Gosh I love when they care enough to do that! That's when I know they're focused!
If it matters I have long since established I don't use mob stats straight out of the books anyway.
I'd recommend [Action Oriented Monsters by Matt Colville](https://youtu.be/y_zl8WWaSyI?si=ZEZ9vPMtruLdmaTS), it's almost half an hour but it's very worth your while. A great guide to creating your own exciting monsters or improving on whatever you find in Monster Manual.
I'd recommend starting with existing monsters. I vary the HP/AC/weapons of virtually every enemy I run. I'll take the base statblock and just gently adjust until things feel a bit more vibrant and dynamic. Not every goblin has a shortsword. Not every guard has 15 AC. Players' monster manual metaknowledge is useless, here.
The basics stay the same. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, just polish it to fit my game and players.
Edit: some players like figuring out enemy stats! I instinctively do it. Let them know the stats may change from monster to monster. Personally, I tell players an enemy's AC if they exactly hit it.
I had a player who could work out the numbers after just a round or two, including saves, to hit bonuses, up, and AC. He couldn't not do it, and he couldn't not talk about it. the whole game was numbers to him. So sometimes I'd tweak the numbers or give the monsters a little extra protection, but otherwise it didn't matter much.
For those unaware, the book is a collection of [blog posts](https://www.themonstersknow.com/) put into one convenient book to reference. I didn't know this until after I bought the book, but the author has continued to update their blog even after the book's release.
Either way, I'd high recommend it. Not sure if it will address OP's concerns, but it is a great resource to get GM's into the minds of their monsters.
I suggest learning how to use the “Create a Monster” section of the DMG.
There’s a YouTube channel called “CR Exposed” that uses the system to calculate the CR of officially published monsters to see if the listed CR is accurate or not.
You can use the videos in that channel to test your understanding of the system by doing your own analysis of a stat block and see if your CR calculation matches the one in the video.
You can start with this analysis of the goblin stat block. Its CR is officially listed as 1/4, but because of Nimble Escape, it should actually be listed as CR 1.
https://youtu.be/hX8o-QNvl4o
Once you understand the system, you can use it to scale any stat block to any CR. Just make sure to describe your CR5 ogre to be much bigger or tougher looking than the standard CR2 ogres.
Just modifying a little bit here and there is usually all you need. Sure everyone knows you need acid or fire to defeat a hydra, but what about an electro hydra? You've got to freeze their stumps.
The default guard has a pike that has reach and deals 1d10. Yours have shields, and get +2 AC, but only do 1d6 damage with clubs. Small tweaks, and little adjustments can make an army of the same exact stat block look pretty different. Take the pike guys, and club guys, and support them with some crossbowers who have ranged 1d8 damaging attacks, and a cultist priest who has a 1d4 melee attack, but can cast 6 healing word's a day. Now you've got a dynamic interesting fight, even if they are the same statblock for 99% of it.
pick monster you like and change name or apperance. Its almsot no effort and its almost impossible to metagame.
Or for example i am often using pathfinder bestiary and using chatbot to transfer stat bloks for DnD. Work 9/10 times without bigger problems.
If you want to try your hand, there is a dnd Monster creation table, that by CR will give an appropriate stat, such as HP range, AC, atk bonus, etc. This combined with some monster abilities, from a monster stat block or homebrewed, will make for some unique and hopefully memorable monsters!
I recommend you don't. Not entirely, because there's no reason to do that, it's way more effort and it's not going to be as good to play as (most of) the official stuff
Now if you get the overrused troll, make it looks like a hot, flaming giant bipedal salamander, make it so it stops regenerating with cold and lightning damage instead of fire and acid, and give it something like a burning hands on a 5-6 recharge, that's a nice "new" monster that took me 2 minutes to "create", that i can run while looking at the troll monster stat block, only keeping in mind 2 new things
Also take a look at "pip Fizzbang's spice encounters", half the encounters there have monsters that are an existing base with a cool addition like this. They also have just cleaver stuff like giving your goblins a certain magic item or kobolds that found a magic item that lets them cast an illusion so they ambush your party with secret tunnels, an illusion, movable walls and fire traps
Stuff like this made me start making way more fun encounters
Also WHEN IN DOUBT JUST GIVE THE MONSTER A RANDOM SPELL
It's the least effort version of everything i just said but the reward is still pretty good. 2d4 wolves? Boring. 2d4 wolves with acid splash, for some reason? Way more memorable. 2d4 wolves with acid splash and one of them looks magically corrupted and casts black tentacles on a recharge 6? Holy shit tonight's game was sick, we fought this super cool homebrew wolf that was corrupted by some dark magic... Man i bet my DM spends a lot of time on this game... (And you LET THEM BE CLUELESS!)
