Forgive me for the long post. I recently hosted my first D&D game with 5 of my friends, where all of them and myself included were new to the game. Glad to say we all had a blast and are returning next week to continue.
However, I feel like I made many mistakes. The players kept reacting to their bad rolls, so I told them that bad rolls are not always indicators that they failed, then I fudged a roll against a players low intimidation roll and let one of the enemies get feared of him for a round.
Then outside the boss room, with 2 players scouting ahead, 1 player rolled a nat 4 stealth check and they all started panicking. The other who stealthed started to tell him to retreat and asked for the wizard who was waiting outside to come and didn't let me interject, so I stayed quiet and rolled a d20 (above 10 and I would wait it out ... I rolled a 20). So then the wizard rolls a nat 1 for stealth and the two just charge the boss room, forgoing stealth. I locked only the two of them inside with a gate trap I made up on the spot...I'm so evil. To compensate, I just made the boss act cocky until the rest of the group opened the gate.
I have no clue how to control these guys when they panic...
The last thing I'm confused about is if players can use a spell/cantrip as an action and then a dagger for bonus action as the "two weapons fighting". I just let him do it cos I had no clue.
I have so much respect for you GMs who have done this for years. I felt overwhelmed the whole time and I cant wait to do it again.
Forgive me for the long post. I recently hosted my first D&D game with 5 of my friends, where all of them and myself included were new to the game. Glad to say we all had a blast and are returning next week to continue.
This is the #1 rule -- everyone has fun. If you had fun, you did more than enough right. We all make mistakes at the table (including, ahem, the players).
However, I feel like I made many mistakes. The players kept reacting to their bad rolls, so I told them that bad rolls are not always indicators that they failed
Your job as a DM, upon seeing the result of the role, is to narrate the outcome of the event. If you narrate that things didn't go that badly, maybe they won't panic. If they freak out just seeing the numbers, you need to just let them do that, and then calmly narrate the result. Eventually they will see that the roll itself isn't anything to freak out about.
then I fudged a roll against a players low intimidation roll and let one of the enemies get feared of him for a round.
Skills are not spells. I would not, under normal circumstances, allow a "fear" effect on a simple skill check for intimidation. The enemy you are questioning might cave and give you an answer (though there is no guarantee it'll be truthful -- odds are it'll just be what he thinks you want to hear). Intimidation might, perhaps, make the enemy pause enough that you will go ahead of him in the initiative order, things like that. But if you want to invoke a Fear effect, as per the spell Cause Fear then they need to cast that spell. Ordinarily you can't achieve a "frightened" effect just from an intimidation check. And certainly not in the middle of combat... again, unless there is some kind of exceptional circumstance.
Also, don't fudge die rolls if you can help it. There is no reason why, if the character tried a skill check and failed, that you had to make it succeed. Low level characters have only a small bonus to skills. They should fail quite often. They should expect to fail. This is part of the game and you should not protect them from it.
Then outside the boss room, with 2 players scouting ahead, 1 player rolled a nat 4 stealth check and they all started panicking. The other who stealthed started to tell him to retreat and asked for the wizard who was waiting outside to come and didn't let me interject, so I stayed quiet and rolled a d20 (above 10 and I would wait it out ... I rolled a 20). So then the wizard rolls a nat 1 for stealth and the two just charge the boss room, forgoing stealth. I locked only the two of them inside with a gate trap I made up on the spot...I'm so evil. To compensate, I just made the boss act cocky until the rest of the group opened the gate.
I think you need to present them with some less dangerous circumstances for a few sessions. If you give them a big bad evil boss guy right away, they are going to (rightly) fear it. Let them clear out rats for an innkeeper in the basement or hunt a few random undead in the cemetery for a couple of sessions so they can get their sea legs. They clearly don't have a sense of perspective about how things work in D&D, and this perspective really only comes from experience. Ease them in gently. Don't make them fight a boss monster right away.
The last thing I'm confused about is if players can use a spell/cantrip as an action and then a dagger for bonus action as the "two weapons fighting". I just let him do it cos I had no clue.
