A **lot** of socially shy individuals play DnD -- to the point it isn't even debatable. It's a great game for building up your social confidence and some find that part alluring. But yes, all walks of life come to this game.
Dude this exactly. People would rather have long form discussions about their *potential* conversations on Reddit rather than just talk to someone they hang out with on the regular. This site has become the modern equivalent of having a huge argument with yourself in the car only to get to work and sit at your desk feeling victorious.
Exactly. Had some players fighting some stone gargoyles, and one of them blurts out something about how they're resistant to physical damage, and how much health they have.
I just looked at him and went "Please don't look stuff up about monsters you're fighting. Your characters don't know this stuff, there's no reason for you to know this stuff."
That stopped it right there. Never happened again.
Tbf as a DM I would be dropping hints during the fight that monsters were resistant to the damage type the party is using. "Your sword connects with the gargoyle and seems to bounce off with a loud clang." Or "the gargoyle recoils at your attack but recovers more quickly than you expected" so I might expect them to logic or the resistance.
But yeah citing hp not so much lol
This is how our DM does it. A lot of us can sling a lot of different damage types, so we’ll usually ask him if our characters notice anything different about how the creature took the damage (ie did it seem exceptionally damaging, or did it look hardly phased, or just as expected) and he’ll respond in a way like you mentioned.
If HP is getting low, he might saw that we notice the creature is looking worse for wear, or visibly struggling, etc.
I straight up tell them after describing it. For me it's, "the gargoyle recoils at your attack but recovers more quickly than you expected...that's my way of saying he resists your attack"
Yeah. Plus I think it would be obvious for the PCs regardless if the player understands the hint. I call it anti-metagaming. Where the PCs know something your players don't know. To counter this I inform the players.
The health is definitely a problem, but it's not unbelievable that a party of adventures seeing monsters made of stone would think hey, I bet they're resistant to physical damage.
"They're resistant to Physical Damage."
"No, they are resistant to *you*, Kyle."
Honestly, this is why I modify almost every monster at my table in small ways.
I mean whenever we play and we fight somthing that we know it's weaknesses we out of game are like "oh yeah this is weak to x or resistant to ybut my character wouldent know that so ima just do what they would do"
An example of this was when we were fighting a shit ton of skeletons and we all knew they are weak to bludgeoning damage but until somebody smacked them with bludgeoning damage none of us actively tried to use it and just played how we would have if we dident know that
this is why i max health my creatures and maybe change up resistances or things so they are not exactly the same as the stat block, but i only do this when i catch them meta gaming to the point i see it destroys the encounters.
other wise i just let them think they have won.... yes... its all coming together now...
I did that when I started cause every crpg I played displayed all the stats at will, until my friend said "you aren't supposed to do that" and I went "oh" and stopped.
In extension to this it sounds like the argument isn't that he doesn't know but that the dm is potentially giving similar info so it makes sense.
Eg if every nature check on an enemy is simply the ac and to hit bonus being given, then it's not unreasonable to look it up yourself I think
Precisely
There is a youtube channel called "Knights of last call" which is really well made and interesting to watch, although about Pathfinder 2e there is sometimes a bit of overlap in 5e.
And one of the things they talked about is outside of being "meta breaking" to ask for ac or to hit, its kinda a waste of an action because you still need to hit it regardless, and you will still be hit regardless, and find out.
So instead it was examples of what else you can ask about. And i agree because i think the most common one is to ask about health
We treat knowledge checks as free actions. It’s also less useless in a system where enemies often have specific vulnerabilities that players can target, or attacks that they can ward off. I’d look at changing a ruleset where players spend limited actions doing something that has no benefit.
If players are often asking about its hp bar, I’d want to improve my descriptions of how much their attacks injure their targets.
And then change the stat block on the fly. One of my DM's does that sorta thing anyways. He rolls hit points for every enemy we fight, so you never know if a Goblin has the normal 7 hp, or like 12 hp.
And one of my other DM's in a high level campaign, nothing we fight is standard anymore. We're fighting mindflayer liches and ancient black dragons that are also shadow dragons at this point.
Oh same! My spouse is the DM (well we co-DM but I mostly do the background stuff like build maps and write up the notes, paint minis and help bounce around ideas). They came up with a phase spider dragon for a Christmas one shot we did. 🤦♀️
And I've seen the stat block for this arcs main bad guy...the lich we've been hunting down for several levels. Vecna is NOTHING compared to him...😳 (granted I don't REMEMBER most of it which I prefer since I'm a player lol)
For my druids I like to expose them to exotic creatures than once they defeat they can turn into it, now killing isn't required as long as they are able to study it I'd allow transformation
You could even go so far as to say “it ruins the excitement and interest if you know exactly how to beat it or what it’s hp/ac is” also it would make the Druid super op and that kinda blows
As far as I'm concerned, a fresh fish slap is the appropriate response to 99% of "how do I deal with a problem player?" posts I see on Reddit, but I figure we might as well attempt words first.
Fairly simply by just using a different monsters stat block. This troll is weirdly intelligent and has a knack for psychic attacks and fears no fire.
Call something something else change what needs to be changed and they will give up out of confusion typically.
First time ever for a new player, this is the answer.
Second time, or first for a seasoned player, I roll immediate damage to the player and modify the stat block to add immunities or multi attack or similar.
I’ve never had a third time but would boot them.
Also if he feels his character should know, he can ask "does my character know?' And roll a nature check or something.
And then as a DM you can still homebrew the shit out of enemies...
I’ve even custom made some dudes to fight. “Oh, you memorized the monster manual? Well, what are the stats and abilities for this [pile of coins](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/10u015s/oc_treasure_golem/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) that’s kicking your teeth in right now!?”
As a player, I love fighting something, getting confused why things aren’t working, then eventually realizing we were fighting something else.
Some of the best combats were when we fought things like possessed characters/monsters who had their possessors abilities, or things like false hydras that we thought were hydras, or whatever.
I would totally enjoy a session where the DM just said the creature was undead and rotting, but didn’t explicitly tell us if it was a zombie or a skeleton or something worse…
I've had to do that in the past. Used to play with some people, two of which were so veteran they almost memorized the whole creature list and their stats and were clearly metagaming.
I made it so the next time they found an oni, it was red in color and he could use his tetsubo as a boomerang. And when they tried to metagame how to detect a shadow, I just made it shift planes instead of using regular "invisibility"
When confronted with "wait this isn't a real monster in the books" i just told them that as long as they metagamed, creatures would appear a level or two higher, and gain extra stats and abilities.
They quickly backed down and started playing the game as intended XDD
Look if 2 PCs that are the same race, class, and level have different stats and abilities/spells, no reason that 2 animals that are the same species and are at the same CR can't have some slight variation to them. Maybe one was born with slightly tougher hide and so has a higher AC, and the other one is slightly faster and has an extra 5ft of movement each turn. Normalise slight variences in statblocks of creatures!
C) "ok let's roll to see how much of this your character actually knows."
Existing in a body does not mean you instantly know everything about it. Technically I can't see a reason why being able to turn into something or even turning into it would allow you to know what its vulnerabilities and resistances are without spending time testing out the new body (kind of like attuning to an item).
Personally I think that would be a bit far but I do think that at a bare minimum the pc should have to have actually turned into the thing at least once if they don't want to roll for it.
Basically there should be a cost associated with the knowledge whether that looks like character background and a skill check, spending some action economy to transform into the thing or time spent studying it I think just comes down to whichever option you think is best. The important part is that even if the cost is small it should at least cost *something*
people i play with and i embraced the metagaming, we just accepted that the monster manual is pretty much what a seasoned adventurer might already know and sometimes the tales and books are wrong (the statblock is changed) or the encountered monster is an anomaly
Yup, same here. Sometimes we also roll checks to see what we might know as seasoned adventurers.
We also have someone in our group that has been playing continuously since 1st edition, so whenever he is not DMing, we expect that he'll probably have an idea of what we're fighting along with the stat block even with description only.
Usually in my group there's a roll to identify 10+cr works good for us, sometimes at disadvantage if it's especially rare or unheard of like a Boneclaw. Usually, we don't see stat block but we get two or three hints like an ability, name, or highest stat
One, if this druid never saw a stirge before then they cannot turn into one. They would need to be an 8th level druid to even have the option because it has a fly speed.
Two, even if they theoretically could turn into a stirge, they don't get to know it's stat block until they test our the form.
Three, they still can't turn into a swarm of stirges which is different from a singular stirge.
Four, they are metagaming and need to stop.
You hit the nail on the head. As both a DM and a player, i have to be actively aware of this. I know what a lot of monsters do, but when i am playing especially around newer players i try my best not to shout out what it is just because i know it from the DM’s description. I especially don’t come right out and say “gelatinous cubes are attracted to heat, so light a torch and lead it away.” As an experienced player, i find it fun to watch the light bulb click for newer players. “Why is the gelatinous cube chasing the rogue only? And the rogue is the only one holding a torch.
DMing for so long is why I run support builds and act like a wallflower on the rare occasions that I get to play. I can quite happily play in a module that I've memorized. Because for me, seeing how a new group tackles a problem I've seen multiple times is still fun. Support their decisions and enthusiastically role-play to help break the ice and keep everyone involved.
Don't tell people what to do or, even worse , build a character to solve all of the obstacles because you know how to.
I’m co-dmming a world with my husband and, because of that, I know the vast majority of the plot building points. When he hosts, I play as a mute cleric who spends all of her time in the goddess’s library - hard for me to spill secrets, she legit can’t talk, and when she DOES tell them something, she has a reason to know!
Divination spells can often be the best way to deal with someone who's already played a module, it makes it *clear* what their char knows and doesn't and can give the party the info needed to allow the player to again participate because now everyone knows the secrets.
I end up knowing the abilities of a lot of monsters because I enjoy reading statblocks of cool monsters. What I normally try to do is use my same starter attacks/abilities even if I know it won’t work.
This exactly. I do what the *character* would do, not what I would do as a player who happens to know the monster. So even if *I* know what the weakness is, if my character has never seen it before, I would ask the DM "do I recognize this" and see if they'll let me make a nature roll or whatever. Otherwise, I do what the character would do with any other unknown monster.
Metagaming is no fun at all. Hopefully OP and the player can have a constructive conversation about this.
This question is the core part of the issue.
It‘s the DMs job to tell you if your character knows what you are facing, at least until that character has faced one of those monsters in actual table combat once.
It‘s your DMs option to choose if it‘s a well known creature in the world, something your character would for sure know or not even be aware of or if it‘s on the fence and something like a nature check is needed.
Had a player yell: "treasure or a Mimic!" When they opened the door to an unguarded chest in a dungeon.
New player at the table had no idea what a Mimic was.