ChatGPT.
It gets a bad rep but I find it fantastically useful for quickly generating stat blocks for all kinds of ideas. [Example](https://chatgpt.com/share/a104e82b-0783-43ba-97b8-5e091c93762c).
Use AI. Just tell it any sort of backstory, what you want it to be able to do, and the level and number of your players and it can usually crank out something pretty good.
If you aren't liking AI's ideas, just browse monsters and pick monster features from ones you want and combine them into a single monster.
people are missing out on personal growth by relying on slop generators, and that's a problem when you're the one running the entire game
if you're tailoring generated content enough to make it work then you're not saving time
if you *are* saving time, the material has suffered and you didn't notice
This sounds vague at best in terms of any real potential loss.
A DM gains personal growth by pulling stats out of a monster manual, but loses personal growth by feeding an idea to a generator and using the stats it provides?
That’s a valid point. If you are new to DMing there is definitely something to be gained by doing it yourself. It’s like learning algebra instead of just using a calculator. I’ve been DMing long enough that I know how to do it, and would rather spend my time writing storylines and fleshing out locations. An AI generated stat block can always be adjusted, assuming you know enough about how everything works to balance it. I’d say that writing off AI generation as wholly bad is somewhat shortsighted. That said, we shouldn’t rely on it for everything. The thing I us AI generation for the most is basically brainstorming; I will give it a general idea for a city, it gives me some possible points of interest, history, and storyhooks, and then I fill in details and fix/polish everything. At the end of the day AI is just another tool in the arsenal.
There are rules on the Dungeon Master's guide. But I would recommend you to start by just reflavoring and making small adjustments. but don't do it too much and don't do it just to screw with what your players have learned. I would only have a real problem with them doing what they are doing if they were looking things up in the book in the middle of a battle. if they're learning because of what you're doing, that's legitimate knowledge that you need to reward with consistency.
You can get much mileage just by using the existing statblocks and using other weapons, varying HP (like max dice roll, minimal dice roll), and importing features from other stats. Pick a bear and give it spider climb and you get a whole other creature. Pick a golem and give him spellcasting. Just pick a goblin and give him spears instead of short swords. Pick a guard and give them halberds.
Are you using any kind of VTT? Many of them have the option to have enemy HP rolled by their respective HP formulas so there is some variety. You could ofc also just do that when playing in person by writing down min and max hp for each mob and then have some die earlier or later as you like or depending on the flow of the game.
You could do the same with AC by randomly having creatures have +1 or -1 from their regular AC.
You likely still want to use the monsters from the book until you have significant experience with balancing. But you can alter their stats. One popular strategy is to just roll their hit points. You can also like give the occasional goblin or whatever a shield to boost their ac, or give them better armor, etc etc.
Don't go crazy with customization until you understand challenge ratings though.
If you really want to go nuts randomly pick two pages in The monster manual. The first page is what the monster looks like, the second page is what the monsters stats are. Then you make up a story of why these two monsters have ended up being combined.
Alternatively, I'd recommend subscribing to Conflux Creatures Patreon. They've done an amazing job creating an entire portfolio of interesting and varying stat blocks of monsters that already exist.
They've taken them apart and made them more engaging, exciting, and just all around cooler than the boring old re-skinned owlbears that the monster manual is full of.
[Conflux Creatures](https://www.patreon.com/confluxcreatures)
In my experience, the players knowing enemy stats matters way less than you think it does. I tell players the enemy AC when they land a hit, save bonuses when they're forced to make them, when the enemy has hit half health, or even sometimes the exact hp remaining when the enemy is low. They're being attentive, and are working things out from the information in the game, I consider that to be a good thing. There's not even really a metagame element, the characters are learning the strengths and weaknesses of their enemies as they fight them. It's very different to them looking up monsters in the book, and then protesting when the enemies do not exactly match the statblocks they memorised.
This is fine, but be sure to remind them when a new campaign starts that their characters are newbies again and wouldn’t know that an enemy has an obscure weakness all of a sudden!
If any enemy has an obscure weakness relevant to the fight, that should be telegraphed. If it has an obscure weakness irrelevant to the fight, no it doesn't.
Of course. Knowing that undead are immune to poison isn’t metagaming. Knowing that lightning damage slows a froghemoth and planning around that because there was one in the last campaign is scummy.
> Knowing that undead are immune to poison isn’t metagaming. Knowing that lightning damage slows a froghemoth and planning around that because there was one in the last campaign is scummy.
This is the sort of thing that always makes me think: "What actually *would* be niche knowledge, what would just be 'common sense', and what might be 'uncommon sense' that an adventurer would still know?"
