General questions on homebrew worldbuildyness

[Silus]

So I'm working on a homebrew setting for Pathfinder (Chickity-check the signature there, post suggestions in the second link there) and I've a few general questions.

1) Wandering DMPCs showing up as rumor ("Did you hear X recently came back from Y? They found Z there! I didn't know those existed any more!") or in fluff (Descriptive journal entries regarding locations) with the possibility of the PCs running into them ("Oh hey you guys are exploring [location]? Neat, we should team up for it."). Yea or Nay?

2) Homebrew monsters: At what point is it too much? I'm toying with the idea of adding in some Monster Hunter type apex predators for a few areas but I don't really want them to be too much (Predators in question being the Lagiacrus and Zinogre).

3) I managed to get ahold of Campaign Cartographer 3 but I've not used it yet. How good, on a 1-10 scale, is it for making world maps? Are there far better choices for it?

4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?

5) As a DM, if I let the monsters have something (Class, skills, spells, etc), should I allow the same for the PCs? Like if I said "Ok this this feat is not allowed" then turn around and give it to a monster/NPC, should I then allow the PCs to have access to it or no?

6) As a DM, should you lie to the players at all? Like if you have a homebrew setting and you tell the players "There are no dragons in this setting what so ever" but you have the only dragon in the world as the BBEG, how troublesome would that be? I ask because in the past I've had issues with telling the players "Oh yeah werewolves exist" only to see the PCs turn around and start buying silver weapons with no reason IC to do so. So, um, basically is it alright to lie to your players about certain things if they can't be trusted to RP those things?

More questions to come as I think of them.

[prufock]

1) Wandering DMPCs showing up as rumor ("Did you hear X recently came back from Y? They found Z there! I didn't know those existed any more!") or in fluff (Descriptive journal entries regarding locations) with the possibility of the PCs running into them ("Oh hey you guys are exploring [location]? Neat, we should team up for it."). Yea or Nay?
I'm against DMPCs showing up to join the party, for the most part. I assume these are well-known NPCs that are heroes in their own right? Powerful NPCs should be reserved as plot points in my opinion.


2) Homebrew monsters: At what point is it too much? I'm toying with the idea of adding in some Monster Hunter type apex predators for a few areas but I don't really want them to be too much (Predators in question being the Lagiacrus and Zinogre).
That's a vague question. What do you mean by "too much"? Too powerful? No way to know, given that the monsters you cite don't have D&D stats as far as I can tell. Given the basic information I can glean from the wiki, one is a wyvern with a template, the other is an underwater dragon. Nothing wrong with those. Homebrew monsters are fine in an original setting.


4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?
You need answers for the things PCs will ask. These are examples that the PCs will likely ask (at least mine would). But discovering these things can be quests of their own, and you could wait until they ask, have them go in search of the answer, and decide between sessions how it works. I would say you should have some ideas in mind so random NPC #312 can give a vague, uneducated answer. These are important setting notes, though, and should have some logic behind it (even if that logic is simply "Magic!").

[Cowardly Griffo]

1) Wandering DMPCs showing up as rumor ("Did you hear X recently came back from Y? They found Z there! I didn't know those existed any more!") or in fluff (Descriptive journal entries regarding locations) with the possibility of the PCs running into them ("Oh hey you guys are exploring [location]? Neat, we should team up for it."). Yea or Nay?It depends on the setting, but ultimately you run the risk of making the PCs feel less unique. They stop becoming the adventurers and start becoming some adventurers. Especially if you're having NPCs talk about these other super-dreamy heroes like they're the bees knees and you're not giving the PCs the same treatment.

Settings where lots of adventurers is a conceit can work, mind–see Golarion, and Exalted's Creation for examples–but the PCs are still the main characters of whatever story you're playing through. Everything else–yes, everything else–is there to contribute to their story, not to lessen it or pull the focus away from it.


2) Homebrew monsters: At what point is it too much? I'm toying with the idea of adding in some Monster Hunter type apex predators for a few areas but I don't really want them to be too much (Predators in question being the Lagiacrus and Zinogre).Honestly? I'm in favor of homebrew monsters. I mean, keep the majority of stuff familiar, but yeah, definitely throw in enough "the frell is that?" moments to a) prevent metagaming and far more importantly b) let the PCs with knowledge skills actually roll to figure things out.

