What extent does Player knowledge and experience transparency effect your group(s)

[stoutstien]

This is a subject I've been thinking on a lot the last couple of days. to my knowledge I don't think the subject is covered at all and any printed material released.
As the title states: what level of transparency do you as a player or as a DM have with the rest of the group in regards to game mastery, familiarization with npc ablitlies, knowledge of printed modules, and so on.
My personal philosophy is complete transparency. I believe the more I know about the players the better I can challenge them and fulfill their motivations for playing the game.
I've Had new players sitting down at a game I was running initially they were taken back when I asked them so I'm wondering if I am the odd man out here.

[ImproperJustice]

It can really vary by table, and I think it is largely based on the relationship players hbe with their DM.

Some groups play DM vs. Player, and some go for a much more collaborative approach where play is like a discussion.

[SociopathFriend]

Both of my DMs ask on occasion to see our character sheets- though for one it's mainly for perception stats while the other very much does look over your sheet to see what you can do and provide challenges for you to deal with. The latter is a more experienced DM and is entirely okay with throwing nasty stuff at you and letting you crawl away if you can't handle it.

Granted the more experienced DM has been playing with players making stupider decisions so that may have something to do with why we generally have deadlier encounters. If the players won't learn (and this is deliberate not learning for some of their parts) then he's not going to feel bad if they die.

[ImproperJustice]

Our GM keeps copies of our sheets on file in case we lose them.
It also helps him balance encounters and design moments for us to shine, and to occasionally challenge our weaknesses (which leads to greater teamwork.)

Additionally, he will adjust loot stashes to include a few goodies appealing to our PCs at times.

We have a pretty good relationship with our Gm.
We always allow his villains to finish their monologues and go along with the occasional “your captured plot”.

The end result being more monologues and a solvable deatg trap overseen by a single inept guard and all our stuff not to far from the dungeon.

[stoutstien]

Our GM keeps copies of our sheets on file in case we lose them.
It also helps him balance encounters and design moments for us to shine, and to occasionally challenge our weaknesses (which leads to greater teamwork.)

Additionally, he will adjust loot stashes to include a few goodies appealing to our PCs at times.

We have a pretty good relationship with our Gm.
We always allow his villains to finish their monologues and go along with the occasional “your captured plot”.

The end result being more monologues and a solvable deatg trap overseen by a single inept guard and all our stuff not to far from the dungeon.
That's great
Villian: .... and after I defile your.....why aren't you attacking?"
Party: "that would be rude. Please continue there will be plenty of time for all that when you are done."

On a serious note how this DM determine player knowledge and how?

[Trustypeaches]

I ask that my players be pretty honest about how much they know about the game, but in the end it barely even matters when the game I run is 90% homebrew. I don't use anything from WotC without editing it somehow.

[solidork]

In our game, we would be perfectly fine with our DM looking at our sheets.

As players, we try to actively minimize any prior knowledge of monsters/modules. I think if I had read any of the published campaigns we are playing through I probably would have told my DM at the start.

Edit: In fact, someone posted major spoilers for SKT on here without warning and I told my GM that I got spoiled in that aspect. I don't know if is going to change how things play out though.

[ImproperJustice]

That's great
Villian: .... and after I defile your.....why aren't you attacking?"
Party: "that would be rude. Please continue there will be plenty of time for all that when you are done."

On a serious note how this DM determine player knowledge and how?

As a general rule, we keep player and character knowledge seperate.
Proficiency checks are required to recall info about enemies.
I think it just comes down to we are all adults, we want to have a good time. We want to be challenged and not cheat, and we want to respect our GM who tool time out of his life to build exciting moments for us all to share.
Every once in a blue moon, if someone over reaches with player knowledge, he just says:
“Yes, but does Maleaf the Fire Knight know that Fire Giants are immune to fire?”

Player of Maleaf: Can I make a check?
GM: Roll History or Nature and give yourself advantage since your Military Unit from your background has lilely crossed paths with them before in Brimstone Peaks (part of their native kingdom).

Does that help?

[Sigreid]

The people I play with all are experienced and know a lot. They're also good players and will make decisions based on what their character likely would think they know most of the time. IMO a good player will act in accordance with what they believe their character would think as part of good roll playing.

Edit: Goes the other way too. I expect the DM to have mobs act in accordance to what they know or would likely assume about the party. No enemy should have the party perfectly figured out the first go around.

[Pex]

As long as the DM doesn't get hypersensitive about it it won't matter. It can go too far. What makes it too far is likely subjective but everyone will know it when it happens even the casual DM will call it out and everyone agrees to dial it back. It's the fine line between good player tactics and gaming the system.