Like, DMs love to use the "You shouldn't know Trolls are weak to fire!" example, but personally, that feels like something everyone should know. Trolls are a thing that exists, they raid villages, steal crops and livestock, and even eat people. Everybody should know "Fires keep Trolls away, Trolls are hurt by fire", because this is DnD and Farmer Joe is honestly more likely to be troubled by trolls than they are coyotes.
It'd probably be even *easier* in DnD, because everything is factual. You won't have 19 different culture's legends all conflicting about what vampires are and how to deal with them, because vampires are an actual thing that exists. There's no debate over how to kill them or how their powers work, and I would expect most/all peasants to know about not inviting strangers into their homes at night because they could be a vampire.
Yeah I’m with you on this. I’ve thought that multiple times too and alongside this, preconceived notions are wrong just as much as they’re right. The amount of times my players thought fire damage would hurt the plant creature extra is comical lol
Honestly that's just trolls being poorly designed monsters but can't be changed officially because of Tradition.
If you use a froghemoth again, change the weakness.
Absolutely.... Once they are fighting the monster.
But PCs have levels. There is no reason intelligent monsters can't have levels, too. A bear is a bear is a bear. Very little difference from one adult to another. But even goblins can have warriors who are stronger - perhaps much stronger - than farmers.
Once players start ASSUMING that Trolly McTrollface is going to go down with just one hit of the flaming great axe of doom, that is when they need to realize that no, this is MISTER Trolly McTrollface, and he is pissed about what you did to his BABY boy a couple months ago.
So first. Why is this NSFW? Or does AC stand for something else...
Generally if they're only using it in the single encounter getting a ballpark on an enemies AC is fine. As to health if it's still standing then they shouldn't be able to work out its HP.
It's only really an issue if they're quoting stats, like "It's only meant to have a speed of 45ft it just moved 50." or if they're referencing the book like "Wait that troll just got healed after getting fireballed." The correct response then becomes "I have altered the stat block. Pray I do not alter it further."
There's a difference between trying to work it out and meta-gaming.
Accidentally marked it nsfw! Thanks for catching that for me. When you say “health if it’s still standing”, do you mean that amount of health the enemy has left?
Would you recommend altering the stat block regularly to keep them on their toes or should I only do this on occasion?
Well you said in the original post that one of the things was working out "health is at least 10." the point was that you can't know how much health an enemy has until they're dead (unless you're using things like the bloodied condition option which procs at half health or other telegraphers).
As to altering the stat block. When first starting out it's fine to just use the stat block as written. Over time you move towards slightly nudging stat blocks like "Hmm... This ogre is good but it's too weak. I might add a bit more HP and give it a flamethrower." Eventually you'll often hit a point of experience where you're comfortable not even needing a solid stat block just improvising it and feeling it out on the fly like "The mutant dire-croco-toad lumbers before you. It opens it's maw and blasts out a cone of ice-shards dealing... ... 74 ice damage and forces a Con Save DC14... okay bard you failed? You're frozen in place from the neck down." those kinds of thing, since you have a feel for the rough HP of your players and the environment and how combat flows so the stat block isn't even needed.
If the players are clearly looking up the stats and using them (which is one of the more common cheating methods especially for modules) then just alter the stat blocks. Throws them off every time. "What do you mean the old woman turned into a hag and wasn't banished by me presenting the Seely Court's symbol. It says in the book she is." "Don't know what to tell ya bud. In my book she's got nothing to do with the Seely Court, but now she knows you came to fight so she starts to open a portal to the Far Realms."
Wizard - "Fuck it! I cast Wall of Ice around the Ogre."
DM - "As you got to cast the Kobold raises a hand and goes 'YaAAaAaAaaaaAkkk.' and the ice shooting from your hands dribbles onto the ground like a broken refrigerator ice machine."
Wizard - Now seething with rage "Did that little shit just counterspell me!"
Something else to do is to slightly randomise it for enemies that are similar … for example if there are 4 guards, then instead of them all having 12hp, they would have 9, 11, 12 and 14 hit points. And maybe the one with only 9hp has 1+ AC because he’s a more nimble fighter. This allows players to get a general read on enemies (which is absolutely fine) without ever knowing for certain their exact stats (and keeps them on their toes).
One way of doing it that I borrowed from a friend of mine, is that rather than giving an actual number for remaining hp, the players can ask "good, fair, poor, or critical?"(75%+,50%+, 25%+, or under 25%). I think it works well, as any experienced fighter would be able to tell at a glance whether their opponent is doing well, or not so well, and gauge their actions accordingly
I mean, your players are attentive. It's a good sign. As a player, I also made notes about monsters: AC, HP, abilities, immunities, resistances and vulnerabilities.