Giving the players a foe that's a puzzle is way more interesting than giving them a mountain of hit points to swing their various metaphorical pickaxes at.


4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?If it interests you? Yeah, go for it.

If it interests the players? Well, ask them how it works! Especially if they have the in-character knowledge skills to work it out. If you didn't have the answer, then it wasn't that important to your campaign–but letting the PCs give you an answer does two things. One, it makes them feel more invested, as they've helped create the setting in some small way, and two, it has a decent chance of sparking some ideas that you can use to flesh the setting out more.

Like, if Urist McBard tells you that the Principality of the Moon is mostly lycanthropes because lycanthropes are immortal and they consequently make better rulers–well, holy jeez, lycanthropes are immortal now, and that has all kinds of ramifications. And when you take the ramifications you like, expand them outwards and later show the results to the party in some way, the players will be totally keen on whatever you come up with, because they have some ownership of that idea and that will make them care more.

It's a delicious cycle.

[Silus]

Right so quick followup question to #4:

How much planning (explanation-wise) is too much?

[Talar]

If it starts to feel like a dissertation then it is most likely too much. Anything more then a high school paper is probably toeing the line a bit depending on your players and their interest in the world.

DMPC's if done right can be helpful for a party especially if the party is smaller. Never let a DMPC have the spot light, and generally keep them to a support role and it won't be that bad.

Homebrew monsters are fine just make sure that they are in the relative ball park of balanced. They add some good variety to any campaign.

[1eGuy]

4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?Don't bother until the players find some way of investigating these things in-game. Then make up the most fun answer you can on the spot.

No reason to avoid answering them in your "spare time", of course, but avoid wasting creativity and time on anything that may turn out never to involve the players. The key thing is to get the ball rolling, not to write an encyclopedia.

[Yora]

I think DMPCs are never a good idea. When you prepare your own adventure, scale enemies according to the parties strength, abilities, and equipment.

For my own setting, I created a whole monster manual. One third are from AD&D manuals but generic creatures not specific to D&D, and the rest is all homebrew. Many GMs like to use nonstandard monsters, since the players don't know their abilities unless their characters gained that knowledge.

And I think a setting is even better when not everything has a commonly known mundane explanation. There is nothing magical about a thing that is fully understood.

[Jay R]

4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?

Don't forget that in a fantasy world, many things are not known at all.

My usual answer for something I don't have an answer for is, "So who are you asking?" If it's important for some reason, they can seek out a sage, and I can arrange that they won't find one until I've worked out how this aspect affects the plot.

If it doesn't affect the plot, then they don't know about a sage who has studied that, and can't find anyone who has ever heard of anyone who knows about it. Given that the attempt to find an answer will take time and provide neither treasure nor adventure, they quickly give up the attempt.

[draken50]

You can make whatever you'd like to be honest.

DMPCs/NPCS: I don't really have a problem with other adventuring groups existing. A nice way to balance that is by having evidence of those groups failures as well successes. For High level npcs, I tend to prefer having the party hear about what they did in the past, rather than what they are doing. "Elminster founded the harpers" neat. "Elminster was in Nashkel throwing fire at goblins until they all died horribly, and then teleported to the ocean and killed a kraken fighting a merchant ship." fine... why doesn't his stupidly powerful ass come handle this crap.

Homebrewed monsters: It's your world, you can make whatever you want. As to life cycles and such, well the players would either need to roll for knowledge or ask someone, and that person could be wrong. Not really huge.

Little complex things: you really don't need everything nailed down, it can actually help to have some flexibility, you really want a general idea, and nail specifics on a session by session basis. From a time management standpoint at least. Personally for most games, I like to narrow the scope quite a bit and add details to relatively few places at a time. Tends to make it easier to keep track of, and be more consistent.

[Silus]

You can make whatever you'd like to be honest.

DMPCs/NPCS: I don't really have a problem with other adventuring groups existing. A nice way to balance that is by having evidence of those groups failures as well successes. For High level npcs, I tend to prefer having the party hear about what they did in the past, rather than what they are doing. "Elminster founded the harpers" neat. "Elminster was in Nashkel throwing fire at goblins until they all died horribly, and then teleported to the ocean and killed a kraken fighting a merchant ship." fine... why doesn't his stupidly powerful ass come handle this crap.