[Tawmis]

This is a subject I've been thinking on a lot the last couple of days. to my knowledge I don't think the subject is covered at all and any printed material released.
As the title states: what level of transparency do you as a player or as a DM have with the rest of the group in regards to game mastery, familiarization with npc ablitlies, knowledge of printed modules, and so on.
My personal philosophy is complete transparency. I believe the more I know about the players the better I can challenge them and fulfill their motivations for playing the game.
I've Had new players sitting down at a game I was running initially they were taken back when I asked them so I'm wondering if I am the odd man out here.

For a long discussion about this:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?574081-Metagaming-isn-t-a-bad-word-Change-my-mind

[stoutstien]

As long as the DM doesn't get hypersensitive about it it won't matter. It can go too far. What makes it too far is likely subjective but everyone will know it when it happens even the casual DM will call it out and everyone agrees to dial it back. It's the fine line between good player tactics and gaming the system.

It's more all the lines that are players comfortable just telling their DMs that they are aware of some of mechanical parts of the game. I've noticed a lot of younger or unexperienced DM's use a single trait as the sole factor for determining how hard are easy a specific encounter is.
I hate using trolls again but it's a npc that most people are familiar with and ironically that could potentially be the problem.
A trolls offensive is decent with a good +hit and three attacks for ok damage but with only 15 ac and 84 hp it falls into the semi glass cannon style npc. a standard party at lv 4 could take it down in two rounds or if it had any self preservation instincts, low enough for it to attempt to flee. (A optimized party can take out a troll in one round) Enter regeneration. which in theory would increase the trolls hp by 30. Now it may squeeze an Extra round out with regeneration and man it's fun when players figure out how to counter it.
you say a player can RP and not take advantage of there own experience but I still think it impacts the players enjoyment.
Sometimes I feel like role-playing expectations can hinder play.

[stoutstien]

For a long discussion about this:
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?574081-Metagaming-isn-t-a-bad-word-Change-my-mind
Im speaking of players expectations almost conflicting with each other

[Pex]

It's more all the lines that are players comfortable just telling their DMs that they are aware of some of mechanical parts of the game. I've noticed a lot of younger or unexperienced DM's use a single trait as the sole factor for determining how hard are easy a specific encounter is.
I hate using trolls again but it's a npc that most people are familiar with and ironically that could potentially be the problem.
A trolls offensive is decent with a good +hit and three attacks for ok damage but with only 15 ac and 84 hp it falls into the semi glass cannon style npc. a standard party at lv 4 could take it down in two rounds or if it had any self preservation instincts, low enough for it to attempt to flee. (A optimized party can take out a troll in one round) Enter regeneration. which in theory would increase the trolls hp by 30. Now it may squeeze an Extra round out with regeneration and man it's fun when players figure out how to counter it.
you say a player can RP and not take advantage of there own experience but I still think it impacts the players enjoyment.
Sometimes I feel like role-playing expectations can hinder play.

If everyone is an experienced player are they supposed to play dumb and not use fire or acid? The DM should not be so sensitive about it. There's enough mystery to happen in trying to find out what's going on in the campaign plot. That's where player discoveries happen to get the AHA! moment. A wizard casting Fire Bolt instead of Ray of Frost against the troll should not make the DM rage in protest shouting about metagaming.

[stoutstien]

If everyone is an experienced player are they supposed to play dumb and not use fire or acid? The DM should not be so sensitive about it. There's enough mystery to happen in trying to find out what's going on in the campaign plot. That's where player discoveries happen to get the AHA! moment. A wizard casting Fire Bolt instead of Ray of Frost against the troll should not make the DM rage in protest shouting about metagaming.
Not the issue at hand. Does this reduce players enjoyment or sense of accomplishment. The DM vs player idea is an much more covulr issue

[djreynolds]

Make players roll checks... to see if the character knows things.

Sounds silly, but the dice are fair. You determine the DC.

In the heat of combat, the DC could be higher than normal.

[kamap]

At our table we try and act our characters but sometimes we do stuff our characters couldn't or shouldn't be able to do / know but there haven't been any real big problems and if there are we will talk about it like adults and change accordingly.

I haven't got a problem with the other players and DM knowing what my character is capable of nor his background and secrets. As long as they can keep it seperated from in game and out game. Which for the moment aint a problem.
There are others in our group that like to have their secrets and won't share it till it is a good time in game and no one finds it annoying except sometimes the DM cause she can't really plan anything around it if she doesn't know about it now can she.

[Astofel]

As a DM I'd say I'm very open with my players and we have a very good relationship. I'll typically let them know what spells the enemies are casting and often read the description, too. After all, I can't help but know the same things about their characters, it's only fair. I usually end up reading the descriptions or at least giving durations for special monster abilities, and after a few rolls I might tell them what the monster's AC/Save DC/attack bonus is. By that point they've already figured out if it's relatively high or low anyway, and all I'm doing is satisfying curiosity. I never tell them HP unless the monster is already dead though, but I will tell them how close it is to death's door in a roundabout manner.