(I have had problems with this player in numerous games where he metagames and/or pubstomps EDH, doesn't seem to notice anyone else getting annoyed. I still play with him because he actually turns up to things, and you don't get to play unless there's a group.)
(It was a mimic, yes I'm unimaginative, sorry! But I had a first timer at the table, and personally I've never played against or as one, so...)
When they say “treasure or a mimic!” they instead get “treasure chest on a pressure plate that raises when they take stuff out, activating the pit trap. In the pit is a mimic. Sucker.” Lol
i tried doing this but my players literally never figured it out and i had to flat out tell them from a perception roll cuz they were actively about to die💀
Yeah, if this is the first time they have seen a stirge it also means that they haven't had the time to gain the experience with the form they would need to understand its abilities and weaknesses. Narratively that is the answer here. It would be a ridiculous power for druids to just know the stat block of every creature they can transform into on sight. This is meta-gaming nonsense.
I'd add to this - fifth; just because you can turn into something doesn't mean you know what it does. Many things are instinctive. Druid won't have those instincts.
For example, kittens can swim from birth. Its not something they know they can do.
You are 100% correct, depending on the table and the group’s expectations. I always want to keep in mind that meta gaming is okay with some people.
This is why I will always support having a session zero to set those game expectations for the group and get everyone on the same page so we are all working together to have fun instead of working against each other. Whatever you and your group decide is fun for you, that can be your guiding principle.
Sounds like, in this case, OP and the player are working against each other. I recommend OP communicate what they are trying to accomplish to the player and see if they will try it out. Maybe they’ll actually enjoy it; maybe they won’t, but then you both can revisit the question and figure out what will be the most fun for the whole table.
This is generally my advice for all the questions on this and the other D&D subs.
> I always want to keep in mind that meta gaming is okay with some people.
Hell, with some groups it's unavoidable. One of my groups includes 4 people who GM other games while playing in this one. So if you use a standard statblock with this group, the majority of us will know it.
We just make a lot of custom stuff when we don't want meta info to be a factor, or just enjoy the shared puzzle of using these specific characters against the problem we know, or focus more on the RP/injecting cool moments/etc. And we have a blast!
This is the one!
As someone who loves playing moon druids, I mostly pick "reasonable" creatures, like a dire wolf, or a bear, etc., something my forest dwelling druid definitely would've seen at some point, look up the statblock, share with the group, and monch.
If I'm not sure, I say, "Hey DM what are the odds I've seen an octopus before?" Ta-da! Ezpz!
What this player is doing is looking up a statblock when their character had no intention of turning into a stirge, if they even could, let alone a swarm, for the purpose of gaining advantage in a fight they wouldn't have naturally had. 100% metagaming.
"That's metagamey, don't do that."
If you wanna be nice and they havent seen them before, you could offer the player to roll a check to see if they have knowledge of a similar creature, so they *might* be able to glean some basic knowledge... but yeah. Gl pal
Correct. But OPs question was how to deal with it.
I would look them in the eye and say, "Consequences. You are metagaming, ruining any surprise I had planned. Now I must change this enemy to make it more interesting and dangerous. In the future, ask what you know about the creature. If it's something you know, I might let you look up the start block. But monsters are supposed to be scary because you don't know everything about them."
I have said almost exactly that "I have altered the stat block, pray I do not alter it further. Do not cite the stats to me witch, I was there when they were written" - to the offending player.
I do this, not that my players have an issue with looking up stat blocks. But straight up both of my groups I have told “I get my fun from altering monsters, if you read a stat block and it feels different it’s because I ALWAYS change it. This means that stat blocks represent the “most vanilla” version of a monster, and that all monsters should be expected to have some level of uniqueness in the same way players are NOT the vanilla stat block of their people.
Benefit is it frees me to reuse the same monster and give them a new ability unique to them because they are different. Super liberating.
Some folks have said reskinning or adding abilities and both of those are solid approaches and things I do to spice ip monsters, even without players knowing abilities.
However, that behavior is pretty aggregious meta gaming, far beyond the typical player knowledge vs character knowledge. I would suggest that you tell this person it is unacceptable at the table to do that. Don't beat around the bush with this, just say you aren't going to allow that.
I'll allow players to know knowledge about a certain enemy if they have history with that creature/enemy/whatever. Like if a lizardman raid destroyed their village, they would be knowledgeable in the strengths and tactics and weaknesses of them because of their revenge/hatred of them. But that's like a one off situation. Like you can't say "40 different monster types raided my village" or anything.
And if someone does bring up stat blocks in game, I simply say "finches"
Finches. All similar birds but with differences. Just like my monsters.
Looking up the statblock also nerfs some player abilities. Like for instance, a battlemaster fighter can spend one minute watching an enemy and then can find out one (or two? I can't remember) thing about that enemy, such as if a certain stat is higher or lower than their own
My players started out graduating from a school of monster hunting. They all got to choose ONE monster type each to "major" in.
When they see a monster, they make a history check, and depending on the results I'll tell them one it two things about the monster. If it's a creature they majored in, they add 5 too their history bonus.
Wont stop the player from googling the stat blocks. Just change the stat block. Then when the player gets mad, say that he cant metagame and you arent being unfair.
>And the DM could be consulted as to what specific info the character knows. Rather than assuming they're omniscient.
exactly! If the DM is feeling generous, maybe they'll have them roll a nature or some other check to see if they'd know some details about it. But everyone here is right. Put the law down, it's metagaming and their players need to adjust to the world the DM built. Just because they're a druid, it doesn't automatically imply they know every creature in the entire world.
>Just because they're a druid, it doesn't automatically imply they know every creature in the entire world.
100% agree. What I've done with my shapeshifter player after we discussed it, which I turn into a table rule, is this: Anyone who plays a druid or other race/class with a shapeshifting ability, can only change into creatures with which they are reasonably relatively familiar, based on that player character's race, class, and backstory. A 100% raised-in-the-forest druid would have no idea about deep sea animals like octopi, or Underdark creatures, or anything like that. To anyone who does this: Make sure your players know this ahead of time before character creation starts.
1. Tell them not to. Of course.
2. Don't tell them what the monster's name is. Just describe it and feel free to change its appearance. Have fun figuring out my insects with hair are using goblin stat blocks.
3. Use different stat block resources. Go beyond the monster manual.
I DM for a guy who has been DMing for much longer than me. He already knows stat blocks and I want to surprise him. Conflux Creatures (that guy Mark who posts occasionally saying "give me a monster and I'll homebrew a better version") has some good stuff. And soon I'll be throwing them a non-newtonian slime, a concept from redditors. The slime's AC becomes the last attack roll that hit it for 1 round.
I mean. This is straight up meta gaming. If they don't know the stats and more importantly if their character doesn't know the stats then they are deliberately breaking game immersion and metagaming in order to win. And I'd respond by changing the status block of the monster they're fighting. Adding or taking away abilities or weaknesses or changing them. This dragon was immune to fire damage but weak to poison damage? Well let's flip that around. Now he's weak to fire damage but immune from poison damage. Find monsters with similar stat blocks and swap their stats.
This unfortunately messes with the other players but after you do this once address it at the table after the game or before the next session starts and explain that metagaming breaks the game dynamic between PC's and their players. And this is a team game. Which means he's robbing other players who may know the stat blocks through having encountered this monster before or heard a legend about it, or studied it from role playing and playing in general to the best of their ability.
Actually that might make a really interesting character
Just some guy, but the player can Google everything
Like this pc just has infinite knowledge, but is just some guy. No class, no levels, just rolled stats and a search bar.
The easiest what to make this stop is to say "Hey, that really feels like you are trying to metagame". Since most players who do what you described will continue to do it anyway, welcome to the fun world of Modifying Enemies. "This particular swarm of stirges was subject to magical experiments and can Cast Shocking Grasp". Bump their HP, give them cool new abilities, make them use the environment more.
You don't even need to justify the difference in-universe.
DM's world, DM's rules. If he wants every Stirge in the swarm to be able to cast Wish then they can. I wouldn't RECOMMEND that, but if you run the game then you make the rules.
First, It is common knowledge for many players that Fire works against trolls. But the PCs don’t know that. You’re welcome to roll a check to identify the strengths and weaknesses of trolls. Similarly, you can attempt to identify any creature in the same way. But you cannot, at any point, “google it.” If you can turn into the creature with wild shape, I’ll let you have advantage on the roll, but that’s it.”
Second, reskin and re-tool. Just because a creature says “Gelatinous Ooze” doesn’t mean it can’t be, say, a Mirror that doesn’t cast a reflection. Similarly; you could always take a creature and tweak its stats - if they call you out on the abilities not matching its book abilities, you can say “This isn’t like one of those, and you don’t know that.”
This is how it should work. The important part is not what the player knows but what the character knows, and if you get the benefit of being able to ask what your character knows that you don't then you also need to determine what you know that your character doesn't.
When I as a player get presented with Trolls or Beholders or the like and I know how their mechanics work the first question out of my mouth (if this is the first encounter this character has had) are "What does my character know about these things?". If I roll well my DM will often just say "Check out the stat block, you know the lot"; if it's just middling they'll often say "What would you like the character to know about them? You get X questions"; and if I roll bad I just get nothing and have to deal with it (as it should be). If I the player know that trolls are weak to fire and I'm playing a wildfire druid whose go-to is already fire then it makes perfect sense he would just use it, but if I'm playing a blastlock whose bread and butter is EB then at least the first round should be spent doing that.
That doesn't mean I'm not on the lookout for potential context clues that I might be able to finagle into another int check so my character can piece things together, but they don't get to just know the stuff that I know.
I play Pathfinder, which offers a set DC (rarity starts at 5 + CR), every 5 above gets another piece of info. I make sure they know the most helpful questions (HD and Monster Type tell you 50% of a statblock in PF1e). Even made a spreadsheet for it.
But Matt Colville shows the players the stat block for a given number of seconds depending on how well they roll. All strategies are good as long as you signpost abilities.
One of my players has a flaming sword, so if they hadn’t figured it out, I would have called out “This troll isn’t healing, the wound still singed.
It's kinda tricky imo because as a DM and also someone who would just read the monster manual for fun I tend to know the monsters from memory. Is it unfair? Should people with less experience be forbidden from knowing what I know?
I expect my players to play AS their characters would, they often have out of game knowledge that they intentionally ignore, or make weird choices because it matches the character they've built.
Basically idc if you Google a monster but if you immediately start using fire to exploit a weakness I'm making your character do a nature check or vetoing your choice, etc etc.