So things like "Oh [NPC] helped us out of a pretty bad scrape a few days back. Fought off a [Monster] by themselves and helped us get away"?

[Stellar_Magic]

1.) For DMPCs... I think if you want them to be a regular assistant for a party, they can't be a higher level then the party. I'm not against DMPCs or GMPCs in a party because as a GM... I want to play too, damn it! XD

Also there's nothing wrong with NPCs that are going around doing things in the world either... It helps make it seem more real and alive. Higher level NPCs, even Epic level NPCs, can have their place in a campaign, but lets face it. You're not going to be in regular contact with the higher level people usually because they're handling higher level business. An cavalier 20/mammoth rider 8/noble scion 10 (yes I have a couple npcs like this in one of my campaign settings) is not going to be anywhere near your average level 5-10 adventuring party. He'll be holed up in his palace worth more then anyone can imagine dining with the upper-crust nobles negotiating treaties with other nations... Not worrying about a dire rat in some inn basement.

This doesn't mean they're not going to have a profound affect on an area where they live. Remember the old DnD settlement generators used the highest level local to determine how many characters of x type were at each level. So that level 38 guy might mean that the local settlement has 2 cavaliers of level 19, 4 of level 9, 8 of level 4, 16 of level 2, and maybe 160 at level 1 (I calculate level one differently then most guides suggest).

In short, his presence might make it a lot easier for the party to hire a cavalier, since there's more in the town he lives in. Still, someone that's epic level tends to be in a position of power... Be it the guardian of a city or leader of a kingdom or something. Also, please don't just make it totally random... You can generate potential helpers randomly, but if you want them to be a repeat character... think more about what they'd be doing then just having them wander around.

2.) Homebrew is fine, though starting from scratch on each monster tends to make for a lot more work then you generally need. Now, I personally do this a bit differently then most people. You might notice in some pathfinder stat blocks the organization section includes mention of things like 50% noncombatants and so forth.

What I do is I consider the basic stat block for a monster as the equivalent of a commoner npc for a playable race. It's the most basic type of foe possible for that monster. To make challenging foes, I'll often give every combatant monster class levels. This can really spice up combat, as a party may find yourself facing any number of different combat styles when they burst through the entrance to an Ogre's layer.

If you're doing a relatively low-magic setting where monsters are rare, I tend to give them as many class levels as they have hit die (upping the CR accordingly)... so your typical minotaur encounter goes from a CR 4 monster to a CR 10 encounter against a minotaur with six levels of barbarian. Suddenly that encounter sounds like something worthy of a Greek epic tale, doesn't it?

4.) If it's a question the players may ask, you better have at least a loose idea of an answer. For the clockworks and other machines for example you could say they reproduce by building copies of themselves, and that there are special clockworks for mining precious metals and so forth. For the Lycanthropy... something like that almost certainly will have a myth or legend attached to explain the situation, so that one you definitely would need to explain.

[draken50]

So things like "Oh [NPC] helped us out of a pretty bad scrape a few days back. Fought off a [Monster] by themselves and helped us get away"?

That's not bad, but while it adds a little bit, it's still kind of the same flavor as what the party is probably doing. The fact that it's recent might lead players to believe they should enlist this higher level NPC for their goals. Personally, and again this is more personal preference than anything else I like to lean more towards giving the players an idea that they can become the big talked about folk.

"Ya see that stump... used to be the mightiest ironwood tree of a huge forest that grew round these parts. But one day It was struck by lightning, must-a-been the iron in the tree that drew it, and it caught fire. A mighty wind was blowing, and the embers were flying all around, ol' Hornstead's stable caught fire, and we knew something'd have to be done about it right quick. Lucky for us, Korgan, the mighty warrior of the north happened to be passing through town on his way to great tourney at Landis Castle. He wasn't as well known in those days, we could tell though that he was something special. Well... He saw the tree burning, and with One swing of his mighty axe chopped the great tree down. Then he picked the mighty sentinel of the forest and cast it into the sea. You can still sees it caught in the rocks below the cliff."