Nope. Casting a spell uses an Action unless it says otherwise in the spell description (other options are Bonus Action or Reaction). It is possible to cast a spell that lists itself as being Bonus Action cast, and then take an action like dagger attack. But if you cast a spell that costs one action, you cannot then use the attack as your bonus action. Only very specific things are allowed as bonus actions.
I felt overwhelmed the whole time and I cant wait to do it again.
You always feel overwhelmed. And you always forget things or mess up. Most of the time the players don't notice and even if they do, they are usually so appreciative of your DMing for them that they don't mind.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think BioWizard has your questions covered. There is not much to add so I will just say welcome to the madness. 😊
The main thing is that everyone had fun and that you want to play again. Learning rules and balancing encounters will come with time. It's okay to make mistakes. It is also okay to make a call to keep your game moving forward and then look up rules and details between sessions. Just let your players know that is the case.
Also, don't try to go back and change things. If you make a mistake or a player makes a mistake and the story has moved on, just go with it. Once you learn the correct rule or whatever applies, just say "so from now on..." As long as you are consistent and use the same calls for NPCs as you do for players, you are treating them fairly.
I highly recommend watching the Running the Game series on YouTube by Matt Colville. He gives awesome advice. Just don't try to watch them all in one sitting.
Here is the intro:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I highly recommend watching the Running the Game series on YouTube by Matt Colville. He gives awesome advice. Just don't try to watch them all in one sitting.
I highly recommend watching the Running the Game series on YouTube by Matt Colville. He gives awesome advice. Just don't try to watch them all in one sitting.
When you first get started with D&D you are going to make lots of mistakes and screw up, when you have been doing it for 30 years, you are going to make lots of mistakes and screw up. The only difference is how used to it you become.
This^^^
Everybody makes mistakes, that is truly the best opportunity to learn how to avoid making the same mistake again. Experience is a measure of learning. So the more experienced someone is as a DM, that just means they had more opportunities to learn.
If you watch Matt Colville's campaign diaries, you will see him admit almost every session to making mistakes, and saying "What I probably should have done instead was..." He's been DMing for that 30 years or more... and is so much of an authority that others of us GMing as long refer to his videos... and he still makes mistakes.
When you are in the thick of a session and trying to rule on one thing after another, run monsters, keep things moving, follow what the players are doing -- you will make mistakes. Afterwards you will say, "Darn, I should have..." Yup... get used to it. As we are saying, even the people doing it for 30 years make mistakes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
If you watch Matt Colville's campaign diaries, you will see him admit almost every session to making mistakes, and saying "What I probably should have done instead was..." He's been DMing for that 30 years or more... and is so much of an authority that others of us GMing as long refer to his videos... and he still makes mistakes.
When you are in the thick of a session and trying to rule on one thing after another, run monsters, keep things moving, follow what the players are doing -- you will make mistakes. Afterwards you will say, "Darn, I should have..." Yup... get used to it. As we are saying, even the people doing it for 30 years make mistakes.
All the time. Last Wednesday I was DMing and smack in the middle of it I was keeping a running tally of what I wished I had done differently. As soon as my last session wrapped up I was talking to one of the Players who also DMs for our group about it. He didn’t really think I had done anything poorly which is nice. But still, I saw the room for improvement. That was just three more opportunities for me to learn.
Last Wednesday I was DMing and smack in the middle of it I was keeping a running tally of what I wished I had done differently.
If I kept a list, the first item on it would be, "I wish I were organized enough to keep a running tally of all the things I wish I had done better."
I keep it in my head.
You know how the latest iteration of Sherlock Holmes has a “Mind Palace?” Well, I have a “Mind Rolodex.” I can quote rules practically verbatim because I can close my eyes, flip through my Rolodex like the pages flipping at the beginnings of the MCU movies, and then practically read it right off of the page. If people watch me they can watch my eyes moving across the page behind my closed eyelids.
That’s how I made it through high school. That’s also how I can memorize reams of technical information for work too. 🤷♂️
Something some DMs do (although I don’t) is roll the checks for players behind the dm screen so they can’t react inappropriately to the outcome which their character wouldn’t actually know. Think about it.