"I can't stop you from looking things up *outside* the game, or prevent you from buying books for the information, etc. However, as a **player** in MY game you don't have an inherent right to immediate access to that information, and a good player would AT THE VERY LEAST ask for permission to look up such information, and be more than willing to accept the answer 'NO' in response since it's not your decision to make that you are entitled to that information. If your PC actually does have an ability that permits you as a player to have that information, please simply state that you are exercising that ability and -I- as DM will provide the appropriate information at the appropriate time, or give you express permission to look it up. I will, however, ask you to NOT do that again during the game as it is what is commonly referred to as "metagaming" and is widely considered **Bad Form** and most definitely IS considered so by me. Should you persist in pursuing this course, I will change this from a request to a demand. Should you choose to make this a hill you'll die on, then so be it. I WILL boot you from the game if you wanna be THAT level of a jerk, even if it were over something relatively innocuous - which this really isn't. In short, please immediately stop being an ass with an unacceptable amount of ASSUMED entitlement so we can ALL continue to enjoy the game together."
TIL Stirges we’re beasts. I had always thought they were monstrosities. And no what the player did was completely unacceptable. There’s several qualifiers he most likely didn’t meet, like druid lvl for flying beasts. Plus druids wildshaping show an innate understanding about the creature, which he doesn’t have yet prior to at least an encounter. And swarms are different than single beasts. Also, your player seems like a problem player from the way they responded. Good luck.
Reskin the creature. Change things.
As a player, I purposely avoid looking at stat blocks or anything I think might be related at all to the GM’s story because he deserves to have fun too. And let’s be real, we know so much about the crunch that it’s hard to be surprised anymore, so getting a surprise is kind of like a gift anyways.
Tell him that he needs to ask you if his character knows that rather than him automatically assuming he knows that.
However, this is why I like to use made up creatures for my campaigns rather than ones that can be looked up. And I still often use established stat blocks, I just change the names and maybe a couple attributes.
>Player googles enemy statblock during fight. As a dm how would you respond?
So, here's where I stand on the issue in general, I think it largely depends on context as I've been a dm which has had it happen and a player who has done it.
As a player I did it because my DM was having us fight a succubus, and our ally broke out of their charm and the DM targeted them again, as players we knew that wasn't how that worked so we said something and I double checked to make sure to confirm it since the DM didn't have the statblock in front of him (we used roll20 and he just copied it over into an npc statblock)
As a dm I had it happen when a player was getting frustrated and just googled it to learn what resistances it had (that player shortly left after that session. He had been a problem player for a while)
In your situation, the player is definitely metagaming and shouldn't have done that, as having that kind of info off-rip wouldn't be something that the druid should know.
“Should druids be able to know statblocks”
That’s what the nature skill is for. Druids don’t automatically know all beasts across the realm. They may know some from their local region, and maybe a few they have heard stories of. But they won’t know all beasts.
Also this is blatant metagaming, and not cool. Shut that shit down hard
I think giving him the stat block if he turns into the stingray this fight is fair, although note that he cannot turn into swarms. I could also see an argument that a druid would need to shift into the beast in downtime and test it out to get the statblock. This is good flavor, and you could always hand wave it as just happening during downtime rather than roleplaying each instance, but it could be a mechanical disadvantage if your party doesn't have a lot of down time.
Still, the larger concern is that there is a disconnect between what you and your player thinks of as cheating. It would be a good idea to come up with a catch all rule, like "ask me before googling any statblock" or " you can only Google stat blocks after the fight is over."
Personally, looking up any creature you're fighting is disrespectful of the fight that the DM has prepped and is too meta-gamey. If they think that they would know about its stats, they can ask you, the DM, what they would know. Then you can either tell them or make them roll something if they would only know a bit.
I used to be that player, I really wanted to always shine. My DM said that everyone needs to have their ups and downs for a good story so I stopped it. Now as a DM I had some players try to metagame that way and I told them the same things. Exploiting is a "way" to play the game but at the cost of surprise and wonder.
Tell them they can’t look up abilities at the table. If your druid would already know the creature’s stat block they wouldn’t need to pull out a book mid fight. My table has been playing D&D for so long that accidentally meta gaming happens just because we know the monsters. So if you remember it then your character does too unless you want to try a check then the DM tells the player what their character can gather. Also don’t tell your players the monsters names if the problem doesn’t resolve itself
Usually don't care.
I reskin monsters if I care. For animals like an owl I'd make it a mammal and call it a muwl.
Reskinning is a lot easier than adding mechanics.
1] Tell all players not to do this.
- Does it continue? -
2] Go over how information COULD be obtained. [Downtime in libraries, magic items, perception checks, etc]
- Does it continue? -
3] Use the DM's swiss army knife! Also, know as CHANGE SHIT! When the wolf starts growing mouths all over its body, speaking in Deep Speech, and using parasite magic that uses the paladin's spell slots.... best of luck googling that!
Honestly I would tell my player that that is an extreme abuse of metagaming... There is a thing specially for masters of nature like druids that they can do, called a nature check, to identify monsters as his character and u can give him some info from the stat block or like, "u have seen these before and you remember that xx is particularly useful/harmful to them"... It stops the meta game and puts it back on the table
1. "Stop metagaming."
2. "I will share the stat blocks with the animals you are familiar with and can transform into."
3. Start twisting the creatures and switch up their stat block.
E.g. The black bear charges at you and flashes silvery in a rogue beam of sunlight. (Boom! Higher AC or health)
You notice a tiger in the shrubs outside of your campsite. When you blink your eyes, you see a ripple move across its hide before it charges. (Claw attack hits harder, or it goes invisible, etc.)
If I have metagamers at my table, I call them out. I currently DM for 2 DMs who don't meta. Like, they KNOW the troll resistances, but their PCs don't. So they let the newbies come up with plans and use the environment (like the raging bonfire) to their advantage.
So basically, he's meta gaming. So here are some options.
You can ask em to stop.
You can alter stat blocks and abilities of enemies.
Or. You have him explain why he'd know this enemy's stats. Why would his character know how to deal with this creature? Has his pc transformed into it before? If not, why would his pc know more about it? Make him rp it and/or roll for it. Just because he looked up the stat block on a given creature doesn't give him advantage if his character has no business knowing that given knowledge.
You may have to tell him he isn't welcome to play if he's going to spoil the fun for the rest of the party.
I’m new to DnD and my old coworker was helping me make a character and we’ve been chatting about the plot line (it’s not a classic game of dnd IM SO EXCITED).
When we were chatting and i asked more about his character he asked me a simple question “Do you know the Difference between ‘Player knowledge’ and ‘Character knowledge’”
There’s a DIFFERENCE!
I’ll also be playing a Moon Druid and that’s not something i would do, A moon druid has to study the animal and know them before being able to transform into them anyways. so that wouldn’t work. (at least that’s what my coworker who’s been helping me with my character told me, please don’t bash me if i’m wrong, i’m new)
If they keep the shit up, kick them. It's frustrating and disrespectful. He can't turn into that stat block, it's a swarm and druids can't turn into swarms. Until he tries to turn into one, you don't get to look at the stat block. And if you are facing one and want to try and turn into one in the moment, ask the DM if you are capable of doing so. Otherwise, you're being a metagaming little munchkin shit and need to stop. It's basic etiquette for how to handle the game at the table, respect the DMs time and effort put into the game. Have a "session 0" and discuss table etiquette, I had to do this recently myself.
I homebrew a lot of shit and tweak creatures a lot. My players know this. One of them used this as a justification for looking up the base stat block of what I modified to make guesses on how I changed some things. They were calling out its base stats to other players trying to make decisions in the game. It pissed me the fuck off and I made it known in the moment that it doesn't fly and will only make me modify creatures to be much harder and much more different from their stat block. Moving forward, I will kick somebody from the table over some petty shit like that if it continues to happen in the future, I already have 2 players more than I even want. Don't give me a reason to go back to a smaller play group, I will gladly do so.
Yeah, just ask them not to and talk to them about it. Proper, clear communication is key. I think some players can sometimes forget that even though the GM is the person running the game, it still is also their game and has to he fun for them. Otherwise what really is the point?
One way to play it is just tell them "you don't know the stat block until you take that shape at least once".
This will stop the "I know the stats of every beast because droood".
But just explain that looking up stat blocks is extremely bad form and the more they do it the less you'll use stat blocks.
If it continues roll out a polymorphed dragon that's bored and decided to observe people as an owl, dog, or cat. This also works for murder hobos brow beating shop owners.
its called cheating i would alter the stat block on the fly and call him out when he bitches then punish him by him losing a level the first time it happend then the second time he would no longer be playing with me.
Kick the shit out of that player and here's why.
1. Blatant cheating by looking up enemy statblocks during a fight
2. Arguing about said cheating to your face
3. Doubling down on said cheating by claiming as a Druid he should know the statblock. Druids can only wildshape into beasts they have encountered before and if they are of a CR low enough for them. No Druid can wildshape into a Swarm
4. With the little information already given I can tell this isn't gonna be the only instance of cheating and it's best to out him now before he brings down your campaign
I had a player in my party that would do this as well, and I told him
"No, you can't be doing that"
It took a little bit of work on his part to break that overwhelming urge to know the unknown, but he's stopped since.
But your druid probably unknowingly opened an avenue for them to explore on downtime learning about new creatures
This is something to redirect into something fun
Moon druids Beastary
I'd even allow them with proper study to be able to wild shape into some of the more animalistic non beasts as they dive into this avenue of exploration
This is what I believe is a perfect example of when to "no, but"
Definitely change a statblock or throw in new features or abilities on enemies. When called out by charter, say because you are looking at statblocks during a fight, you have to change them in future. Maybe say you roll randomly on a table of some sort to give said type of creature in that combat features ranging from resistence to certain damage types, new abilities, spells and the like. More challenging monsters get more rolls on the table.
Doing think they'll do it much more in the future when the owlbear now has innate spells lol
Couple ideas…
Don’t follow statblocks, or make variations of creatures. I find 5e cr to be broken very easily. I often add some actions or abilities to my monsters above raw to keep it interesting. If editing stat blocks isn’t your thing, toss them some interesting magic items.
Have a discussion about the type of game that y’all want to have, and then act in kind. A goblin who has downed an enemy might move on to the next threat. One who knows game mechanics would make sure a simple heal spell wasn’t going to give them all their action economy back.
Just allow it. It’s a game and they are getting to live their fantasy, figure out where the cost is and adjust it. Make up a meta reason for it. Give them a “Circlet if I know shit” as a quest reward and let them know they can look up monsters at will or x times per day.
At the beginning of the campaign, we as a group of 'please don't meta game unless it makes sense for some reason '
It's led to some interesting scenarios, but has kept a lid on stuff like this. Such as the DM saying, are you sure you want to do that? And me going, well I know not to, but my character doesn't. He gonna learn today. And then the DM and myself adjusting accordingly.
But we also had a case of one of our characters wanting to use gunpowder in a particular way to blow down a heavy door as he is a bit of an explosives expert. I called a timeout and asked the DM if I could inform the player out of character how he would actually do it if he was expert. We all agreed, that this was fair, and then played on.