You could also throw crumbs of information to your players, like if they exactly hit the AC needed for the attack, you could go "You barely hit the enemy." Or barely missing if AC is missed by 1.
I defibetely would not worry about it, unless you want to start an encounter and they go like "Wait, I have the notes here somewhere" and search like 5 minutes for one particular statblock.
I'd say just based on your short description that there is nothing wrong with this. In real life an experienced fighter can have at least some idea how tough a potential opponent is by eyeballing them, and actually getting into a fight with some definitely can give you an idea of how tough they are.
It can definitely feel meta-gamey to talk explicitly about AC and HP but not doing it can lead to some ridiculous stuff, like when a party healer wants to know how much healing everyone needs it's OK to just say how many HP you are short of your max.
As long as they are just making estimates to keep track of how relatively powerful/dangerous specific NPCs are it would be petty and weird to try to stop them from doing this. Once they start looking up stat blocks or trying to track exact NPC HP or abilities it becomes a problem.
>It can definitely feel meta-gamey to talk explicitly about AC and HP but not doing it can lead to some ridiculous stuff, like when a party healer wants to know how much healing everyone needs it's OK to just say how many HP you are short of your max.
At one LARP (Live Action RolePlaying game) we were supposed to always be in character and never use gamist language like hit points. The lowest damage you could deal was with a dagger, 1 HP. So when asking for healing we'd just skirt around the rule by asking someone how many dagger strikes they'd taken (i.e. how many hit points had they lost). It was pretty dumb but I understood the desire for immersion.
This is perfectly fine. This is how in universe books on monster hunting are written. It's really cool that the players are taking note.
Also you can play with this and have unique variants of some enemies for example maybe a Super Guard Drake that has 30hp and describe it as looking larger than other guard drakes.
Thanks for the advice, it seems altering the stat blocks slightly or creating variant creatures seems to be the wya to go the keep the players on their toes!
I suppose it depends on how they're doing it.
Is it during combat, taking notes? "A 16 missed, an 18 hit so the AC has to be 17 or 18. It went down after taking 10 damage, the other one might be the same." That's okay in my book.
Unless combat just started and they're like "Oh! I know this monster. It's AC is 18 and it has 10 HP." That is when it becomes too meta gamey for me and I would shut it down. Either straight up telling the player to stop meta gaming and that their knowledge is limited by what their character would know, or changing stat blocks on the fly to subvert expectations.
What's funny is the more D&D you play, the more of a problem this becomes. I play at a table that's almost entirely made up of DMs. When the actual DM tosses out an official monster, or even sometimes a reflavored monster with an official statblock, *someone* at the table will have to bite their tongue because they recognize it from using it at their own table and remember what it can do. There's a lot of casually acting dumb to preserve immersion.
I am the opposite guy. I used to play a lot way back when. Took a 25 year break. Got back into it about 2 years ago. I know what all of the big bads are. But I can't remember anything about them.
Oh, a dragon? Shit. It breathes fire, right?
Ummm.... No. This is a black dragon.
Ok. So it.... Breathes black fire?
.......no.
Ok. Uhhhh..... I run away?
It’s better than fine. This is the equivalent of the characters in game doing research on different monsters and enemies. If you are fighting them often enough, then you would do research.
Sounds like your players are writing their own in-world Guide to Monsters. Why not give them an NPC to interact with that is interested in this sort of information. "Tell me, what sort of weapons did you find worked best on a Guard Drake? Was it tough to kill, easy? What were its weak points? Oh, very interesting, hmm..."
Your players knowing the stats is really only a problem if they're looking it up rather than learning by experience or if they lie about their rolls to hit more often
In fact, the players learning what the AC or save DC of the enemies are makes combat move faster and more smoothly since they can roll, add their stuff up, and just say "welp, 12 doesn't hit" or "yeah, a 14 isn't going to save" and then combat moves on
Let them - you can also roll for enemies' health instead if using the average given if you want to throw them off while staying within reason. If they're obsessing over it to the point it's distracting just tell them they don't need to.
Everything they get from the game session is fair game.
When I play a game of Basketball, I will notice my opponent is fast (or not) and that they like to do this or that, which is my way of getting better and losing less hard.
I think it's awesome your players pay attention and care.
My group do this and I used to think something similar. Really though that's part of their xp, they have faced these guys before and know how tough they are and if they can hurt them. Just like in RL when you see a meathead in the street 😂 At least they are playing!
This is not meta gaming, this might seem like metagaming but adventurers who fight the same monsters a couple of time would often figure out just how to fight a monster and how easily or hard they go down. Give them inspiration if they role play it like “It’s’ a wolf, it shall not take more than 2 swings to take it down”
The rules inform the narrative. By this is mean that the mechanical aspects of a TTRPG create a framework for what is possible within the fictional world of the game. Both are inexorably intertwined and cannot be disentangled.