PC: I want to try to hide.
DM: sure, roll please.
PC: rolls a nat 1.... actually, I’m just going to move over here instead.
now, in reality, the character would just be trying to hide, and unless someone is advising them how well they’re doing it, they’re just going to think they’re doing it well. If players see their bad rolls, it’s next to impossible for them to not start meta gaming.
If players see their bad rolls, it’s next to impossible for them to not start meta gaming.
If the players start to meta game, what should my approach be?
Is all meta gaming bad?
Should I inform the players about meta gaming and ask them how they feel about it?
Or perhaps I let the players get more used to the game and the moments of failure, and over time it becomes less of an issue.
Well, take stealth for example. If one is proficient in stealth, they should have some rough idea if they botched. The thing to understand is that the number rolled matters little in a vacuum. It only really matters when compared against the enemy’s passive perception. The players don’t have that other piece of the puzzle. So, much like their characters, they would have some rough idea how stealthy they are being, but still cannot be sure that it was successful or not. So that’s not entirely meta gaming.
Besides, some degree of meta gaming is inevitable. It is literally impossible for there to be 0% meta gaming. It’s really only a major issue if the Players have their PCs act on knowledge they cold not actually know. Like stuff that was discussed while their PCs weren’t there, or stuff from the Monsters Manual.
And I will tell you, some of the most fun I have had in D&D came from the “failures.” When that happens for them, they’ll stop fearing it as much. Please allow me to recommend this:
If players see their bad rolls, it’s next to impossible for them to not start meta gaming.
What do you mean by meta-gaming?
If you mean trying to "get out of the roll" -- I have never seen players do that since I got to high school, let alone as an adult. Your example implies this... "I try to hide," nat 1, "Never mind; I don't try to hide." That's not metagaming, even -- it's cheating. You attempted to hide. Once you see the roll, you're not allowed to go back in time and pretend you didn't make the roll. If your players are doing this, you need to explain to them that this is not allowed. You declare what you are doing, the die is rolled, and the DM narrates the result of what you declared that caused you to roll the die. End of story.
If by "metagaming" you mean, "RPing what it says happened on the dice," then that is not metagaming -- it is roleplaying. It is playing D&D. "I try to hide," nat 1, "Well... OK, I try to squeeze myself into the corner but I trip over my cloak and make a lot of noise." DM - "The monsters all turn to look at you." Again... that's what is supposed to happen.
Or... more commonly, "I try to hide," nat 1, DM says, "You attempt to squeeze yourself into the corner, but in doing so, you knock over the vase on the pedestal above you and it smashes to the floor. All the monsters in the room turn and look right at you."
Again... this is not metagaming. It's playing D&D.
If the players start to meta game, what should my approach be?
Let's define metagaming first: Metagaming = having your character act on knowledge that you, the player, have, but the character would not have.
Great example of what could be metagaming... Last session my players examined a very complex mosaic on the floor of a temple. They made Religion checks to see what they knew about it, and they didn't really know anything. One of the players said, "I know exactly what this is... but my character doesn't." He did not say aloud what it was (thus avoiding spoilers to the other players -- good on him!), and he did not try to RP that his character suddenly had this knowledge that he had gleaned from years and years of D&D lore and DMing.
If he had said, "I know what this mosaic is... it's the layout of the city of Sigil!" (it's not -- this is just an example), that would have been metagaming. Because his character, Hassan, has no way of knowing that Sigil even exists (in fact, it does not exist, in my universe), let alone that this mosaic has anything to do with Sigil.
So.. what should your approach be? You should inform the player, gently, that their character wouldn't know this, and to please not bring out of character information into the game. New players should be introduced to this kindly, and not harshly. Also, new players will metagame a lot because they are new... as long as there is nothing story or immersion-breaking about it, go easy on them. As they grow accustomed to D&D, they will learn to separate their knowledge, as players, from their characters' knowledge.
This is something you can easily discuss at the start of the session.