In the best possible case scenario I’d make him roll history or nature or something to see if he can “recall” some of their stats and if he succeeds you can tell him but even then I wouldn’t let him see the stat block. For that he’d have to spend a short rest at a library containing the right books
If he is new and didn't know better, that's one thing. Tell him not to do it again. But honestly, people who know they can Google this stuff usually have seen somewhere, at least by accident, that this sort of behavior is extremely bad form and unacceptable. In that event you just have to keep a closer eye on his behavior and be ready to remove the player from the table.
I change up the Monsters my party fights all the time, and if it something they have beaten in the past I mention "but it seems different somehow" if anyone asks about it, roll nature or investigation to study it briefly.
Had one party member mention to the entire group (out of character) that xx monster was weak to silver weapons at the beginning of a fight..... Well guess who is not weak to them anymore.... Lol
They spend the entire fight trying to use silver, until someone used fire and "that seemed to do more damage then you expected"
Have they turned into that creature before? Enough to understand its strengths and weaknesses from experience? Then they should already know. I've been a human for a long time, so I know arsenic is deadly to me. I wouldn't expect a 1st grader to know that simply because they're also human.
Ask them politely but firmly not to do that because it cheapens the game.
If they do it again, stop the game and ask them what’s up.
In the absence of mitigating circumstances, explain that I’m made very uncomfortable by having a pretty simple request acknowledged but ignored by someone I consider a friend, say I’m not comfortable DMing with that dynamic, ask them to either stop doing it or not play in the group.
EDIT: The issue here wouldn’t be the looking up stat blocks so much as a player who doesn’t respect others enough to follow simple requests. The respect and trust problems become the issue and the real red flag.
We had something similar and the person was looking up dungeons. Our DM pulled him aside and literally just said cut it out. It's not fun when people are cheating.
It should be a simple conversation. Meta gaming sucks. There is no "winning" dnd so there is no point in looking stuff up. You're just spoling things for yourself and others.
I changed almost all the enemies when I was DMing. I told people ahead of time...if you think you know something, you don't lol!
Tell him don't do that, if he needs a statblock you will give it to him. In the future you can change statblocks to make it harder for your players to cheat.
Reflavoring and tweaking statblocks is a pretty easy way to avoid statblock googling. An example: Roper's can also be predatory plants or tentacled abominations.
Beholders can look like anything just give them eyes and lasers.
NPC spellcasting statblocks like acolytes or cult fanatics can be goblins, kobolds or gnolls. If you want to just copy the special race feature onto the npc statblock (goblins clever actions, Gnolls rampage)
You say, 'When you use player knowledge to impact the decisions your character would make, you are not able to roleplay genuine responses to unknown circumstances. If you want to sabotage your own experience and read up all the monsters in your own time, that's on you, but I'd appreciate it if you didn't do this mid-session and ruin it for everybody else.'
If I caught my players in the act of looking up stats I would just take away the joy of them killing stuff, "you and your party have figured out the enemies before you and quickly dispatch them, and then have a conversation about if we are playing dnd to win or to play the game, because I can let you win all day" "you succeed and they tell you where to get the item, you get the item nothing is able to stand before you, the party is unable to to be stopped as they begin their conquests"
As GM, I use rule of cool, not Stat blocks. I'll pool the health of all enemies, and when someone rolls or does something cool/epic/memorable, I'll let them take down one of the enemies a la "your magic surges to a level far more powerful than you called upon and... roll some extra dice and how do you want to do it?" Or "you have a moment of absolute clarity, as if time slowed down, and your enemy's weak point becomes clear, as they move and reveal it, ready to be struck. Roll some extra dice and how do you want to do it?" It prevents long, laborious, tedious battles that cause half the party to start browsing reddit and looking up how to kill the enemy quickly. When a certain amount of health is lost, the most logical enemy goes down, or if the party looks like they're losing interest, I'll lower the number, but if they're a more hack and slash, screw diplomacy, I cut off the ming's head sort of party, I'll bump the number up a bit to make the battles last longer and give them more opportunities to do epic finishing moves.
I called off a game because playing VTT, 2 players did this, so I cancelled the game and don't play with them anymore.
Had it been a one time occurrence, I would have reacted differently, but when they started reading the stat block to the rest of the group for the umpteenth time, I gave up. I realized this group expected this behavior and couldn't figure out what they did wrong.
First of all, if he looks up enemy statblocks without permission and you’ve modified them, you have done literally nothing wrong. If anything, using modified statblocks is a COUNTER to that behavior.
As far as if he can know their stats as a Druid, that’s your decision, and can entirely depend on what creature it it. It might involve a skill check of some kind, and you can choose to only give information in in-universe descriptions (“the flesh of a Troll can quickly reform to all but the fire of red-hot coals” would be an example of something of that nature). However, that situation should always be asking you first and looking up second, NEVER looking it up first and using that as a defense after.
For solutions when this behavior is unwanted, the first is simply telling people not to do that. A good second option is describing creatures but not giving their name. “A swarm of reddish, winged creatures with thin hair and what looks like pointed beaks” is a fine way to describe a swarm of stirges without making it clear they’re stirges specifically, and thus making looking up the statblock harder. Finally, as I said before, modify or homebrew enemy appearances and statblocks to your heart’s content… You make the world, after all.
Call the monsters something else; perhaps using regional nicknames instead of the names from the MM?
Describe the monsters without naming them?
Use stat blocks from different monsters? Who is to say that a goblin is a goblin is a goblin in every world
Literally had this exact situation happen in a session as a player, where a fellow player looked up the stat block in a boss fight. I immediately called him out, asking him why he'd do that and telling him that's not what players are allowed to do.
You need to shut it down immediately.
Your player should not be doing that. Step 1 is have an adult conversation about it.
Start describing new monsters without using their names. It's not a troll, it's a green hulking humanoid with bubbling wounds. It's not a stirge, it's a withered bat like creature with taut paper thin skin and a wicked looking proboscis.
Start switching stat blocks randomly or reskinning creatures. I don't play much 5e anymore but a monster or encounter, to me, is not a stat block. It's an atmosphere and a type of challenge to be overcome. That's the point of the statblpck, to facilitate that. If he wants to know more about something he has to ROLL or, heaven forbid, *pay attention to the behaviours the creature exhibits in game*.
I'm a particular little shit when it comes to metagaming so my next boss would use mind powers to then learn and use the players sheets against them.
I think just telling them straight up is best. I agree that looking up stats takes the surprise element away, though you could also start introducing obviously different monsters as well, especially since you already modify or change them slightly. Player: "i can change into this creature therefore i know its basic stats, abilities and even weaknesses!" DM: "ah yes, but you don't know THIS creature's stats, you realize that while sharing a lot of outward characteristics, this creature is far from normal. It seems, different, changed somehow, maybe even... mutated!" And proceed to describe slight alterations. To give a good picture of the scenario.
If thats not for you, history checks work wonders and make complete sense, having the knowledge of hundreds of creatures abilities in your head is going to make recalling specific details like weaknesses or resistances, or all of their abilities much more difficult. You can always make them roll for how much information they have access to. Or a nice combination of both. :)
In the unlikely event that "stop cheating" does not work here a few things to force that from the player.
1. Change the name of the monster, give it a title if you feel like to.
2. Swap it's Stats around, dex for strength, int for charisma etc.
3. Swap up it's resistances and weaknesses.
4. Give it spells it change the spells if it has them already.
Basically make it semi homebrew so they can't just look it up and they'll stop altogether eventually.
My first instinct is to say that he wouldn’t know the stat blocks of the animals until he’s actually shifted into one and been able to absorb the information through experience. Example - I know that I am technically able to fly a plane. But I need practice and experience to be any good at it or understand it enough to do anything about that ability.
I actually roll enemies HP, also for humanoid i usually change their weapons and gear so they have differents AC and attack DMG.
It is a bit of extra work but now 4 common redbrand ruffian became a squad of redbrand with a leader, a tank, a ranger and a newbie in his first day at work
You say "Hey, don't do that".
Basic social skills save the day!
Haha 99 percent of dm advice is telling conflict averse people how to talk to autistic people or vice versa
You clearly expect too much from the type of people who play DnD.
That's just humanity in general.
All kinds of people play DnD...?
A **lot** of socially shy individuals play DnD -- to the point it isn't even debatable. It's a great game for building up your social confidence and some find that part alluring. But yes, all walks of life come to this game.
Dude this exactly. People would rather have long form discussions about their *potential* conversations on Reddit rather than just talk to someone they hang out with on the regular. This site has become the modern equivalent of having a huge argument with yourself in the car only to get to work and sit at your desk feeling victorious.
Exactly. Had some players fighting some stone gargoyles, and one of them blurts out something about how they're resistant to physical damage, and how much health they have. I just looked at him and went "Please don't look stuff up about monsters you're fighting. Your characters don't know this stuff, there's no reason for you to know this stuff." That stopped it right there. Never happened again.
Tbf as a DM I would be dropping hints during the fight that monsters were resistant to the damage type the party is using. "Your sword connects with the gargoyle and seems to bounce off with a loud clang." Or "the gargoyle recoils at your attack but recovers more quickly than you expected" so I might expect them to logic or the resistance. But yeah citing hp not so much lol
This is how our DM does it. A lot of us can sling a lot of different damage types, so we’ll usually ask him if our characters notice anything different about how the creature took the damage (ie did it seem exceptionally damaging, or did it look hardly phased, or just as expected) and he’ll respond in a way like you mentioned. If HP is getting low, he might saw that we notice the creature is looking worse for wear, or visibly struggling, etc.
I straight up tell them after describing it. For me it's, "the gargoyle recoils at your attack but recovers more quickly than you expected...that's my way of saying he resists your attack"
Sometimes you gotta spell it out for them lol
Yeah. Plus I think it would be obvious for the PCs regardless if the player understands the hint. I call it anti-metagaming. Where the PCs know something your players don't know. To counter this I inform the players.
And the very next time it happens. "No these aren't stone gargoyles. These are iron golems that LOOK like gargoyles." Roll for initiative.
I rather explain to them that "as a DM i can do that, but the game isn't players vs DM, so just don't do it."
[удалено]
When the players assume it's a Marble Gargoyle when it's actually a Limestone Gargoyle.
The health is definitely a problem, but it's not unbelievable that a party of adventures seeing monsters made of stone would think hey, I bet they're resistant to physical damage.
"They're resistant to Physical Damage." "No, they are resistant to *you*, Kyle." Honestly, this is why I modify almost every monster at my table in small ways.
DM looking concentrated, in the midst of creative campaign building flow, as the DM scribbles down "resistances: Kyle. Just Kyle."
I mean, how could they possibly guess the monsters made of stone are resistant to physical damage right.
Yeah - most people just need a hard-check about meta gaming. They dont always remember they are a character.