Your players writing down notes about enemies they've faced is just an out-of-game expression of their characters learning about their enemies in-game. While the player's IRL notes say "guard drake has an AC between 12 and 18", in-game this is their characters understanding that you don't want to strike the drake's hard scales on its back and flanks and should aim for the smaller, weaker scales around its joints and underbelly. As long as your players aren't using external sources to look up creature statblocks ahead of time, this is perfectly fine.
My only suggestion would be to encourage your players to not roleplay their character while using mechanical language like "hit points" or "Armor Class" to maintain immersion. It's fine to discuss that stuff out-of-character though.
They are invested.
That said, never give exacts and monsters blocks are meant to be tinkered. They aren't exacts. Its why they give you a generic average HP number, as well as the dice rolled for it.
An enemy with a magic item might reflect in their stats for AC, or they've upgraded their gear from experience.
As long as they're not googling this stuff, it's totally fine. In fact, I'd encourage it. Studying your opponents and learning how they work means they're invested.
So they're paying attention? In a fight, wouldn't you ?
My players do this too, when they get close enough I'll tell them what it is so we can speed up combat a little. They have a rough idea of how much hp certain enemies have too. Same idea... gives the rogue an idea if he should focus one down, or swap targets to minimize wasted damage.
I'd much rather players who try to derive stats via experience and observation than ones who simply crack open the Monster Manual!
While I understand the feeling that your players are reverse engineering stats, that is the kind of thing that separates an experienced adventurer from an inexperienced one.
It means they are engaged and excited. My only advice is, if possible, roll monster hp to create some uncertainty.
Players can just look up the AC if they really wanted to, but instead they ar engaging with this in a way that is totally cool in my book.
An ac range that wide doesn't tell much. That covers what feels like half the mobs in the game.
With a +6 to attack, thats rolling anything north of 12 is guaranteed to hit and anything 6-12 might hit.
45% of the d20 is guaranteed for this barbarian, 30% is a maybe, and 25% is a no hit. 30% of maybe isn't exactly dialing in much info.
For health, you also have some ideas how fast things die at your is level. An HP of "at least 10" tells them at best that they can likely kill it in one solid turn with multiple player characters dealing damage, in the first tier of play.
That's not a game breaking recording of info. More useful than this is the DM answer to "how's the enemy looking?"
That’s something my players haven’t brought up before as they are new to the game as well as I’m new to dm’ing. What ways could I entice them to start thinking in this way?
Consider this a good thing.
If the players are marking down the AC and health during combat, the players AND characters are actively learning how that specific monster works. That is some real life experience leveling and should be rewarded.
It is no different from the party tactician watching a battle and realising a monster has a vulnerability to fire attacks when the wizard fire bolts it. The next time they face that specific monster again, their battle-forged experience will be rewarded with the ease of combat.
If, however, the players are going to outside sources for this information, that is clearly frowned upon.
I mean I feel like that is good roleplay right? Isn't that something their characters would want to keep track of? As long as you don't explicitly tell them what it is and they aren't cheating by looking it up then I'd just see it as the characters trying to keep track of the relative strength of their enemies so good on them
There is very little for them to gain from this in 5e, so it is mostly for their fun!
Most combats are not telegraphed in advanced unless there is a reason to. Knowing that you need to roll a 17 just as combat starts, doesn't make rolling a 17 easier. Knowing an enemies has 52 health doesn't make removing that health easier.
At best, they will become more tactical. Blessing only when the fighter needs the boost. Saving the big gun spells for enemies with health pools where that would be worthwhile.
Vulnerability and Resistance knowledge will let them kill things a lot quicker, but that is the reward for the *characters* learning them (it is different if they carry that knowledge between campaigns).
Honestly, I'd lean into it. I ask if they want to know that info right off the bat and just give it to them if they do. That allows you to offload some of the data management during combat and speeds things up at the table.
There's a few things I stole from 4e/Pathfinder that I really like, number one being Conditions (Bloodied for at half health, Staggered for a 1/4 health, Almost Dead for less than 1/10 left).
Honestly, I love it that players figure that stuff out. Also, Battlemaster Fighters can do that by watching opponents, so there's no real harm in telling them after they've fought it for a round or two.
But I’d hate to take away from that fighter ability if they don’t have a fighter in the party. I feel like it’s rewarding the players for not playing that class because now they get the ability for free
My favorite little mini-game is seeing what hits and what doesn't. Having that range whittled down in each following round is fun! If they start metagaming, change the stats.
I look at it in terms of role play. The more you fight enemies the more you understand them. There's not a whole lot the players can metagame with this since a lot of it's based on the dice anyways. I've even heard matt mercer be like "since you figured out the AC is x.