I'd say to explain to them what the term "meta-game" means and how it effects the game. One thing that can be hard for new players to grasp is that a characters limitations or failures are just as much a part of them and their story as are their abilities. So, for example an Barbarian who is illiterate won't be able to solve a riddle which is a word puzzle, even if the player can see the answer. A fighter with a low intelligence might fail at an attempt to barter and be over-charged by an unscrupulous merchant. These are all part of the game. And in the long run, failures add more to the story.
Sure, it is hard not to continue to be suspicious of the charming villain when you know you rolled a natural 1 on your insight check, but learning how to include the results of the dice roles in your Role-play is part of the fun. Talking about it will help the players be aware and give you all an opportunity to work together to create the best possible story.
One thing that can be hard for new players to grasp is that a characters limitations or failures are just as much a part of them and their story as are their abilities.
And often, provide more fodder for RP than the successes do.
Success, failure... it really doesn't matter. It's all just something to RP about. If you can keep that in mind, and you look at each die roll or skill check or encounter as a stimulus to which you can RP a response, RPing becomes a lot more fun... and a lot less stressful.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
One thing that can be hard for new players to grasp is that a characters limitations or failures are just as much a part of them and their story as are their abilities.
And often, provide more fodder for RP than the successes do.
Success, failure... it really doesn't matter. It's all just something to RP about. If you can keep that in mind, and you look at each die roll or skill check or encounter as a stimulus to which you can RP a response, RPing becomes a lot more fun... and a lot less stressful.
Forgive me for the long post. I recently hosted my first D&D game with 5 of my friends, where all of them and myself included were new to the game. Glad to say we all had a blast and are returning next week to continue.
However, I feel like I made many mistakes. The players kept reacting to their bad rolls, so I told them that bad rolls are not always indicators that they failed, then I fudged a roll against a players low intimidation roll and let one of the enemies get feared of him for a round.
Then outside the boss room, with 2 players scouting ahead, 1 player rolled a nat 4 stealth check and they all started panicking. The other who stealthed started to tell him to retreat and asked for the wizard who was waiting outside to come and didn't let me interject, so I stayed quiet and rolled a d20 (above 10 and I would wait it out ... I rolled a 20). So then the wizard rolls a nat 1 for stealth and the two just charge the boss room, forgoing stealth. I locked only the two of them inside with a gate trap I made up on the spot...I'm so evil. To compensate, I just made the boss act cocky until the rest of the group opened the gate.
I have no clue how to control these guys when they panic...
The last thing I'm confused about is if players can use a spell/cantrip as an action and then a dagger for bonus action as the "two weapons fighting". I just let him do it cos I had no clue.
I have so much respect for you GMs who have done this for years. I felt overwhelmed the whole time and I cant wait to do it again.
This is the #1 rule -- everyone has fun. If you had fun, you did more than enough right. We all make mistakes at the table (including, ahem, the players).
Your job as a DM, upon seeing the result of the role, is to narrate the outcome of the event. If you narrate that things didn't go that badly, maybe they won't panic. If they freak out just seeing the numbers, you need to just let them do that, and then calmly narrate the result. Eventually they will see that the roll itself isn't anything to freak out about.
Skills are not spells. I would not, under normal circumstances, allow a "fear" effect on a simple skill check for intimidation. The enemy you are questioning might cave and give you an answer (though there is no guarantee it'll be truthful -- odds are it'll just be what he thinks you want to hear). Intimidation might, perhaps, make the enemy pause enough that you will go ahead of him in the initiative order, things like that. But if you want to invoke a Fear effect, as per the spell Cause Fear then they need to cast that spell. Ordinarily you can't achieve a "frightened" effect just from an intimidation check. And certainly not in the middle of combat... again, unless there is some kind of exceptional circumstance.
Also, don't fudge die rolls if you can help it. There is no reason why, if the character tried a skill check and failed, that you had to make it succeed. Low level characters have only a small bonus to skills. They should fail quite often. They should expect to fail. This is part of the game and you should not protect them from it.
I think you need to present them with some less dangerous circumstances for a few sessions. If you give them a big bad evil boss guy right away, they are going to (rightly) fear it. Let them clear out rats for an innkeeper in the basement or hunt a few random undead in the cemetery for a couple of sessions so they can get their sea legs. They clearly don't have a sense of perspective about how things work in D&D, and this perspective really only comes from experience. Ease them in gently. Don't make them fight a boss monster right away.