Bonus points if the actual actual character remembers it more accurately, dude showed up broke, got drunk on cheap ale and passed out in the stable. Woke up when the hay caught fire, and yelled for townsfolk to help put it out. Worked with some woodsman to help saw the thing down, and was damn near crushed by it. Then because of the slope, it rolled down to the cliffside and fell into the ocean below. Story just changed once he got powerful and famous.

Later on, similar stories can be made about the player characters themselves.

Alternatively, players can hear about other things going on, but really should be less specific and generally farther away. "Pirates have been raiding the elven coastline", " I hear that Sorcerer Flameboots or whatnot hired on a bunch of ships to go try to burn em out.""Well I wish him luck, but those are a clever bunch of bastards, I bet he'll be back with nothing to show for it but a sunburn and scurvy."

If it's: "Man, SuperDude the Amazing was just here, and wrestled a kraken to death with his bare hands, and saved all our lives, so we gave him all our treasure and valuables, but he declined it and bought us all magical steeds... yup... Hey, I'll give you a bit of coin if you can kill a couple lizards for me though, thems delicious."

That could be pretty disheartening.

[Thrudd]

So I'm working on a homebrew setting for Pathfinder (Chickity-check the signature there, post suggestions in the second link there) and I've a few general questions.

1) Wandering DMPCs showing up as rumor ("Did you hear X recently came back from Y? They found Z there! I didn't know those existed any more!") or in fluff (Descriptive journal entries regarding locations) with the possibility of the PCs running into them ("Oh hey you guys are exploring [location]? Neat, we should team up for it."). Yea or Nay?

2) Homebrew monsters: At what point is it too much? I'm toying with the idea of adding in some Monster Hunter type apex predators for a few areas but I don't really want them to be too much (Predators in question being the Lagiacrus and Zinogre).

3) I managed to get ahold of Campaign Cartographer 3 but I've not used it yet. How good, on a 1-10 scale, is it for making world maps? Are there far better choices for it?

4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?

More questions to come as I think of them.

1.) It's fine to have NPC's that the players hear about, wandering around doing their own thing, it can help the players feel like the world doesn't revolve around just them. Other parties of adventurers might turn up as rivals or team up with them against a common foe. Just be careful that NPC's that actually join them or help them often are not higher level than they are. An equal level NPC should not join the party for more than a short time, like a single mission. A higher level NPC should be only giving advice or non-active assistance (and probably not very often). Lower level NPC's might join as permanent henchmen/cohorts, the rules should cover how this works.

2.) homebrew monsters are great, especially if your players have memorized all the published monster manuals. Apply them the same way you would any other monster. "Too much" would be unbeatable monsters that are encountered regularly.

4.) Have some idea about them, but you don't need to go into great detail unless it is something the characters need to know in great detail. The players don't get answers about things their characters don't know, so if they want to know something that isn't obvious, they'll need to investigate in-game.

[Silus]

Added another question:

5) As a DM, if I let the monsters have something (Class, skills, spells, etc), should I allow the same for the PCs? Like if I said "Ok this this feat is not allowed" then turn around and give it to a monster/NPC, should I then allow the PCs to have access to it or no?

[draken50]

Added another question:

5) As a DM, if I let the monsters have something (Class, skills, spells, etc), should I allow the same for the PCs? Like if I said "Ok this this feat is not allowed" then turn around and give it to a monster/NPC, should I then allow the PCs to have access to it or no?

Personally, I don't go by those rules. I may not let my player be a drow, doesn't mean they can't fight them. One of my players at one point just kept asking for stuff from forgotten realms, drow, half dragon, spellfire, just all sorts of stuff that I didn't want used. Also monsters sometimes have defining traits that would be unsuitable for a player to have. Generally I don't my players having a level drain for every melee attack at low levels. I also don't want to have to deal with other parts of it, so I don't allow vampires as players unless I'm running some kind of monster game. Doesn't mean they won't fight them.

Spells are a little... different, generally if you're going to disallow a spell, it should be consistent.

Classes I feel differently about, as I think a fair number are designed for NPCs in a lot of systems. Commoner and warrior and the like come to mind. I'd strongly discourage a player from playing a commoner for... well, it wouldn't take long to have them re-roll. I can see avoiding some classes if they wouldn't fit the campaign theme and the like. I can see some of the oriental classes not fitting what you'd have in mind in some cases, or if it doesn't fit the campaign. I won't disallow a player from playing a druid in a city-based intrigue game, but I will generally have them explain why they're character would be motivated to participate (the theme is communicated to the players).

