• entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    91
    ·
    1 year ago

    Metagaming Bob is implied to be a player who metagames, so they intentionally use game knowledge to improve their odds of winning. If for instance they were to fail an insight check, they would choose to break character and act suspicious of the person who they failed insight on, even if their character should have no reason to suspect them.

    • Norgur@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So they’ll end up with a inconsistent mess of a character whose illogical scrapheap of descisions had “win the thing I wanna do” as their sole background?

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ooohhhh, so not seeing their own roll they just get into that doesn’t indicate if they failed?

      • ericbomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also for charm/illusion spells.

        If he knows he got a 2 on a wisdom saving throw, then something crazy happens, he will probably assume it’s an illusion or something.

    • Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Put that way, it sounds like blind rolls are the only way that sort of thing should be done. I like it!