Nope. Casting a spell uses an Action unless it says otherwise in the spell description (other options are Bonus Action or Reaction). It is possible to cast a spell that lists itself as being Bonus Action cast, and then take an action like dagger attack. But if you cast a spell that costs one action, you cannot then use the attack as your bonus action. Only very specific things are allowed as bonus actions.
You always feel overwhelmed. And you always forget things or mess up. Most of the time the players don't notice and even if they do, they are usually so appreciative of your DMing for them that they don't mind.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think BioWizard has your questions covered. There is not much to add so I will just say welcome to the madness. 😊
The main thing is that everyone had fun and that you want to play again.
Learning rules and balancing encounters will come with time. It's okay to make mistakes. It is also okay to make a call to keep your game moving forward and then look up rules and details between sessions. Just let your players know that is the case.
Also, don't try to go back and change things. If you make a mistake or a player makes a mistake and the story has moved on, just go with it. Once you learn the correct rule or whatever applies, just say "so from now on..." As long as you are consistent and use the same calls for NPCs as you do for players, you are treating them fairly.
Thank you BioWizard and Eriniel for your responses, my tension has eased so much. I will keep all your feedback in mind for our next session! :)
I highly recommend watching the Running the Game series on YouTube by Matt Colville. He gives awesome advice. Just don't try to watch them all in one sitting.
Here is the intro:
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I will give it a watch, thank you!
I highly recommend it, it’s quite excellent.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
This^^^
Everybody makes mistakes, that is truly the best opportunity to learn how to avoid making the same mistake again. Experience is a measure of learning. So the more experienced someone is as a DM, that just means they had more opportunities to learn.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If you watch Matt Colville's campaign diaries, you will see him admit almost every session to making mistakes, and saying "What I probably should have done instead was..." He's been DMing for that 30 years or more... and is so much of an authority that others of us GMing as long refer to his videos... and he still makes mistakes.
When you are in the thick of a session and trying to rule on one thing after another, run monsters, keep things moving, follow what the players are doing -- you will make mistakes. Afterwards you will say, "Darn, I should have..." Yup... get used to it. As we are saying, even the people doing it for 30 years make mistakes.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
All the time. Last Wednesday I was DMing and smack in the middle of it I was keeping a running tally of what I wished I had done differently. As soon as my last session wrapped up I was talking to one of the Players who also DMs for our group about it. He didn’t really think I had done anything poorly which is nice. But still, I saw the room for improvement. That was just three more opportunities for me to learn.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If I kept a list, the first item on it would be, "I wish I were organized enough to keep a running tally of all the things I wish I had done better."
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I keep it in my head.
You know how the latest iteration of Sherlock Holmes has a “Mind Palace?” Well, I have a “Mind Rolodex.” I can quote rules practically verbatim because I can close my eyes, flip through my Rolodex like the pages flipping at the beginnings of the MCU movies, and then practically read it right off of the page. If people watch me they can watch my eyes moving across the page behind my closed eyelids.
That’s how I made it through high school. That’s also how I can memorize reams of technical information for work too. 🤷♂️
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Something some DMs do (although I don’t) is roll the checks for players behind the dm screen so they can’t react inappropriately to the outcome which their character wouldn’t actually know. Think about it.
PC: I want to try to hide.
DM: sure, roll please.
PC: rolls a nat 1.... actually, I’m just going to move over here instead.
now, in reality, the character would just be trying to hide, and unless someone is advising them how well they’re doing it, they’re just going to think they’re doing it well. If players see their bad rolls, it’s next to impossible for them to not start meta gaming.
If the players start to meta game, what should my approach be?
Is all meta gaming bad?
Should I inform the players about meta gaming and ask them how they feel about it?
Or perhaps I let the players get more used to the game and the moments of failure, and over time it becomes less of an issue.