Ultimately though, I tend to hold the dm's position a little looser, if I want to have a level 3 cleric have 6 skeletons that re-rise after 2 rounds unless a consecrated area is dispelled or the cleric is killed, that's what'll happen. I've yet to have a player complain about that unfairness, but my players seem to trust me.

[Silus]

Aaaaaand another question >.>

6) As a DM, should you lie to the players at all? Like if you have a homebrew setting and you tell the players "There are no dragons in this setting what so ever" but you have the only dragon in the world as the BBEG, how troublesome would that be? I ask because in the past I've had issues with telling the players "Oh yeah werewolves exist" only to see the PCs turn around and start buying silver weapons with no reason IC to do so. So, um, basically is it alright to lie to your players about certain things if they can't be trusted to RP those things?

I really do appreciate ya'll's answers =3 I don't really have a lot of people around here to ask about this sorta stuff and I'm still learning as a DM >.>

[draken50]

Provide game world information in game. I wouldn't tell them as the GM that there are no dragons.

At the same time it seems unlikely that the majority of NPCs would think of dragons as anything other than flights of fancy. If they decide to try to buy swords of dragonslaying or some such... why would they exist when there's no dragons around?

You don't need to lie to the players, but you can, and probably should provide misinformation through your NPCs. NPCs aren't all knowing and come to erroneous conclusions all the time. Allow the characters to have a rather sheltered backstory, and it'll be fitting for the characters to know as little as the players do. Knowledge rolls can still be useful, but think over what it would actually provide. If dragons are rare, or thought to never exist. Draconic is probably not the language of magic ect.

It might surprise you how much players will trust the word of an NPC described as "wearing cloths stained with mud and horse crap."

[Thrudd]

5.) You are within your rights to give your monsters or NPC's anything you want, and to restrict whatever you want to the players. If you want a monster to have a special ability that the players don't have access to, just call it a special ability, not a feat.

NPC's are a bit more delicate situation, because if they do something cool that breaks the rules as the players know them, the players might want to know how they did it and how to get it themselves. You will need to decide on how you handle that based on your players, and the specific game you are playing. If you know your players are a bunch of rules lawyers who are going to meta-game and pick apart everything that happens and get all in a huff about NPC's "cheating", then you might just want to avoid that scenario. If they are generally cool about things and mostly play in-character, then it shouldn't be a problem. The problem with 3e and PF is that they have encouraged the assumption that everything in the game; monster, NPC and PC alike, are built using the same rules and the same abilities. Players used to these games may have more of a problem with enemies using non-standard or inaccessible abilities.

Spells are a different matter. You should feel free to restrict spells any way you want, and to give NPCs any spells you want. If the players want to learn a spell an enemy has used, they will need to find a copy of it first, or conduct research to replicate it. You control how easy or impossible it will be to accomplish that. A spell that the PC's previously had no knowledge of at all would likely be extremely hard to find, or is the personal creation of their enemy (that's why they didn't know about it already).

6.) Don't tell the players anything their characters don't know. Hopefully, in a new setting or with new players, they are starting out at level 1 or near to it. The information their characters know about the world should fit into a few paragraphs. They shouldn't know much about anything outside the small region they have grown up in. Let them discover everything through play. Unless they ask "are there dragons in this world?" you don't need to say anything about it at all. If they do ask, tell them whatever their character knows or thinks: " nobody you've ever met has seen a dragon, they are just children's stories." or "your character has never heard of any such thing.", or whatever is true to the character. Any further information they want, make them look for it in-character.

[Jay R]

Added another question:

5) As a DM, if I let the monsters have something (Class, skills, spells, etc), should I allow the same for the PCs? Like if I said "Ok this this feat is not allowed" then turn around and give it to a monster/NPC, should I then allow the PCs to have access to it or no?

It's perfectly OK for monsters to have access to abilities that the players don't. Dragons have breath weapons, spiders generate poison internally, giants have great height, etc. Why should a feat, skill, or spell be any different?