When it comes to my players' separation of their ooc knowledge and their PCs' knowledge I'm also fairly lenient. My default response to 'would my character know that?' is 'idk man, you tell me, it's your character'. It helps that my players are good at knowing when having that knowledge is justifiable or not, to the extent that I wonder why they bother asking me if they'd know in the first place. As an example I recently ran a session where I gave the players some tribal warrior NPCs unfamiliar with magic to run, and had a combat where they had to deal with spells like Hypnotic Pattern and Dominate Monster. They did a great job of having the NPCs react appropriately, I think one player had their NPC try to reason with the Dominated barbarian, then resorting to attacking him in self defense when that failed and snapping him out of it.

[Pelle]

you say a player can RP and not take advantage of there own experience but I still think it impacts the players enjoyment.
Sometimes I feel like role-playing expectations can hinder play.

This depends entirely on how and why your group play the game. If the goal of the players is to win, playing it competetively as a game, it may reduce enjoyment. If the main goal is instead to create a memorable story, to improvise fun stuff in the moment, then deciding that your character does not know the troll weakness might make the scene more fun for the players, even though it's worse for the character. My group is a little of both.

[mephnick]

When I started in the hobby, player skill was paramount. No one cared about "what their character would know". Games were a test of the player to see if you could get a pawn through to retirement.

I can force myself to not shoot fire at a troll, but I find it annoying and, honestly, pointless. I feel like the current generation of players has swung way to far to the RP side of the game and completely forgotten about the G part. It is good to be "good" at DnD. I don't get any satisfaction from throwing a Firebolt at an Ice Devil and finding out "GASP, FIRE DOESN'T HURT IT". What about that experience is supposed to be fun for me?

As a GM I design things completely independent of group details. Hell, I didn't even learn most of the class abilities until a few years into 5e. Not my job.

[Demonslayer666]

We play that player knowledge is separate from character knowledge.

[KorvinStarmast]

When I started in the hobby, player skill was paramount. No one cared about "what their character would know". Games were a test of the player to see if you could get a pawn through to retirement.

I can force myself to not shoot fire at a troll, but I find it annoying and, honestly, pointless. Yeah. But I will say that, particularly when the party got split up but the DM didn't make us all leave the room, we'd get the "you don't know that, those guys are somewhere else" from the DM. And rightly so.

[stoutstien]

Once again I'm not talking about the semantics of player knowledge versus character knowledge and how and when to separate it. I'm speaking of knowledge the player has having an impact on overall feel of a particular challenge.
Battleship is only fun if you don't know where the other players ships are. players get enjoyment out of using different strategies to discover the location. Oversimplification of the issue but it works I the same regard.
When you watch a particular movie a second time your emotional response is changed.
you know the plot, now you focus on different elements.
It's a common thing to have a table players where one or two are vastly more knowledgeable then the other players. I've heard stories of these players being jerks and telling the new players spoilers for the lack of a better word. Setting that aside I feel it's the dms responsibilities two equally engage the new and experienced players at the same time which can be difficult.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I'm fortunate that most of my players put roleplaying ahead of silly things like 'survival'. My own players ask me if they realize that a troll is weak to fire and acid. And if I say "probably", some of them will roll a d20 completely independent of what I told them to decide whether they know or not. They like the idea of playing ignorance on purpose.

But we do have other players that don't do this, and it does cause some culture shock. When I DM I frankly don't care, but if most of my table does, it becomes a problem. I try to work with them on roleplaying terms as best I can to appease the group, but it's normally not me that goes to them. It's the other players.

When I'm playing, I also roleplay a certain level of ignorance. I like to blend my roleplaying and my gaming, and I enjoy the challenge of purposely ignoring preferable tactics in pursuit of less obvious ones. I learned to do this relatively early into my career, since a lot of my DM's are previously players of mine, and they often come to me for advice when writing their games. This gives me a certain insight into the story that could make things unfun if I acted upon it, so I don't. Even if I know the solution to a puzzle, I consider that knowledge a failsafe just in case the rest of the party can't figure it out but the DM needs us to clear it. Unless we get to that point, I won't solve those puzzles.

[stoutstien]

When I'm playing, I also roleplay a certain level of ignorance. I like to blend my roleplaying and my gaming, and I enjoy the challenge of purposely ignoring preferable tactics in pursuit of less obvious ones. I learned to do this relatively early into my career, since a lot of my DM's are previously players of mine, and they often come to me for advice when writing their games. This gives me a certain insight into the story that could make things unfun if I acted upon it, so I don't. Even if I know the solution to a puzzle, I consider that knowledge a failsafe just in case the rest of the party can't figure it out but the DM needs us to clear it. Unless we get to that point, I won't solve those puzzles.
That is a place I fill as well the few times I am not DM. I also tend to play more support/buff focus PC. The other players know that I know but I let them take the lead.(I love playing character with precognitive abilities so it's easy to rp my knowledge as Foresight)

I'm curious how this goes with tables with high turnover.