it takes up on the table. Not to hide information from my players.
And to 2), I have to say this: The "little measure" in this case is to put monsters under their own tab. Making getting to monster stats any more than going to the monster tab is turning a "little measure" into a larger measure - and one that isn't actually inherently useful, because there is no requirement for a new player to be sold the lie that they have to choose to be either a player only or a DM only because having information on the DM-side of the game ruins something about the game-play experience on the player-side (which yes, I'm being overly dramatic - I get that way any time someone says something that suggests they think me being a DM makes me a less attractive prospective player, because if people really believe that then I am less likely to ever get to play rather than a DM - plus, its a ridiculous and arbitrary idea that no role-playing game other than D&D that is not trying to emulate D&D doesn't adhere to because they put all of the rules content of the game in a single book more often than not).
Total agreement. Nothing is perfect and a player who wants to get around the rules will find a way. Something like this would simply set the tone, and take care of most problems before they ever become problems.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't like having my players meta game and look up monsters to see what they need to do to best beat it. Whilst having everything to look up super easy is awesome, and players can easily look at monsters in their leisure, having it right next to their spells and character sheet is just a little dangerous during play.
Understand that having totally separate player and DM views is a bit extreme. But something to discourage players from metagaming and looking up the monsters they're fighting (even the temptation of) would be fantastic.
People can see what they are interacting with.
(Pictures are always fun to keep things on the same page.) :)
(much like Geralt from "The Witcher" series.)
Sure, they build up to it - and, yes, they have info ahead of time, but stats alone wont ruin it for DM or Player.
Drunkens and Dragons, (Runehammer games), on youtube, has mad DMing skills and info to help alleviate these concerns. :)
I agree with Dhaylen. Besides, I believe that it's the players responsibility to not be metagaming (aka ruining the game for themselves). Players who want to metagame, will do so regardless. No need to remove the resources from people who wont "abuse" it for metagaming imo
If you ask your players not to look at the monsters and they do anyway, that's a table problem not a dev problem.
And as someone who both DMs and plays, that'd just be silly.
I see where you're coming from but TBH if someone is doing this they are only ruining the experience for themselves and their fellow players. It's only an issue if you make it an issue I suppose
Also you can make them roll a history check to remember that specific type of monster. And I know the struggle it is hard to keep their eyes off, so what I do is alter some of the feats to make it harder to meta game
In my group, there are players with varying levels of experience with D&D. Some who've been playing since 3.5 or even 3.0, others who came in during 4.0. In this time, they've played different campaigns, come across many monsters. For some, any of the information found in these entries is, at most, a quick memory fresh-up. They know what monsters' strengths and weaknesses are.
In my opinion, limiting access to information isn't going to help much. In any group, you'll be helped far more by agreeing with your players to limit meta-gaming, in the interest of everyone playing, including the DM. I've done things in-character that out-of-character I knew were sub-optimal or even bad, on the simple basis that my character didn't know that, and the action seemed logical to my character at the time. In some cases leading to far more interesting and fun situations!
I'm not - nor was I ever - your "obstacle" until you've deemed me as such, nor am I your wallet, my hard earnt money is not yours by deault.
Je suis Consumer - We are the foundation, the floor beneath your rug. our support is the fate of every retail product, business, and franchise. for success you need support.
I will always miss what you were, but I will never miss what you've become.
#OpenDnD #CanceltheSub #DnDBegone.#NeverForgive #NeverForget
I get the argument that this is a table issue more than a development issue, but if we're here beta testing it's worth bringing something like this up. A player's view vs. a DM's view chosen at start-up or the ability to lock out some info if screens can be linked into a party - there may be a simple or elegant solution that keeps this from being a problem in the first place, whether it's a table problem or a dev problem.
It might not be a big deal for your particular tables but there are tables where this will be a concern, where access to certain kinds of players or politics within a group of friends make it difficult to get a full table of like-minded individuals. Even as a player, I'd appreciate the simple removal of the temptation to metagame - one less thing to stress over. There will be no perfect solutions, but there very likely are better solutions than simply blaming players and ignoring it. That's why we're here.
The issue with a player abusing their access to monster stats to get some advantage at the table that isn't fair for them to have is not an issue with whether the monster stats are available to the player or not.
Players can read the Monster Manual all they want to, whether their DM says "Go ahead, I don't care." or "Don't you dare, that's 'metagaming' and 'metagaming' is evil!"
So making some kind of extra thing that someone has to do in order to see monster stats isn't going to actually change anything; a player can still switch over to a "DM view" and look at monsters whenever they want, even if that includes some kind of actual-DM-taxing extra purchase.
Also, I've found that people who are the sort to seek out unfair advantages (which in this case only applies because the DM in question considers knowing what monsters are/do is "unfair", which I don't actually agree to be the case since that would mean that I, as a DM, am never allowed to be a player because I remember things I've read) are also the type to do so no matter how inconvenient someone else tries to make it.
I can see both sides of this argument but my biggest concern (and where I think having a 'Hide from My Players' option is most relevant) is with homebrew content. If I generate an custom reward items that I want to be a surprise (or, in that vein of thought a custom 'boss' type monster), I would like that content to remain hidden until or perhaps beyond the players encountering it. I usually do this in order to better provide surprise to my more experienced players. My worry is therefore not with metagaming in the sense of individuals attempting to min/max or to cheat, but instead avid players who are excited for what kind of cool gear they can acquire or what kind of monsters are in x 'class' and peruse the content assuming that there are no 'spoilers'. Here, homebrew's would stick out like a sore thumb (due to the lack of artwork etc) and it would be difficult to blame the players for catching a glimpse at these surprises before they encounter them.
I agree with the OP. In tabletop play you use a DM screen to keep secrets from the players. Could I buy my own copy of Storm King's Thunder and the Monster Manual and look up everything I wanted to? Absolutely. But something has been put in place to let me know that I'm not supposed to be doing that. A simple checkbox saying "enable GM view" or something would be helpful, I think. It won't stop players who actively want to spoil things for themselves, but it will at least put a little measure there that tells new players "hey, we don't expect or want you to be looking at this if you aren't running the game."
Irianne Well SAID ! (this is all my contribution here though... )
I appreciate this concern and problem.
My solution is to hack / change / modify otherwise make them go.. "It doesn't say that right here!" Funny how evolution can work even at a gaming table.
Over all I think just having the "this is metagaming" chat every so often at the table will be all that you need to keep that at bay. If you have a player who just can't help but force the game to their favor........ Find a new player.
As a player and someone that did a little DM stuff back in Adnd..... I'd say leave it alone. Honestly as a player I was sitting there arguing with my table mates saying things like... It's six seconds. You can't do 20 questions in six seconds. (He kept asking the DM stuff).
my cg paladin and another guys LG paladin were walking in the forest. A sprite comes out of the trees and before it can speak he smite crits it to death.
Some guys really don't care for the Roleplay aspect. I do. I asked the same players who his god in the forgotten realm setting was and he said Jesus. I was like... Uh... Assuming that's true would a lawful good paladin of "Jesus" have attacked someone that was randomly walking in the first. Dear God.
As a DM, I agree with tehguitarist and Irianne. Something small and easy to bypass like a check box makes sense.
Total agreement. Nothing is perfect and a player who wants to get around the rules will find a way. Something like this would simply set the tone, and take care of most problems before they ever become problems.