Well, take stealth for example. If one is proficient in stealth, they should have some rough idea if they botched. The thing to understand is that the number rolled matters little in a vacuum. It only really matters when compared against the enemy’s passive perception. The players don’t have that other piece of the puzzle. So, much like their characters, they would have some rough idea how stealthy they are being, but still cannot be sure that it was successful or not. So that’s not entirely meta gaming.
Besides, some degree of meta gaming is inevitable. It is literally impossible for there to be 0% meta gaming. It’s really only a major issue if the Players have their PCs act on knowledge they cold not actually know. Like stuff that was discussed while their PCs weren’t there, or stuff from the Monsters Manual.
And I will tell you, some of the most fun I have had in D&D came from the “failures.” When that happens for them, they’ll stop fearing it as much. Please allow me to recommend this:
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
What do you mean by meta-gaming?
If you mean trying to "get out of the roll" -- I have never seen players do that since I got to high school, let alone as an adult. Your example implies this... "I try to hide," nat 1, "Never mind; I don't try to hide." That's not metagaming, even -- it's cheating. You attempted to hide. Once you see the roll, you're not allowed to go back in time and pretend you didn't make the roll. If your players are doing this, you need to explain to them that this is not allowed. You declare what you are doing, the die is rolled, and the DM narrates the result of what you declared that caused you to roll the die. End of story.
If by "metagaming" you mean, "RPing what it says happened on the dice," then that is not metagaming -- it is roleplaying. It is playing D&D. "I try to hide," nat 1, "Well... OK, I try to squeeze myself into the corner but I trip over my cloak and make a lot of noise." DM - "The monsters all turn to look at you." Again... that's what is supposed to happen.
Or... more commonly, "I try to hide," nat 1, DM says, "You attempt to squeeze yourself into the corner, but in doing so, you knock over the vase on the pedestal above you and it smashes to the floor. All the monsters in the room turn and look right at you."
Again... this is not metagaming. It's playing D&D.
Let's define metagaming first: Metagaming = having your character act on knowledge that you, the player, have, but the character would not have.
Great example of what could be metagaming... Last session my players examined a very complex mosaic on the floor of a temple. They made Religion checks to see what they knew about it, and they didn't really know anything. One of the players said, "I know exactly what this is... but my character doesn't." He did not say aloud what it was (thus avoiding spoilers to the other players -- good on him!), and he did not try to RP that his character suddenly had this knowledge that he had gleaned from years and years of D&D lore and DMing.
If he had said, "I know what this mosaic is... it's the layout of the city of Sigil!" (it's not -- this is just an example), that would have been metagaming. Because his character, Hassan, has no way of knowing that Sigil even exists (in fact, it does not exist, in my universe), let alone that this mosaic has anything to do with Sigil.
So.. what should your approach be? You should inform the player, gently, that their character wouldn't know this, and to please not bring out of character information into the game. New players should be introduced to this kindly, and not harshly. Also, new players will metagame a lot because they are new... as long as there is nothing story or immersion-breaking about it, go easy on them. As they grow accustomed to D&D, they will learn to separate their knowledge, as players, from their characters' knowledge.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
This is something you can easily discuss at the start of the session.
I'd say to explain to them what the term "meta-game" means and how it effects the game. One thing that can be hard for new players to grasp is that a characters limitations or failures are just as much a part of them and their story as are their abilities. So, for example an Barbarian who is illiterate won't be able to solve a riddle which is a word puzzle, even if the player can see the answer. A fighter with a low intelligence might fail at an attempt to barter and be over-charged by an unscrupulous merchant. These are all part of the game. And in the long run, failures add more to the story.
Sure, it is hard not to continue to be suspicious of the charming villain when you know you rolled a natural 1 on your insight check, but learning how to include the results of the dice roles in your Role-play is part of the fun. Talking about it will help the players be aware and give you all an opportunity to work together to create the best possible story.
And often, provide more fodder for RP than the successes do.
Success, failure... it really doesn't matter. It's all just something to RP about. If you can keep that in mind, and you look at each die roll or skill check or encounter as a stimulus to which you can RP a response, RPing becomes a lot more fun... and a lot less stressful.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
This^^^
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting