Is it metagaming to hold your action to attack a creature as soon as an ally moves into flanking with you?
That's definitely not metagaming
Hold to attack a creature with toll the dead as soon as it is wounded?
Also not metagaming
hold to attack a creature when it drops below a specific number of hp?
That depends. You shouldn't be able to know how many hp a given creature has. I'd say you can choose to attack when a creature drops below half their max hp, because at that point the rules say that they're visibly bloodied.
hold to attack the next enemy above a specific cr that enters range?
That's metagaming. You don't know the CR of creatures. You're free to list all the creatures that you'd want to hit, though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
hold to attack a creature when it drops below a specific number of hp?
hold to attack the next enemy above a specific cr that enters range?
The are not metagaming, because they are invalid uses of the feature.
Reactions must trigger off perceivable circumstances. Neither HP or CR are perceivable in the game world.
A character might be able to tell "lightly wounded" or "badly wounded", but that depends on what hit points actually mean, which varies from table to table.
I agree with most of what has been said, the PC will know from experience (or that of instructors) that an enemy is easier to hit if he is trying to watch two enemies both next to him but on opposite sides making it hard to watch both at the same time, and will be able to tell if an enemy is unhurt, lightly wounded of almost dead but will only have a very rough idea whether a spell like power word kill will affect a creature.
There is actually no need for the player to know the exact number of HP an enemy has, when I DM I either roll for HP for assign thme myself to something different to the average quoted in the manual.
The CR example might be metagaming but it can also be a a reference point to speed the game along. It is not metagaming to say my character hold the attack action with a trigger of when a creature he perceives to be a significant threat comes into range. The question then becomes what would his character perceive to be a significant threat and the use of a CR is an easiy way to indicate that, the alternative is whenever any creature comes within range the player is asked if that his character would regard it as a significant threat, but this would slow combat down.
The ready action says "When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger." it does not say whether ignoring the trigger ends the ready action, if you assume it does not the play can just ready the attack action for when a creature comes into range and then just ignore the trigger of the creature is not worth attacking, ending up to be functionally identical to the paragraph above.
I can't actually think of an example for a held attack where the CR has a metagaming impact but a 8th level cleric trying to hold an action to use their destroy undead channel divinity if x or more undead with a CR of 1 or less get within range is meta gaming.
Is it metagaming to hold your action to attack a creature as soon as an ally moves into flanking with you?
No. Characters can be presumed to know how to make tactical decisions like looking for the best opportunity for an attack.
Hold to attack a creature with toll the dead as soon as it is wounded?
Not really, but it could also be a sub-optimal choice. If the mook goes down in one hit, the action was wasted... Since there's a bit of opportunity cost baked in, there's no reason to be worried.
hold to attack a creature when it drops below a specific number of hp?
Yes, as written. HP are a game-mechanical abstraction. Also, that information should probably be hidden from players. However, the abstraction tracks something real--how injured a creature is. A savvy player could come up with something which would be character knowledge. I'd be willing to (situationally) accept descriptive language like, "critically wounded," "near death," "bloodied."
hold to attack the next enemy above a specific cr that enters range?
Yes. CR is a game-mechanical abstraction. Also, that information should probably be hidden from players. It would be difficult to find language that would turn CR into something real. You could hold your action until a "more threatening" monster entered the area, but is an illithid more threatening than a medusa? Their CR is higher, but a party ready for the one threat might be unprepared to meet the other. There's no way to be accurate enough to make this a real distinction. At the same time, this would be an atrocious use of a readied attack. The opportunity to ready an attack against the next enemy that enters range exists. Adding the rider "of a certain CR" only serves to limit the usefulness of that readied action. Better just to use the unqualified readied action so as to preserve more versatility.
Monster CR is definitely a metagame knowledge that characters shouldn't know. What is referred by holding action in the game use the Ready action and in order to do so as a character you must decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your reaction and then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.