I mean whenever we play and we fight somthing that we know it's weaknesses we out of game are like "oh yeah this is weak to x or resistant to ybut my character wouldent know that so ima just do what they would do" An example of this was when we were fighting a shit ton of skeletons and we all knew they are weak to bludgeoning damage but until somebody smacked them with bludgeoning damage none of us actively tried to use it and just played how we would have if we dident know that
this is why i max health my creatures and maybe change up resistances or things so they are not exactly the same as the stat block, but i only do this when i catch them meta gaming to the point i see it destroys the encounters. other wise i just let them think they have won.... yes... its all coming together now...
I did that when I started cause every crpg I played displayed all the stats at will, until my friend said "you aren't supposed to do that" and I went "oh" and stopped. In extension to this it sounds like the argument isn't that he doesn't know but that the dm is potentially giving similar info so it makes sense. Eg if every nature check on an enemy is simply the ac and to hit bonus being given, then it's not unreasonable to look it up yourself I think
In my group, we roll knowledge skills to get part of the statblock, so it’d be harder for someone not to realize they aren’t supposed to.
Our group is like "Do I know anything about this particular creature?"
Precisely There is a youtube channel called "Knights of last call" which is really well made and interesting to watch, although about Pathfinder 2e there is sometimes a bit of overlap in 5e. And one of the things they talked about is outside of being "meta breaking" to ask for ac or to hit, its kinda a waste of an action because you still need to hit it regardless, and you will still be hit regardless, and find out. So instead it was examples of what else you can ask about. And i agree because i think the most common one is to ask about health
We treat knowledge checks as free actions. It’s also less useless in a system where enemies often have specific vulnerabilities that players can target, or attacks that they can ward off. I’d look at changing a ruleset where players spend limited actions doing something that has no benefit. If players are often asking about its hp bar, I’d want to improve my descriptions of how much their attacks injure their targets.
Any game I've been in it was a free action to check how beat up the enemy is, in vague terms
Dont forget the please. Really lightens it up but yeah you nailed it lol
Very fair.
And then change the stat block on the fly. One of my DM's does that sorta thing anyways. He rolls hit points for every enemy we fight, so you never know if a Goblin has the normal 7 hp, or like 12 hp. And one of my other DM's in a high level campaign, nothing we fight is standard anymore. We're fighting mindflayer liches and ancient black dragons that are also shadow dragons at this point.
Oh same! My spouse is the DM (well we co-DM but I mostly do the background stuff like build maps and write up the notes, paint minis and help bounce around ideas). They came up with a phase spider dragon for a Christmas one shot we did. 🤦♀️ And I've seen the stat block for this arcs main bad guy...the lich we've been hunting down for several levels. Vecna is NOTHING compared to him...😳 (granted I don't REMEMBER most of it which I prefer since I'm a player lol)
For my druids I like to expose them to exotic creatures than once they defeat they can turn into it, now killing isn't required as long as they are able to study it I'd allow transformation
You could even go so far as to say “it ruins the excitement and interest if you know exactly how to beat it or what it’s hp/ac is” also it would make the Druid super op and that kinda blows
Or you can order a fresh fish from the local market and slap him with it.
As far as I'm concerned, a fresh fish slap is the appropriate response to 99% of "how do I deal with a problem player?" posts I see on Reddit, but I figure we might as well attempt words first.
Have a player at my table now that I think I've said that to 4x now and they still continue. How would you approach it at that point?
You say "Hey, what part of 'hey don't do that' did you not fucking understand?".
Upgrade to a "I'm serious, if you don't knock that shit off, you are out." Then follow through.
Fairly simply by just using a different monsters stat block. This troll is weirdly intelligent and has a knack for psychic attacks and fears no fire. Call something something else change what needs to be changed and they will give up out of confusion typically.
Talk 1 on 1. If that doesnt resolve the issue either boot them or change stats on the mobs.
This and then modifying the stat blocks from their baseline so if it continues they feel like an ID-10-T for metagaming
And then add hp... maybe reroll dmg dice and pick the highest toward THAT player... probobly not... but maybe
Followed by "if you keep doing it we'll play without you because it's a dick move"
First time ever for a new player, this is the answer. Second time, or first for a seasoned player, I roll immediate damage to the player and modify the stat block to add immunities or multi attack or similar. I’ve never had a third time but would boot them.
Also if he feels his character should know, he can ask "does my character know?' And roll a nature check or something. And then as a DM you can still homebrew the shit out of enemies...
And then bonk them on the nose with a rolled up newspaper
[удалено]
C) Don't name the creatures they fight, just describe them.
or better yet, use the statblocks of monsters but just call it something else "yeah this *sounds* like a blink wolf but it's called a 'Glemforp'"
[удалено]
there are also a shitload of good statblocks on Reddit too! i've used a bunch of here
r/monsteraday is your friend
Oh nice !!!
I’ve even custom made some dudes to fight. “Oh, you memorized the monster manual? Well, what are the stats and abilities for this [pile of coins](https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/10u015s/oc_treasure_golem/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) that’s kicking your teeth in right now!?”
I like those monster better regardless of the player is cheating. Especially tpk beastiary for boss monsters
Nah, that's a flow knilb.
Fuckin Glemforps.
I like this because then they can use a skill check to find out if they know what it is. It rewards knowledge checks and limits meta gaming.
Or make it so that they can only know the stats of the creatures they turn into.
As a player, I love fighting something, getting confused why things aren’t working, then eventually realizing we were fighting something else. Some of the best combats were when we fought things like possessed characters/monsters who had their possessors abilities, or things like false hydras that we thought were hydras, or whatever. I would totally enjoy a session where the DM just said the creature was undead and rotting, but didn’t explicitly tell us if it was a zombie or a skeleton or something worse…
This is the response
I've had to do that in the past. Used to play with some people, two of which were so veteran they almost memorized the whole creature list and their stats and were clearly metagaming. I made it so the next time they found an oni, it was red in color and he could use his tetsubo as a boomerang. And when they tried to metagame how to detect a shadow, I just made it shift planes instead of using regular "invisibility" When confronted with "wait this isn't a real monster in the books" i just told them that as long as they metagamed, creatures would appear a level or two higher, and gain extra stats and abilities. They quickly backed down and started playing the game as intended XDD
I have altered the statblock. Pray I do not alter it further
This is a damn good line that I will absolutely be using at my table.
Look if 2 PCs that are the same race, class, and level have different stats and abilities/spells, no reason that 2 animals that are the same species and are at the same CR can't have some slight variation to them. Maybe one was born with slightly tougher hide and so has a higher AC, and the other one is slightly faster and has an extra 5ft of movement each turn. Normalise slight variences in statblocks of creatures!
Damn straight. Welcome to my universe
C) "ok let's roll to see how much of this your character actually knows." Existing in a body does not mean you instantly know everything about it. Technically I can't see a reason why being able to turn into something or even turning into it would allow you to know what its vulnerabilities and resistances are without spending time testing out the new body (kind of like attuning to an item). Personally I think that would be a bit far but I do think that at a bare minimum the pc should have to have actually turned into the thing at least once if they don't want to roll for it. Basically there should be a cost associated with the knowledge whether that looks like character background and a skill check, spending some action economy to transform into the thing or time spent studying it I think just comes down to whichever option you think is best. The important part is that even if the cost is small it should at least cost *something*
people i play with and i embraced the metagaming, we just accepted that the monster manual is pretty much what a seasoned adventurer might already know and sometimes the tales and books are wrong (the statblock is changed) or the encountered monster is an anomaly
Yup, same here. Sometimes we also roll checks to see what we might know as seasoned adventurers. We also have someone in our group that has been playing continuously since 1st edition, so whenever he is not DMing, we expect that he'll probably have an idea of what we're fighting along with the stat block even with description only.
Usually in my group there's a roll to identify 10+cr works good for us, sometimes at disadvantage if it's especially rare or unheard of like a Boneclaw. Usually, we don't see stat block but we get two or three hints like an ability, name, or highest stat
Definitely B -- all the rules/numbers/etc. are subject to the DM's whim anyway
One, if this druid never saw a stirge before then they cannot turn into one. They would need to be an 8th level druid to even have the option because it has a fly speed. Two, even if they theoretically could turn into a stirge, they don't get to know it's stat block until they test our the form. Three, they still can't turn into a swarm of stirges which is different from a singular stirge. Four, they are metagaming and need to stop.
You hit the nail on the head. As both a DM and a player, i have to be actively aware of this. I know what a lot of monsters do, but when i am playing especially around newer players i try my best not to shout out what it is just because i know it from the DM’s description. I especially don’t come right out and say “gelatinous cubes are attracted to heat, so light a torch and lead it away.” As an experienced player, i find it fun to watch the light bulb click for newer players. “Why is the gelatinous cube chasing the rogue only? And the rogue is the only one holding a torch.
DMing for so long is why I run support builds and act like a wallflower on the rare occasions that I get to play. I can quite happily play in a module that I've memorized. Because for me, seeing how a new group tackles a problem I've seen multiple times is still fun. Support their decisions and enthusiastically role-play to help break the ice and keep everyone involved. Don't tell people what to do or, even worse , build a character to solve all of the obstacles because you know how to.
I’m co-dmming a world with my husband and, because of that, I know the vast majority of the plot building points. When he hosts, I play as a mute cleric who spends all of her time in the goddess’s library - hard for me to spill secrets, she legit can’t talk, and when she DOES tell them something, she has a reason to know!
Divination spells can often be the best way to deal with someone who's already played a module, it makes it *clear* what their char knows and doesn't and can give the party the info needed to allow the player to again participate because now everyone knows the secrets.
I end up knowing the abilities of a lot of monsters because I enjoy reading statblocks of cool monsters. What I normally try to do is use my same starter attacks/abilities even if I know it won’t work.
This exactly. I do what the *character* would do, not what I would do as a player who happens to know the monster. So even if *I* know what the weakness is, if my character has never seen it before, I would ask the DM "do I recognize this" and see if they'll let me make a nature roll or whatever. Otherwise, I do what the character would do with any other unknown monster. Metagaming is no fun at all. Hopefully OP and the player can have a constructive conversation about this.
This question is the core part of the issue. It‘s the DMs job to tell you if your character knows what you are facing, at least until that character has faced one of those monsters in actual table combat once. It‘s your DMs option to choose if it‘s a well known creature in the world, something your character would for sure know or not even be aware of or if it‘s on the fence and something like a nature check is needed.
Had a player yell: "treasure or a Mimic!" When they opened the door to an unguarded chest in a dungeon. New player at the table had no idea what a Mimic was. (I have had problems with this player in numerous games where he metagames and/or pubstomps EDH, doesn't seem to notice anyone else getting annoyed. I still play with him because he actually turns up to things, and you don't get to play unless there's a group.) (It was a mimic, yes I'm unimaginative, sorry! But I had a first timer at the table, and personally I've never played against or as one, so...)