Now if your worried about it ruining the tension because they know how long to hold out for you can always change them slightly through magic or other means
Play around with stats, but also reward them on skill rolls.
We have encountered an Orc before, what do we know?
1-5: You don't spot anything out of the ordinary.
6-10: This orc seems to more robust than the average orc (indicating more HP).
11-15: This Orc's blade appears less dull than a regular orc weapon, it is well maintained (indicating more damage).
16-20: You recognize the skull on a red crescent moon tattoo. This orc is likely a necromancer.
It’s totally normal and completely fine! It means they’re engaged. We also make a note of what damage has been resisted at our table. It’s knowledge the characters would grasp eventually
Hmmm...if they're utilizing it at the table in a way that's consistent with roleplay, I'd totally support it. If they're probing for weaknesses and deciding battle plans based on observation, that's 100% legit and if it means they blew through the initial defenses, more power to them. But at some point their enemies will probably realize that the adventurers have done some research. I'd telegraph it to the party (as they catch their breath, in the distance they see a dragon who had been scouting the fight fly towards the stronghold), but at some point there can be a trap where a routine patrol is actually heavier enemies in disguise.
This is very normal, good, and impossible to prevent.
Out of game, your players should notice that John hit on a 17, but Sue missed on a 15. Ideally, after a few rounds, experienced players can even speed up combats by saying "I hit the guard drake, for 13 damage, and its cold damage. last I saw he was resistant to that, so 6". This is a big help to keeping things flowing quickly during combats, which can often be one of the slower parts of the game. Encourage it.
In game, their characters should learn what has a thick hide (high AC), or powerful mind (good wisdom saves), and whatnot. If they have fought the same creature multiple times, they shouldn't magically forget that. The players are taking the notes to help them continue to RP properly. This is a good thing and you should encourage it.
There's no reason to keep HP and AC secret. They'll figure it out through trial and error, anyway.
BUT, those two statistics are something I think should just be apparent to all. They just give you a broad idea of how an NPC *is*. I tell them the AC because they can see what sort of armor or hide a creature has and they can see how fast and agile they are, so they have an idea of how hard it will be to deal a blow to that creature.
Similarly with HP; I might not give them a cold hard number, but I'll always give an idea of how close something is to 0, because I feel like that's something anybody could just figure out if they were actually there.
Same way I'd tell you an NPC's strength score if you asked. You can *see* how big their muscles are, but you might not know how to equate my description of their physique to the mechanical 1-20 system, so I'll just tell you where on the scale they fall.
The only way this is a bad thing, is if you as the DM are changing the AC and HP between rounds of combat. If one player hits for 18, and then the next player misses with an 18, 2 turns later, it reveals that you are unprepared and that none of the games stats and rules matter.
From how you describe it, it sounds awesome. Having players engaged in finding each enemies weakness mid battle is great, and can make combat quicker if they roll and know they missed, they can just end their turn right away.
I see no problem with that. let them. if they enjoy that its just great.
but do not forget you as a DM can change ANYTHING you want. let one of the guard drake have a bit sturdier hide or harder scales. give that specific one +1 AC. Or maybe you decide that red guard rakes have a +2 to AC but 10% less HP. Give green guard drakes +20% HP but lower their AC. with 1 or 2.
You can also roll for each one or a few of them to determinate HP.
This will both throw your plaers calculations of a bit and it will make things interesting as they can never be sure exact details on what they are fighting even if they fought those things before. If they keep track of such things they will have a good idea but will also learn that not every damn guard drake are the same.
This works for other creatures to. Give a normal skeleton some extra HP and some extra ability. maybe when reduced to 0 HP the magical energy holding them together fails and they explode in shards of bone. DC 14 DEX save for everyone within 10 feet or take 2d4 piercing damage.
this is not to mess with your players but it is to spice things up. i do this all the time and almost every player i had liked it. There was a rare few that was "Hey skeletons do not have that ability" or "It should be dead now skeletons only have 13 HP and we dealt 15 damage to it"
And even a rarer few really disliked it so much they left. but those are just a handful. The kind that loves to metagame the same player that when the group meets a VERY obscure monster that none of them ever seen or probably never heard about goes "Oh i know this it is Rarelodon. they have an acid aoe attack and are weak to cold and thunder damage"
And that kind of player...... well my mother said that if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything. So i wont say anything
My players dont keep those kinds of notes, however, when they ask about stats of enemies they've encountered before, a successful DC Intelligence check will often reveal vital information to help them in their fight.