Bloodied is a 4e rule. The following is the only reference 5e has, and it's from the DMG:
Players often ask how hurt a monster looks. Don’t ever feel as though you need to reveal exact hit points, but if a monster is below half its hit point maximum, it’s fair to say that it has visible wounds and appears beaten down. You can describe a monster taken to half its hit points as bloodied, giving the players a sense of progress in a fight against a tough opponent, and helping them judge when to use their most powerful spells and abilities.
To echo the comments of others in the this thread, the last two statements would count as metagaming. The reason is because it uses game mechanics and definitions, and not conditions that the characters would see in the world they are being portrayed in. So if you issued the statements as:
hold to attack until a creature starts showing significant wounds?
hold to attack until the larger enemy enters range?
These would be fine because the conditions are represented on the battlemap for the game. They don't require any knowledge of the game's mechanical works. It is simply relating to having a character say "You take care of the goblins, I will wait for the bugbear."; which in game mechanics terms is "I will hold to attack until the larger enemy enters range".
I mean, I've read and seen stories in which the more abstract mechanics are part of the narrative. The old Goblins comic is a great example, alongside the absolute avalanche of isekai stories coming out of Japan in the last five-ish years. In Rising of the Shield Hero, they're not even in a game, and yet, they still talk about things in terms of levels, XP, and crafting systems -- and they're right to do so. For some reason the world they're in just... Follows game rules. It's weird! But it works. There's value in it as a narrative device.
If you're playing in a setting like one of these, then who knows?
But yeah. Usually, you can't read somebody's challenge rating or know how many hit points they have.
Bloodied is a 4e rule. The following is the only reference 5e has, and it's from the DMG:
Players often ask how hurt a monster looks. Don’t ever feel as though you need to reveal exact hit points, but if a monster is below half its hit point maximum, it’s fair to say that it has visible wounds and appears beaten down. You can describe a monster taken to half its hit points as bloodied, giving the players a sense of progress in a fight against a tough opponent, and helping them judge when to use their most powerful spells and abilities.
I do this a lot, refering to a monster as bloodied for one that bleed or heavily worn for construct, i will even often say of insubstantial undead hat their form is flickering in distortion.
I also describe when a monster has damage immunity that it is painless and tearless or when it has resistance that it doesn't seem to suffer wear and tear as much as it should. Or that it quickly regenerate some of its wound inflicted etc..
I think this is knowledge available to them in-character and my players usually like these infos.
Is it metagaming to hold your action to attack a creature as soon as an ally moves into flanking with you?
Hold to attack a creature with toll the dead as soon as it is wounded?
hold to attack a creature when it drops below a specific number of hp?
hold to attack the next enemy above a specific cr that enters range?
That's definitely not metagaming
Also not metagaming
That depends. You shouldn't be able to know how many hp a given creature has. I'd say you can choose to attack when a creature drops below half their max hp, because at that point the rules say that they're visibly bloodied.
That's metagaming. You don't know the CR of creatures. You're free to list all the creatures that you'd want to hit, though.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
No, those are both based on some perceivable circumstance in the game world.
The are not metagaming, because they are invalid uses of the feature.
Reactions must trigger off perceivable circumstances. Neither HP or CR are perceivable in the game world.
A character might be able to tell "lightly wounded" or "badly wounded", but that depends on what hit points actually mean, which varies from table to table.
I agree with most of what has been said, the PC will know from experience (or that of instructors) that an enemy is easier to hit if he is trying to watch two enemies both next to him but on opposite sides making it hard to watch both at the same time, and will be able to tell if an enemy is unhurt, lightly wounded of almost dead but will only have a very rough idea whether a spell like power word kill will affect a creature.
There is actually no need for the player to know the exact number of HP an enemy has, when I DM I either roll for HP for assign thme myself to something different to the average quoted in the manual.
The CR example might be metagaming but it can also be a a reference point to speed the game along. It is not metagaming to say my character hold the attack action with a trigger of when a creature he perceives to be a significant threat comes into range. The question then becomes what would his character perceive to be a significant threat and the use of a CR is an easiy way to indicate that, the alternative is whenever any creature comes within range the player is asked if that his character would regard it as a significant threat, but this would slow combat down.
The ready action says "When the trigger occurs, you can either take your reaction right after the trigger finishes or ignore the trigger." it does not say whether ignoring the trigger ends the ready action, if you assume it does not the play can just ready the attack action for when a creature comes into range and then just ignore the trigger of the creature is not worth attacking, ending up to be functionally identical to the paragraph above.
I can't actually think of an example for a held attack where the CR has a metagaming impact but a 8th level cleric trying to hold an action to use their destroy undead channel divinity if x or more undead with a CR of 1 or less get within range is meta gaming.
No. Characters can be presumed to know how to make tactical decisions like looking for the best opportunity for an attack.
Not really, but it could also be a sub-optimal choice. If the mook goes down in one hit, the action was wasted... Since there's a bit of opportunity cost baked in, there's no reason to be worried.
Yes, as written. HP are a game-mechanical abstraction. Also, that information should probably be hidden from players. However, the abstraction tracks something real--how injured a creature is. A savvy player could come up with something which would be character knowledge. I'd be willing to (situationally) accept descriptive language like, "critically wounded," "near death," "bloodied."
Yes. CR is a game-mechanical abstraction. Also, that information should probably be hidden from players. It would be difficult to find language that would turn CR into something real. You could hold your action until a "more threatening" monster entered the area, but is an illithid more threatening than a medusa? Their CR is higher, but a party ready for the one threat might be unprepared to meet the other. There's no way to be accurate enough to make this a real distinction. At the same time, this would be an atrocious use of a readied attack. The opportunity to ready an attack against the next enemy that enters range exists. Adding the rider "of a certain CR" only serves to limit the usefulness of that readied action. Better just to use the unqualified readied action so as to preserve more versatility.
Monster CR is definitely a metagame knowledge that characters shouldn't know. What is referred by holding action in the game use the Ready action and in order to do so as a character you must decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your reaction and then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.
Bloodied is a 4e rule. The following is the only reference 5e has, and it's from the DMG:
To echo the comments of others in the this thread, the last two statements would count as metagaming. The reason is because it uses game mechanics and definitions, and not conditions that the characters would see in the world they are being portrayed in. So if you issued the statements as:
hold to attack until a creature starts showing significant wounds?
hold to attack until the larger enemy enters range?
These would be fine because the conditions are represented on the battlemap for the game. They don't require any knowledge of the game's mechanical works. It is simply relating to having a character say "You take care of the goblins, I will wait for the bugbear."; which in game mechanics terms is "I will hold to attack until the larger enemy enters range".
I mean, I've read and seen stories in which the more abstract mechanics are part of the narrative. The old Goblins comic is a great example, alongside the absolute avalanche of isekai stories coming out of Japan in the last five-ish years. In Rising of the Shield Hero, they're not even in a game, and yet, they still talk about things in terms of levels, XP, and crafting systems -- and they're right to do so. For some reason the world they're in just... Follows game rules. It's weird! But it works. There's value in it as a narrative device.
If you're playing in a setting like one of these, then who knows?
But yeah. Usually, you can't read somebody's challenge rating or know how many hit points they have.
I do this a lot, refering to a monster as bloodied for one that bleed or heavily worn for construct, i will even often say of insubstantial undead hat their form is flickering in distortion.
I also describe when a monster has damage immunity that it is painless and tearless or when it has resistance that it doesn't seem to suffer wear and tear as much as it should. Or that it quickly regenerate some of its wound inflicted etc..
I think this is knowledge available to them in-character and my players usually like these infos.
Yeah, to be clear I think it should be an actual rule.