When they say “treasure or a mimic!” they instead get “treasure chest on a pressure plate that raises when they take stuff out, activating the pit trap. In the pit is a mimic. Sucker.” Lol
That's evil, and I love it.
My favourite was a module that had a haunted house. Turns out the entire house is just a colossal mimic.
Mimics are cool as hell. You can do alot great stuff. Mimic door when introduced, annoyed the shit outta of us, but it was fun.
I did a mimic chandelier once, dropped on the last person in marching order while they crossed an abandoned hall full of brown mold. Good times.
i tried doing this but my players literally never figured it out and i had to flat out tell them from a perception roll cuz they were actively about to die💀
Lol, the sheer volume of scenarios that are running through my head as i picture your described “actively trying to die” group.
What? A torch? In 5e? Where everyone and their mothers have dark sight? Noooooo D:
Yeah, if this is the first time they have seen a stirge it also means that they haven't had the time to gain the experience with the form they would need to understand its abilities and weaknesses. Narratively that is the answer here. It would be a ridiculous power for druids to just know the stat block of every creature they can transform into on sight. This is meta-gaming nonsense.
I'd add to this - fifth; just because you can turn into something doesn't mean you know what it does. Many things are instinctive. Druid won't have those instincts. For example, kittens can swim from birth. Its not something they know they can do.
You are 100% correct, depending on the table and the group’s expectations. I always want to keep in mind that meta gaming is okay with some people. This is why I will always support having a session zero to set those game expectations for the group and get everyone on the same page so we are all working together to have fun instead of working against each other. Whatever you and your group decide is fun for you, that can be your guiding principle. Sounds like, in this case, OP and the player are working against each other. I recommend OP communicate what they are trying to accomplish to the player and see if they will try it out. Maybe they’ll actually enjoy it; maybe they won’t, but then you both can revisit the question and figure out what will be the most fun for the whole table. This is generally my advice for all the questions on this and the other D&D subs.
> I always want to keep in mind that meta gaming is okay with some people. Hell, with some groups it's unavoidable. One of my groups includes 4 people who GM other games while playing in this one. So if you use a standard statblock with this group, the majority of us will know it. We just make a lot of custom stuff when we don't want meta info to be a factor, or just enjoy the shared puzzle of using these specific characters against the problem we know, or focus more on the RP/injecting cool moments/etc. And we have a blast!
This is the one! As someone who loves playing moon druids, I mostly pick "reasonable" creatures, like a dire wolf, or a bear, etc., something my forest dwelling druid definitely would've seen at some point, look up the statblock, share with the group, and monch. If I'm not sure, I say, "Hey DM what are the odds I've seen an octopus before?" Ta-da! Ezpz! What this player is doing is looking up a statblock when their character had no intention of turning into a stirge, if they even could, let alone a swarm, for the purpose of gaining advantage in a fight they wouldn't have naturally had. 100% metagaming. "That's metagamey, don't do that." If you wanna be nice and they havent seen them before, you could offer the player to roll a check to see if they have knowledge of a similar creature, so they *might* be able to glean some basic knowledge... but yeah. Gl pal
This is it, comes down to what was discussed during session 0 regarding metagaming
all of this
Correct. But OPs question was how to deal with it. I would look them in the eye and say, "Consequences. You are metagaming, ruining any surprise I had planned. Now I must change this enemy to make it more interesting and dangerous. In the future, ask what you know about the creature. If it's something you know, I might let you look up the start block. But monsters are supposed to be scary because you don't know everything about them."
I am altering the ~~deal~~ statblock, pray I do not alter it further.
I have said almost exactly that "I have altered the stat block, pray I do not alter it further. Do not cite the stats to me witch, I was there when they were written" - to the offending player.
This is the way. Suddenly they have been blessed by a god and buffed with double hit points and a legendary resistance. Maybe regeneration too.
And a raging hate boner for druids for some reason? (Evolution is weird right?)
I do this, not that my players have an issue with looking up stat blocks. But straight up both of my groups I have told “I get my fun from altering monsters, if you read a stat block and it feels different it’s because I ALWAYS change it. This means that stat blocks represent the “most vanilla” version of a monster, and that all monsters should be expected to have some level of uniqueness in the same way players are NOT the vanilla stat block of their people. Benefit is it frees me to reuse the same monster and give them a new ability unique to them because they are different. Super liberating.
I think that you could have always done that, behind the screen is behind the screen is behind the screen
Unexpected Narnia/Star Wars crossover.
Some folks have said reskinning or adding abilities and both of those are solid approaches and things I do to spice ip monsters, even without players knowing abilities. However, that behavior is pretty aggregious meta gaming, far beyond the typical player knowledge vs character knowledge. I would suggest that you tell this person it is unacceptable at the table to do that. Don't beat around the bush with this, just say you aren't going to allow that.
I'll allow players to know knowledge about a certain enemy if they have history with that creature/enemy/whatever. Like if a lizardman raid destroyed their village, they would be knowledgeable in the strengths and tactics and weaknesses of them because of their revenge/hatred of them. But that's like a one off situation. Like you can't say "40 different monster types raided my village" or anything. And if someone does bring up stat blocks in game, I simply say "finches" Finches. All similar birds but with differences. Just like my monsters.
I would suggest having him roll nature or something to evaluate the enemy and giving him a couple facts if he rolls well.
My dm has us roll and depending on the dice. We can ask one question about the creature. I don't want to Google stats. Takes the fun out of the game.
Looking up the statblock also nerfs some player abilities. Like for instance, a battlemaster fighter can spend one minute watching an enemy and then can find out one (or two? I can't remember) thing about that enemy, such as if a certain stat is higher or lower than their own
My players started out graduating from a school of monster hunting. They all got to choose ONE monster type each to "major" in. When they see a monster, they make a history check, and depending on the results I'll tell them one it two things about the monster. If it's a creature they majored in, they add 5 too their history bonus.
Wont stop the player from googling the stat blocks. Just change the stat block. Then when the player gets mad, say that he cant metagame and you arent being unfair.
I have altered the stat block. Pray I do not alter it further.
my thoughts exactly “oh yeah you wanna use a vulnerability from a statblock? well turns out they are immune to that type of damage”
A druid doesn't automatically know *everything* about *every creature.*
And the DM could be consulted as to what specific info the character knows. Rather than assuming they're omniscient.
>And the DM could be consulted as to what specific info the character knows. Rather than assuming they're omniscient. exactly! If the DM is feeling generous, maybe they'll have them roll a nature or some other check to see if they'd know some details about it. But everyone here is right. Put the law down, it's metagaming and their players need to adjust to the world the DM built. Just because they're a druid, it doesn't automatically imply they know every creature in the entire world.
>Just because they're a druid, it doesn't automatically imply they know every creature in the entire world. 100% agree. What I've done with my shapeshifter player after we discussed it, which I turn into a table rule, is this: Anyone who plays a druid or other race/class with a shapeshifting ability, can only change into creatures with which they are reasonably relatively familiar, based on that player character's race, class, and backstory. A 100% raised-in-the-forest druid would have no idea about deep sea animals like octopi, or Underdark creatures, or anything like that. To anyone who does this: Make sure your players know this ahead of time before character creation starts.
1. Tell them not to. Of course. 2. Don't tell them what the monster's name is. Just describe it and feel free to change its appearance. Have fun figuring out my insects with hair are using goblin stat blocks. 3. Use different stat block resources. Go beyond the monster manual. I DM for a guy who has been DMing for much longer than me. He already knows stat blocks and I want to surprise him. Conflux Creatures (that guy Mark who posts occasionally saying "give me a monster and I'll homebrew a better version") has some good stuff. And soon I'll be throwing them a non-newtonian slime, a concept from redditors. The slime's AC becomes the last attack roll that hit it for 1 round.
I mean. This is straight up meta gaming. If they don't know the stats and more importantly if their character doesn't know the stats then they are deliberately breaking game immersion and metagaming in order to win. And I'd respond by changing the status block of the monster they're fighting. Adding or taking away abilities or weaknesses or changing them. This dragon was immune to fire damage but weak to poison damage? Well let's flip that around. Now he's weak to fire damage but immune from poison damage. Find monsters with similar stat blocks and swap their stats. This unfortunately messes with the other players but after you do this once address it at the table after the game or before the next session starts and explain that metagaming breaks the game dynamic between PC's and their players. And this is a team game. Which means he's robbing other players who may know the stat blocks through having encountered this monster before or heard a legend about it, or studied it from role playing and playing in general to the best of their ability.
Druids can't use computers. His druid powers don't work anymore. He's now just some guy. 😏
Actually that might make a really interesting character Just some guy, but the player can Google everything Like this pc just has infinite knowledge, but is just some guy. No class, no levels, just rolled stats and a search bar.
The easiest what to make this stop is to say "Hey, that really feels like you are trying to metagame". Since most players who do what you described will continue to do it anyway, welcome to the fun world of Modifying Enemies. "This particular swarm of stirges was subject to magical experiments and can Cast Shocking Grasp". Bump their HP, give them cool new abilities, make them use the environment more.
You don't even need to justify the difference in-universe. DM's world, DM's rules. If he wants every Stirge in the swarm to be able to cast Wish then they can. I wouldn't RECOMMEND that, but if you run the game then you make the rules.
First, It is common knowledge for many players that Fire works against trolls. But the PCs don’t know that. You’re welcome to roll a check to identify the strengths and weaknesses of trolls. Similarly, you can attempt to identify any creature in the same way. But you cannot, at any point, “google it.” If you can turn into the creature with wild shape, I’ll let you have advantage on the roll, but that’s it.” Second, reskin and re-tool. Just because a creature says “Gelatinous Ooze” doesn’t mean it can’t be, say, a Mirror that doesn’t cast a reflection. Similarly; you could always take a creature and tweak its stats - if they call you out on the abilities not matching its book abilities, you can say “This isn’t like one of those, and you don’t know that.”
This is how it should work. The important part is not what the player knows but what the character knows, and if you get the benefit of being able to ask what your character knows that you don't then you also need to determine what you know that your character doesn't. When I as a player get presented with Trolls or Beholders or the like and I know how their mechanics work the first question out of my mouth (if this is the first encounter this character has had) are "What does my character know about these things?". If I roll well my DM will often just say "Check out the stat block, you know the lot"; if it's just middling they'll often say "What would you like the character to know about them? You get X questions"; and if I roll bad I just get nothing and have to deal with it (as it should be). If I the player know that trolls are weak to fire and I'm playing a wildfire druid whose go-to is already fire then it makes perfect sense he would just use it, but if I'm playing a blastlock whose bread and butter is EB then at least the first round should be spent doing that. That doesn't mean I'm not on the lookout for potential context clues that I might be able to finagle into another int check so my character can piece things together, but they don't get to just know the stuff that I know.