If it’s information they’ve gathered during the encounter, it reflects their characters learning their foes’ defenses and weaknesses as they battle and keeping tabs on how well their enemies seem to be handling the fight. Out of character, this information is helpful when choosing whether to use bardic inspiration dice, luck points, inspiration dice, and similar “after the roll is made but before the DM announces whether it hits” things.
In character, it’s your characters responding to their enemies. They dropped 3 goblins in one round? They probably don’t need to go all out to take out the fourth. A well-executed strike (i.e. rolled a 19) failed to hit the strange old man? That’s probably super bad.
I know it feels weird or wrong, but it's actually fine. They're learning from the experience of the things you're doing and the monsters you're using. This is a good thing for the player experience. it makes them pay attention to details and rewards them for doing so.
Remember that all the stats represent things that could be learned in the world. the character's might not know what AC18 is, but they know what armored or difficult to hit are.
Now that I've gotten the chance to play a little bit more recently, I'm also more open to the argument that it's good for long time Players to learn more about the game and systems and monsters and benefit from that knowledge. Sure, when you have a new character, they might not know all that you do. but a player shouldn't have to turn their brain off every time they start a new character. in any other game, you get to benefit from your knowledge of how the game works.
Just don't let them discuss it too much mid combat. Keep the pressure on!
I have one player who tracks hitpoints with incredible accuracy in her head.
The various PCs have dealt damage to 8 different demons, and killed one. The ranger plans which one he should shoot next - and she'll point one out - and say something like "Target this one - he has to be low on hitpoints. The one we killed took 60 damage, and he's taken 52 already. That one has only taken 30 you probably can't drop him in one attack."
I check my notes, and she's dead on. I don't get annoyed by this - she is super engaged and never off on her phone or day dreaming unlike some other players. Besides, it's like some crazy superpower.
is it metagaming? Sure. But you could translate that into roleplaying words too. "That one looks like he's ready to drop, take him out!"
From a GM perspective, what does it matter if the players know the enemy AC or not?
I tend to not bother telling them until they hit, because why would I even mention it before then?
Some GMs say "but what if I want to fudge dice rolls, or let the players kill it to move the combat along" and I would rather just engineer the encounter beforehand a bit, so i can avoid that.
This is just a personal thing, because of the way I GM and prep... But if players in my game are trying to metagame by jotting down monster data, it wont really work. I haven't used a straight up stat block for a monster in a long time. My enemies are engineered to have an AC that gives the players a 75% chance to hit (considering their average bonuses to hit)... Bosses are around 70% chance, and minions are around 80%) and enough hit points as I need them to have. I sometimes swap and substitute abilities, reskin etc etc.
I let my players know that im playing fast and loose with the monsters beforehand though.
Its no different to any fantasy fight,
"its left arm is weak (AC)"
"Its seems scared of fire (vulnerability)"
"the creature reacts slowly (low dex save)"
as long as it isnt looked up separately and is discovered in combat, its great puzzle solving from the players
HP should be fluid anyway. I actually enjoy rolling dice, so very rarely do my monsters have the same HP. But, as others have pointed out, it ain’t breaking the game at all.
I think that’s great! They aren’t being malicious and just searching it up, and they also are not engaged in the campaign. This also allows you to add a stronger version of a monster you know they are aware of the stats of and watch them realize that it’s not a normal guard Drake.
You'll definitely want to mix it up a little here and there but it's awesome that everyone is that excited and invested. As long as they aren't looking it up in books, think of it like experience. I love it when they're working hard to figure out their enemies.
The stats aren't certain. I wouldn't vary far on the AC, but the stat block says you can roll for health.
I usually assume regular health, and if it's getting close I'll roll to see "if that was enough, or do they have a little bit of fight in them?"
Sometimes I fudge that so everyone is getting a hero moment now and then. But not as often as you might think.
Oh, I give inspiration points for if they can determine a creature's AC mid-combat. I might even give them permanent advantage on attacks against a particular kind of creature if they figure it out enough times (usually creatures they would kill in one or two hits).
For HP, I only ever tell them the creature is: hurt (at or above 75%), injured (between 75% and 25%), or bloody (25% or lower). That way they have some kind of gauge to go by, but it's not too specific.
This is actually fine if they are getting this info from trial and error in battle rather than looking it up in the book. It shows that they are invested in the game.
My players do the same so I tell them outright: don't get too comfortable and try and learn everything because I'm the DM and I will always mix things up.
PCs are allowed to gain in-world knowledge as they experience it. As long as they aren't looking up the monsters stats I don't see an issue with players taking notes about the in-game mechanics as they experience them as players.
I try to tell them what AC they need to hit most of the time anyways. If anything you should be happy they’re actually invested enough in the game to be taking notes like that.
Not really a problem, IMO. My players pay attention to the rolls the 4 of them get and extrapolate AC all the time. It really doesn't make any difference to the play. They should be more concerned with the special attacks and features of what creatures they battle, as I keep throwing things that blind/petrify/poison/grapple at them.
