Stamets

Either it is the symbol for another stroke, the symbol for loss, the symbol for gay sex, or the sign that a zombified bunny rabbit raised from the bowels of ancient Sumeria will return to eat a crater on the moon in three and a half weeks.

Just look into your heart for the answer.

My DM last week decided to have this weird fucky thing in the area that we were at. Some fucky wucky magic that was making it so after every roll (except for attacks) the DM made another roll to determine odds or evens. If it was evens, your roll worked as normal. If it was odds, your roll was reversed so that your nat 20 would become a nat 1. But that also meant if you ended up with a nat 1 and he rolled an odd, you'd get a nat 20. This happened twice. We were all laughing nonstop because like... none of us could have metagamed it if we wanted to. And some of us roll physically and others on dnd beyond. DM just trusts us. So when I said a Nat 1 at one point with a pained sigh, I had forgotten about his odds/evens thing. He rolled and started laughing and then we all started laughing as the roll went through stupendously well.

Not exactly the same as what you're describing but I thought it was fun and wanted to share <3

So first off, Meta-gaming in DnD is a bit weird. It's both acceptable and not acceptable, depending on the limitations therein. Like it is technically metagaming to have one PC trust another after just meeting in the game for the first time but this is not just acceptable but actively encouraged in some games because you don't want to draw out being untrustworthy of your party in the first session when the whole goal is to play together.

But the flipside is bad metagaming like if you read a module ahead of time, have information about that and then use that to take actions like fetching a bad guys bugout bag and investigating a specific wall to see through the illusion (Fuck you, you giant turtle asshole... sorry. Bad experience) then that is just you being shitty because you're not really playing the game. This is taken a step further with dice rolls. You may or may not notice that some DMs will ask for a specific DC and other ones will just ask for a roll and then tell you if you succeeded/failed after the fact. The ones who ask for it after the fact have typically dealt with a lot of Metagaming Bobs. People who, when they hear a specific DC, will roll just barely that DC or roll to beat it. Especially if it is a big and important roll. They don't want the dice to tell the story, they just want to win. They don't understand the game. To them it's being the hero or succeeding everytime so they'll lie about the dice rolls.

Metagaming bob is upset in this instance because the DM has elected to have all players roll in a specific thing so that only the DM can see the roll. That way only the DM knows whether they succeeded or failed. Bob feels like his agency has been taken away and he doesn't trust the DM. He thinks the DM will just lie about the rolls because Bob can't understand playing the game in any way other than how he sees it. He is mentally accusing the DM of doing what he does. So when he says that there is a problem, the DM knows that he has caught Bob.

From this point, Bob will typically flame out of the party. He will get upset about something and either be pushed out by all other players and the DM or just leave himself. Less often, Bob starts to learn the error of his ways and accepts the dice as the true storytellers and all of us just along for the ride.

I hope that helps and I hope that you have a fantastic session next weekend! May you always roll with advantage and the dice be forever in your favor <3

That just means you're not dead inside.

I can fix you.

And I would change nothing. The Good Place might be a perfect show

Am definitely surprised by I_Fart_Glitter considering I know them personally lol

It's really nice being able to post queer memes here on Lemmy because even the cishet people get it and laugh with us. Everyone gets representation. Hell fucking yeah. I mean I do go a bit overboard sometimes with the gay but I'll catch a husband someday.

Meh, if it's a one off and not an important fight? Doing it for the sake of a gag I've got no problem with. Just don't want it to be a consistent thing.

You might say the knight is hulking and looming ominously, but does that mean 20 AC, 50 HP, one attack at +6 for 1d8+4… Or does that mean 24 AC, 500 HP, three attacks at 1d8+8 (slashing) +1d4 (negative energy)? Could be either! The range of possibilities is largely unbound and arbitrary.

That's more of a DM/GM description issue than a gaming issue. Like nothing about what you said is specific to DnD, it's just how the person is going to describe the person. But even then I prefer it that way. I don't know what the situation is going to be like until I try to fuck with that. Also, you could just ask to size him up. Insight checks exist, perception checks exist, etc. But I'm kinda pro-having the enemies vague. I loathe video games where I see a number above an enemies head and know whether or not I can defeat them. I'm here to roleplay, not be told immediately whether or not I can take the dude.

Why what did I do? I phoned it the fuck in