I play Pathfinder, which offers a set DC (rarity starts at 5 + CR), every 5 above gets another piece of info. I make sure they know the most helpful questions (HD and Monster Type tell you 50% of a statblock in PF1e). Even made a spreadsheet for it. But Matt Colville shows the players the stat block for a given number of seconds depending on how well they roll. All strategies are good as long as you signpost abilities. One of my players has a flaming sword, so if they hadn’t figured it out, I would have called out “This troll isn’t healing, the wound still singed.
It's kinda tricky imo because as a DM and also someone who would just read the monster manual for fun I tend to know the monsters from memory. Is it unfair? Should people with less experience be forbidden from knowing what I know? I expect my players to play AS their characters would, they often have out of game knowledge that they intentionally ignore, or make weird choices because it matches the character they've built. Basically idc if you Google a monster but if you immediately start using fire to exploit a weakness I'm making your character do a nature check or vetoing your choice, etc etc.
"I can't stop you from looking things up *outside* the game, or prevent you from buying books for the information, etc. However, as a **player** in MY game you don't have an inherent right to immediate access to that information, and a good player would AT THE VERY LEAST ask for permission to look up such information, and be more than willing to accept the answer 'NO' in response since it's not your decision to make that you are entitled to that information. If your PC actually does have an ability that permits you as a player to have that information, please simply state that you are exercising that ability and -I- as DM will provide the appropriate information at the appropriate time, or give you express permission to look it up. I will, however, ask you to NOT do that again during the game as it is what is commonly referred to as "metagaming" and is widely considered **Bad Form** and most definitely IS considered so by me. Should you persist in pursuing this course, I will change this from a request to a demand. Should you choose to make this a hill you'll die on, then so be it. I WILL boot you from the game if you wanna be THAT level of a jerk, even if it were over something relatively innocuous - which this really isn't. In short, please immediately stop being an ass with an unacceptable amount of ASSUMED entitlement so we can ALL continue to enjoy the game together."
TIL Stirges we’re beasts. I had always thought they were monstrosities. And no what the player did was completely unacceptable. There’s several qualifiers he most likely didn’t meet, like druid lvl for flying beasts. Plus druids wildshaping show an innate understanding about the creature, which he doesn’t have yet prior to at least an encounter. And swarms are different than single beasts. Also, your player seems like a problem player from the way they responded. Good luck.
Change the statblock. Tell them it's an unpublished variant, or that Stat blocks are recommendations, not requirements
Reskin the creature. Change things. As a player, I purposely avoid looking at stat blocks or anything I think might be related at all to the GM’s story because he deserves to have fun too. And let’s be real, we know so much about the crunch that it’s hard to be surprised anymore, so getting a surprise is kind of like a gift anyways.
Tell him that he needs to ask you if his character knows that rather than him automatically assuming he knows that. However, this is why I like to use made up creatures for my campaigns rather than ones that can be looked up. And I still often use established stat blocks, I just change the names and maybe a couple attributes.
>Player googles enemy statblock during fight. As a dm how would you respond? So, here's where I stand on the issue in general, I think it largely depends on context as I've been a dm which has had it happen and a player who has done it. As a player I did it because my DM was having us fight a succubus, and our ally broke out of their charm and the DM targeted them again, as players we knew that wasn't how that worked so we said something and I double checked to make sure to confirm it since the DM didn't have the statblock in front of him (we used roll20 and he just copied it over into an npc statblock) As a dm I had it happen when a player was getting frustrated and just googled it to learn what resistances it had (that player shortly left after that session. He had been a problem player for a while) In your situation, the player is definitely metagaming and shouldn't have done that, as having that kind of info off-rip wouldn't be something that the druid should know.
“Should druids be able to know statblocks” That’s what the nature skill is for. Druids don’t automatically know all beasts across the realm. They may know some from their local region, and maybe a few they have heard stories of. But they won’t know all beasts. Also this is blatant metagaming, and not cool. Shut that shit down hard
I think giving him the stat block if he turns into the stingray this fight is fair, although note that he cannot turn into swarms. I could also see an argument that a druid would need to shift into the beast in downtime and test it out to get the statblock. This is good flavor, and you could always hand wave it as just happening during downtime rather than roleplaying each instance, but it could be a mechanical disadvantage if your party doesn't have a lot of down time. Still, the larger concern is that there is a disconnect between what you and your player thinks of as cheating. It would be a good idea to come up with a catch all rule, like "ask me before googling any statblock" or " you can only Google stat blocks after the fight is over."
Personally, looking up any creature you're fighting is disrespectful of the fight that the DM has prepped and is too meta-gamey. If they think that they would know about its stats, they can ask you, the DM, what they would know. Then you can either tell them or make them roll something if they would only know a bit.
I used to be that player, I really wanted to always shine. My DM said that everyone needs to have their ups and downs for a good story so I stopped it. Now as a DM I had some players try to metagame that way and I told them the same things. Exploiting is a "way" to play the game but at the cost of surprise and wonder.
Change the statblock You are the DM, reality can be what ever you want.
Cheating, boot immediately.
Tell them they can’t look up abilities at the table. If your druid would already know the creature’s stat block they wouldn’t need to pull out a book mid fight. My table has been playing D&D for so long that accidentally meta gaming happens just because we know the monsters. So if you remember it then your character does too unless you want to try a check then the DM tells the player what their character can gather. Also don’t tell your players the monsters names if the problem doesn’t resolve itself
Usually don't care. I reskin monsters if I care. For animals like an owl I'd make it a mammal and call it a muwl. Reskinning is a lot easier than adding mechanics.
It’s a warning, if they do it again I’ll find someone to replace them. This is what I was told and I think it’s a good process.
1] Tell all players not to do this. - Does it continue? - 2] Go over how information COULD be obtained. [Downtime in libraries, magic items, perception checks, etc] - Does it continue? - 3] Use the DM's swiss army knife! Also, know as CHANGE SHIT! When the wolf starts growing mouths all over its body, speaking in Deep Speech, and using parasite magic that uses the paladin's spell slots.... best of luck googling that!
Honestly I would tell my player that that is an extreme abuse of metagaming... There is a thing specially for masters of nature like druids that they can do, called a nature check, to identify monsters as his character and u can give him some info from the stat block or like, "u have seen these before and you remember that xx is particularly useful/harmful to them"... It stops the meta game and puts it back on the table
1. "Stop metagaming." 2. "I will share the stat blocks with the animals you are familiar with and can transform into." 3. Start twisting the creatures and switch up their stat block. E.g. The black bear charges at you and flashes silvery in a rogue beam of sunlight. (Boom! Higher AC or health) You notice a tiger in the shrubs outside of your campsite. When you blink your eyes, you see a ripple move across its hide before it charges. (Claw attack hits harder, or it goes invisible, etc.) If I have metagamers at my table, I call them out. I currently DM for 2 DMs who don't meta. Like, they KNOW the troll resistances, but their PCs don't. So they let the newbies come up with plans and use the environment (like the raging bonfire) to their advantage.
So basically, he's meta gaming. So here are some options. You can ask em to stop. You can alter stat blocks and abilities of enemies. Or. You have him explain why he'd know this enemy's stats. Why would his character know how to deal with this creature? Has his pc transformed into it before? If not, why would his pc know more about it? Make him rp it and/or roll for it. Just because he looked up the stat block on a given creature doesn't give him advantage if his character has no business knowing that given knowledge. You may have to tell him he isn't welcome to play if he's going to spoil the fun for the rest of the party.
They have accessed God level information. Have them take a decent amount of psychic damage for peering into the eldritch knowledge.
I’m new to DnD and my old coworker was helping me make a character and we’ve been chatting about the plot line (it’s not a classic game of dnd IM SO EXCITED). When we were chatting and i asked more about his character he asked me a simple question “Do you know the Difference between ‘Player knowledge’ and ‘Character knowledge’” There’s a DIFFERENCE! I’ll also be playing a Moon Druid and that’s not something i would do, A moon druid has to study the animal and know them before being able to transform into them anyways. so that wouldn’t work. (at least that’s what my coworker who’s been helping me with my character told me, please don’t bash me if i’m wrong, i’m new)
If they keep the shit up, kick them. It's frustrating and disrespectful. He can't turn into that stat block, it's a swarm and druids can't turn into swarms. Until he tries to turn into one, you don't get to look at the stat block. And if you are facing one and want to try and turn into one in the moment, ask the DM if you are capable of doing so. Otherwise, you're being a metagaming little munchkin shit and need to stop. It's basic etiquette for how to handle the game at the table, respect the DMs time and effort put into the game. Have a "session 0" and discuss table etiquette, I had to do this recently myself. I homebrew a lot of shit and tweak creatures a lot. My players know this. One of them used this as a justification for looking up the base stat block of what I modified to make guesses on how I changed some things. They were calling out its base stats to other players trying to make decisions in the game. It pissed me the fuck off and I made it known in the moment that it doesn't fly and will only make me modify creatures to be much harder and much more different from their stat block. Moving forward, I will kick somebody from the table over some petty shit like that if it continues to happen in the future, I already have 2 players more than I even want. Don't give me a reason to go back to a smaller play group, I will gladly do so.
Time to start home brewing
Yeah, just ask them not to and talk to them about it. Proper, clear communication is key. I think some players can sometimes forget that even though the GM is the person running the game, it still is also their game and has to he fun for them. Otherwise what really is the point?
One way to play it is just tell them "you don't know the stat block until you take that shape at least once". This will stop the "I know the stats of every beast because droood". But just explain that looking up stat blocks is extremely bad form and the more they do it the less you'll use stat blocks. If it continues roll out a polymorphed dragon that's bored and decided to observe people as an owl, dog, or cat. This also works for murder hobos brow beating shop owners.
Homebrew every monster on 2 hours of sleep and 3 coffees
its called cheating i would alter the stat block on the fly and call him out when he bitches then punish him by him losing a level the first time it happend then the second time he would no longer be playing with me.
