• @Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    71 year ago

    I’d argue that it’s more fun to bury the lead on a module/set dungeon, to prevent any (even subconscious) meta-gaming from upsetting the play between more/less seasoned players, but I do like the “jazz and sheet music” analogy.

    If someone clicks/is told you’re using Tomb of Horrors, they’ll know more than a player who is experiencing that for the first time organically. Obviously applying that and not breaking PC-player knowledge divide is the players issue to maintain, but they’ll still have that seed lurking in their brain about the upcoming set pieces

    • @Susaga@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      I’m on team “tell the players”, personally, because it lets the players customise their characters for the module. A group for Wilds Beyond the Witchlight are going to be different from Descent Into Avernus, for example.

      (Of course, if a player decides to put Doom Guy in a fairy tale, that’s perfectly fine, but it should be their choice.)

      Also, a person who knows about Tomb of Horrors will figure it out pretty quickly during gameplay anyway because of those set pieces you mentioned, so it doesn’t matter if you didn’t tell them what it was. Heck, they might even have bowed out so they don’t ruin things with their meta-knowledge, if only they knew what they were going to be playing.

    • littleblue✨
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Lede*

      And, I don’t necessarily disagree, though it’s the latter half of the statement that clarifies the problematic thinking: removing player agency is not a good first step.

        • littleblue✨
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Fair point, though I can only assume that it won’t be long before people are mispronouncing it IRL, for reasons not unlike “decimate” vs. “devastate”. 🫣 Ah, the consequences of underfunded education at the national scale. 🥹