The monster has it if it would be good for the game for the monster to have it, and the PCs have it if it would help the game for the PCs to have it. These are different questions and can certainly have different answers.


6) As a DM, should you lie to the players at all? Like if you have a homebrew setting and you tell the players "There are no dragons in this setting what so ever" but you have the only dragon in the world as the BBEG, how troublesome would that be? I ask because in the past I've had issues with telling the players "Oh yeah werewolves exist" only to see the PCs turn around and start buying silver weapons with no reason IC to do so. So, um, basically is it alright to lie to your players about certain things if they can't be trusted to RP those things?

You don't have to. They won't listen as carefully as you speak.

"You've never heard of any dragons anywhere in the world. You don't even know the word."

They won't remember what you said, only that there aren't any any dragons. When they finally find one, you will have trouble convincing them that you didn't lie to them, because they will only remember that you said dragons don't exist.

It also helps if you routinely tell them only what they should know.

PC: What's the name of the town to the north?
DM: Who are you asking?

If you never speak from the DM's omniscience, then they will be a little likelier, after the fact, to believe that you didn't lie when you didn't.

In my current game, the 3rd-level cleric believes that Detect Evil doesn't pick up alignments in my world, because she grew up in a tiny village with no evil people, and I told her that she's never detected an evil person with it.

[Airk]

To answer the question no one else has:

Campaign Cartographer is a super powerful tool, and I can't think of anything better for making world maps. However, it does have quite a learning curve. The end result will be a great map, but especially the first time, it's going to take a long time to get there. It doesn't hurt if you have art skills or some dollars to throw at tile packs and the like either.

[Craft (Cheese)]

1) Wandering DMPCs showing up as rumor ("Did you hear X recently came back from Y? They found Z there! I didn't know those existed any more!") or in fluff (Descriptive journal entries regarding locations) with the possibility of the PCs running into them ("Oh hey you guys are exploring [location]? Neat, we should team up for it."). Yea or Nay?

Strong nay on this one.


2) Homebrew monsters: At what point is it too much? I'm toying with the idea of adding in some Monster Hunter type apex predators for a few areas but I don't really want them to be too much (Predators in question being the Lagiacrus and Zinogre).

The point where it's too much is the point where you get sick of designing the monsters.


4) Does everything need a description on how it functions or why it is the way that it is? Like "How do the clockwork creatures of the Gear Wastes reproduce and grow?" "Um, they just do?" "Why is the Principality of the Moon mostly lycanthropes?" "Um...why not?" I know that as the DM I outta have some general idea for how things work, but do I really need to come up with all the complex little hows and whys and such?

It's okay to answer some questions with "Nobody knows" or "It's a mystery." Generally though if something would be common knowledge in the setting, you need to have a satisfactory answer prepared.


5) As a DM, if I let the monsters have something (Class, skills, spells, etc), should I allow the same for the PCs? Like if I said "Ok this this feat is not allowed" then turn around and give it to a monster/NPC, should I then allow the PCs to have access to it or no?

You shouldn't do this with things you've explicitly banned: AKA banning druids and then having a straight-up Venomfire build as a BBEG. That just makes it look like you're making exceptions for your precious NPCs. I think it's fine to do this with homebrewed stuff though, but you should be prepared for the possibility of, say, players trying to learn homebrewed spells they saw a bad guy use, or try to take that sweet magic item away from the BBEG.


6) As a DM, should you lie to the players at all? Like if you have a homebrew setting and you tell the players "There are no dragons in this setting what so ever" but you have the only dragon in the world as the BBEG, how troublesome would that be? I ask because in the past I've had issues with telling the players "Oh yeah werewolves exist" only to see the PCs turn around and start buying silver weapons with no reason IC to do so. So, um, basically is it alright to lie to your players about certain things if they can't be trusted to RP those things?

Always give information about the world from an in-character perspective: Don't say "In this setting, dragons don't exist" say "The last of the dragons were slain long ago, at the Battle of Isrelkaer. Nobody's seen one in thousands of years." It's not really lying, it's just that the vast majority of the setting (and thus, the PCs) are misinformed.

On the other hand, if the existence of werewolves is common knowledge in the setting, that's a perfectly good IC reason for getting silvered weapons just in case you run into one.