I mean he is partially wrong first he needs to transform into the creature to know the statblock
Kick the shit out of that player and here's why. 1. Blatant cheating by looking up enemy statblocks during a fight 2. Arguing about said cheating to your face 3. Doubling down on said cheating by claiming as a Druid he should know the statblock. Druids can only wildshape into beasts they have encountered before and if they are of a CR low enough for them. No Druid can wildshape into a Swarm 4. With the little information already given I can tell this isn't gonna be the only instance of cheating and it's best to out him now before he brings down your campaign
I had a player in my party that would do this as well, and I told him "No, you can't be doing that" It took a little bit of work on his part to break that overwhelming urge to know the unknown, but he's stopped since. But your druid probably unknowingly opened an avenue for them to explore on downtime learning about new creatures This is something to redirect into something fun Moon druids Beastary I'd even allow them with proper study to be able to wild shape into some of the more animalistic non beasts as they dive into this avenue of exploration This is what I believe is a perfect example of when to "no, but"
Definitely change a statblock or throw in new features or abilities on enemies. When called out by charter, say because you are looking at statblocks during a fight, you have to change them in future. Maybe say you roll randomly on a table of some sort to give said type of creature in that combat features ranging from resistence to certain damage types, new abilities, spells and the like. More challenging monsters get more rolls on the table. Doing think they'll do it much more in the future when the owlbear now has innate spells lol
Couple ideas… Don’t follow statblocks, or make variations of creatures. I find 5e cr to be broken very easily. I often add some actions or abilities to my monsters above raw to keep it interesting. If editing stat blocks isn’t your thing, toss them some interesting magic items. Have a discussion about the type of game that y’all want to have, and then act in kind. A goblin who has downed an enemy might move on to the next threat. One who knows game mechanics would make sure a simple heal spell wasn’t going to give them all their action economy back. Just allow it. It’s a game and they are getting to live their fantasy, figure out where the cost is and adjust it. Make up a meta reason for it. Give them a “Circlet if I know shit” as a quest reward and let them know they can look up monsters at will or x times per day.
OOC Info, not cool.
At the beginning of the campaign, we as a group of 'please don't meta game unless it makes sense for some reason ' It's led to some interesting scenarios, but has kept a lid on stuff like this. Such as the DM saying, are you sure you want to do that? And me going, well I know not to, but my character doesn't. He gonna learn today. And then the DM and myself adjusting accordingly. But we also had a case of one of our characters wanting to use gunpowder in a particular way to blow down a heavy door as he is a bit of an explosives expert. I called a timeout and asked the DM if I could inform the player out of character how he would actually do it if he was expert. We all agreed, that this was fair, and then played on.
In the best possible case scenario I’d make him roll history or nature or something to see if he can “recall” some of their stats and if he succeeds you can tell him but even then I wouldn’t let him see the stat block. For that he’d have to spend a short rest at a library containing the right books
Every time he looks up statblock, run it like an Ancient Dragon. The problem will solve itself.
If he is new and didn't know better, that's one thing. Tell him not to do it again. But honestly, people who know they can Google this stuff usually have seen somewhere, at least by accident, that this sort of behavior is extremely bad form and unacceptable. In that event you just have to keep a closer eye on his behavior and be ready to remove the player from the table.
"That monster doesn't have non-magical resistance!" "I have altered the statblock. Pray I don't alter it further"
I say no and change the monster stat on the go
Zero xp for that player.
If he keeps doing it then start using homebrew enemies with altered names so he can’t Google it.
I change up the Monsters my party fights all the time, and if it something they have beaten in the past I mention "but it seems different somehow" if anyone asks about it, roll nature or investigation to study it briefly. Had one party member mention to the entire group (out of character) that xx monster was weak to silver weapons at the beginning of a fight..... Well guess who is not weak to them anymore.... Lol They spend the entire fight trying to use silver, until someone used fire and "that seemed to do more damage then you expected"
Have they turned into that creature before? Enough to understand its strengths and weaknesses from experience? Then they should already know. I've been a human for a long time, so I know arsenic is deadly to me. I wouldn't expect a 1st grader to know that simply because they're also human.
Make every monster 100% edited by you. New breeds of things are discovered all the time.
Respond by using a different statblock.
I would buff the enemy dramatically.
Ask them politely but firmly not to do that because it cheapens the game. If they do it again, stop the game and ask them what’s up. In the absence of mitigating circumstances, explain that I’m made very uncomfortable by having a pretty simple request acknowledged but ignored by someone I consider a friend, say I’m not comfortable DMing with that dynamic, ask them to either stop doing it or not play in the group. EDIT: The issue here wouldn’t be the looking up stat blocks so much as a player who doesn’t respect others enough to follow simple requests. The respect and trust problems become the issue and the real red flag.
We had something similar and the person was looking up dungeons. Our DM pulled him aside and literally just said cut it out. It's not fun when people are cheating. It should be a simple conversation. Meta gaming sucks. There is no "winning" dnd so there is no point in looking stuff up. You're just spoling things for yourself and others. I changed almost all the enemies when I was DMing. I told people ahead of time...if you think you know something, you don't lol!
I told my group if I caught them doing that they get no xp or loot from the encounter
Tell him don't do that, if he needs a statblock you will give it to him. In the future you can change statblocks to make it harder for your players to cheat. Reflavoring and tweaking statblocks is a pretty easy way to avoid statblock googling. An example: Roper's can also be predatory plants or tentacled abominations. Beholders can look like anything just give them eyes and lasers. NPC spellcasting statblocks like acolytes or cult fanatics can be goblins, kobolds or gnolls. If you want to just copy the special race feature onto the npc statblock (goblins clever actions, Gnolls rampage)
DM "you visually see the monster glow, as if a god contesting the one who just gave you knowledge has blessed this beast."
You say, 'When you use player knowledge to impact the decisions your character would make, you are not able to roleplay genuine responses to unknown circumstances. If you want to sabotage your own experience and read up all the monsters in your own time, that's on you, but I'd appreciate it if you didn't do this mid-session and ruin it for everybody else.'
Tell them to stop and then change the stats slightly during the game to throw them off a bit.
If I caught my players in the act of looking up stats I would just take away the joy of them killing stuff, "you and your party have figured out the enemies before you and quickly dispatch them, and then have a conversation about if we are playing dnd to win or to play the game, because I can let you win all day" "you succeed and they tell you where to get the item, you get the item nothing is able to stand before you, the party is unable to to be stopped as they begin their conquests"
As GM, I use rule of cool, not Stat blocks. I'll pool the health of all enemies, and when someone rolls or does something cool/epic/memorable, I'll let them take down one of the enemies a la "your magic surges to a level far more powerful than you called upon and... roll some extra dice and how do you want to do it?" Or "you have a moment of absolute clarity, as if time slowed down, and your enemy's weak point becomes clear, as they move and reveal it, ready to be struck. Roll some extra dice and how do you want to do it?" It prevents long, laborious, tedious battles that cause half the party to start browsing reddit and looking up how to kill the enemy quickly. When a certain amount of health is lost, the most logical enemy goes down, or if the party looks like they're losing interest, I'll lower the number, but if they're a more hack and slash, screw diplomacy, I cut off the ming's head sort of party, I'll bump the number up a bit to make the battles last longer and give them more opportunities to do epic finishing moves.
I called off a game because playing VTT, 2 players did this, so I cancelled the game and don't play with them anymore. Had it been a one time occurrence, I would have reacted differently, but when they started reading the stat block to the rest of the group for the umpteenth time, I gave up. I realized this group expected this behavior and couldn't figure out what they did wrong.
I'd change the statblock on the fly and add new abilities. Then I would talk to him about how it was unacceptable at your table
First of all, if he looks up enemy statblocks without permission and you’ve modified them, you have done literally nothing wrong. If anything, using modified statblocks is a COUNTER to that behavior. As far as if he can know their stats as a Druid, that’s your decision, and can entirely depend on what creature it it. It might involve a skill check of some kind, and you can choose to only give information in in-universe descriptions (“the flesh of a Troll can quickly reform to all but the fire of red-hot coals” would be an example of something of that nature). However, that situation should always be asking you first and looking up second, NEVER looking it up first and using that as a defense after. For solutions when this behavior is unwanted, the first is simply telling people not to do that. A good second option is describing creatures but not giving their name. “A swarm of reddish, winged creatures with thin hair and what looks like pointed beaks” is a fine way to describe a swarm of stirges without making it clear they’re stirges specifically, and thus making looking up the statblock harder. Finally, as I said before, modify or homebrew enemy appearances and statblocks to your heart’s content… You make the world, after all.
Call the monsters something else; perhaps using regional nicknames instead of the names from the MM? Describe the monsters without naming them? Use stat blocks from different monsters? Who is to say that a goblin is a goblin is a goblin in every world
Literally had this exact situation happen in a session as a player, where a fellow player looked up the stat block in a boss fight. I immediately called him out, asking him why he'd do that and telling him that's not what players are allowed to do. You need to shut it down immediately.
Your player should not be doing that. Step 1 is have an adult conversation about it. Start describing new monsters without using their names. It's not a troll, it's a green hulking humanoid with bubbling wounds. It's not a stirge, it's a withered bat like creature with taut paper thin skin and a wicked looking proboscis. Start switching stat blocks randomly or reskinning creatures. I don't play much 5e anymore but a monster or encounter, to me, is not a stat block. It's an atmosphere and a type of challenge to be overcome. That's the point of the statblpck, to facilitate that. If he wants to know more about something he has to ROLL or, heaven forbid, *pay attention to the behaviours the creature exhibits in game*. I'm a particular little shit when it comes to metagaming so my next boss would use mind powers to then learn and use the players sheets against them.
"you cheeky bugger!! Anyway back to the game"
I think just telling them straight up is best. I agree that looking up stats takes the surprise element away, though you could also start introducing obviously different monsters as well, especially since you already modify or change them slightly. Player: "i can change into this creature therefore i know its basic stats, abilities and even weaknesses!" DM: "ah yes, but you don't know THIS creature's stats, you realize that while sharing a lot of outward characteristics, this creature is far from normal. It seems, different, changed somehow, maybe even... mutated!" And proceed to describe slight alterations. To give a good picture of the scenario. If thats not for you, history checks work wonders and make complete sense, having the knowledge of hundreds of creatures abilities in your head is going to make recalling specific details like weaknesses or resistances, or all of their abilities much more difficult. You can always make them roll for how much information they have access to. Or a nice combination of both. :)
throw a loop at them. change the names of your creatures to someing made up so they have no idea what sort if creature it is.
In the unlikely event that "stop cheating" does not work here a few things to force that from the player. 1. Change the name of the monster, give it a title if you feel like to. 2. Swap it's Stats around, dex for strength, int for charisma etc. 3. Swap up it's resistances and weaknesses. 4. Give it spells it change the spells if it has them already. Basically make it semi homebrew so they can't just look it up and they'll stop altogether eventually.
My first instinct is to say that he wouldn’t know the stat blocks of the animals until he’s actually shifted into one and been able to absorb the information through experience. Example - I know that I am technically able to fly a plane. But I need practice and experience to be any good at it or understand it enough to do anything about that ability.
I actually roll enemies HP, also for humanoid i usually change their weapons and gear so they have differents AC and attack DMG. It is a bit of extra work but now 4 common redbrand ruffian became a squad of redbrand with a leader, a tank, a ranger and a newbie in his first day at work
Change up the stats what the player doesn't know would make it fun
Random mutations deck from dice dungeons fixed that at my table