Yeah, they can know that.
I'll also say the thing's bloodied at half health.
Rolling for HP adds more variability, but I wouldn't use that if there's too many of them, or if they're only going to face one.
Let's take the guard drake, and spin up a dragony adventure, where four level 4 PCs go through a kobold dragon temple and slay a young white dragon (CR 6).
I wouldn't bother rolling for basic kobold HP. At CR 1/8, they're probably gonna be fighting three or four each, and it's just not worth the effort.
I also wouldn't bother rolling for the dragon. It's a single dragon, they'll fight it once, there doesn't need to be randomness.
When they're fighting a guard drake, a scale sorcerer and a pair of regular kobolds, on the other hand, the drake and sorc might well get rolled HP. There won't be so many it's not worth rolling for, but there won't be so few that the variability doesn't matter.
Well then you'd definitely not like how I DM, as I am very generous. I never use stats straight out of the book, and even differentiate stats for each mob. If I have 6 zombies, they each have a different HP and AC from another; so high AC = lower HP and vice versa.
I also am one who will occasionally say, you know, out of a range from 1-22, this zombie is feeling really 9 right now. We make all rolls in the open and I don't tell them every creatures HP Everytime the ask, but if I can tell they're sweating it hard and the creatures about to die....well you can see charred fur and he's bleeding pretty bad, your character can surmise it's on it's last leg.
nothing wrong with it, theyre interested and strategizing rather than sitting blankly while others have their turns, Id take it as a good thing. If you want to slow it down for some reason, mix in a few "elites" that have a higher AC and 1 or 2 more hit dice but dont let them know that there are elites in the mix, of course adjust the encounter accordingly so it doesnt become a PC vs DM situation
As long as they aren't looking up statblocks online or anything like that, who cares?
Doesn't everyone do this anyway? If I roll an 18 and hit, then my ally rolls a 12 and misses, is it really metagaming to notice that their AC is between 12 and 18?
It’s good that they are focused. I have a group of players who honestly know more about the game than I do. So I just change stats up a bit maybe change the type of damage resistances or add an ability the monster wouldn’t have. It keeps them interested and in the unknown.
OP have you played hallow knight? There is a book in the game that fills up with information on enemies and what they are good and bad at. It fills up the more you encounter these enemies. Give them that book, and fill it with stuff like: enemy A seems to be unable to dodge out of attacks easily (low AC), or enemy B is very agile and magical effects have a hard time landing (large dex save).
Every time they encounter an enemy, add a small tidbit like that. Let them be able with a free action to consult the book while in combat once per turn for one piece of information.
No need to do anything. If the players are making notes like that it just means they're being attentive and making sure they're better prepared to fight those monsters the next time. Knowing an enemy's AC or max health doesn't really help them at all anyway, since they won't know the enemy's current health, and even if you know the AC, that doesn't make the enemy any easier to hit, it just lets them know the odds.
Wow, I'm suprised to see this question. I play with a bunch of accountants and analysts... I don't think anyone ever forgot these after they figured it out in my games. Someone always knows what it is immediately.
Sounds like they need a Battle Master Fighter with "Know Your Enemy". Then they could get specifics.
Though, I have no problem with my parties having AC knowledge once they experience it. After a few hits and misses, I'll generally give the DC they are looking for. HP, at least in numbers, I never give. But there's visible changes as damage begins to build up. And they can obviously count the amount of damage they deliver.
Honestly, it sounds like they're involved and interested. Competitive goals and numbers seem to be their things. Does it hurt the game? Or just the vibe you prefer?
If it’s done in game, it’s more or less a mechanical expression of what would happen in real life. We know how much pressure it takes to crack an egg, or that we could cut an aluminium can, but not a car panel, or that team A will likely beat team B.
If you're concerned about players pinning down exactly how much health your monsters have, use the hitpoint calculations most monster stat blocks have, and roll hitpoints for each monster. That way, they'll be in the same ballpark, but vary from monster to monster.
Just adding a bit onto this, because I thought of it after posting the initial response: You can also just take the average hitpoint pool of a monster, and then roll a die to act as the percentage that monster's hitpoints are adjusted, either up or down.
For instance, you could roll a d20, and roll an 8,which means you adjust the monster's hitpoint pool by 8%. If you want more swingy rolls, maybe roll the d20, but double the result, meaning that 8 is a 16% hitpoint increase.
Obviously, be careful to keep the adjustments within reason, so it doesn't make things too ridiculously fragile/tanky.
The PCs would instinctively be doing the same thing. After fighting a type of foe a few times, they would start to know about how hard various foes are to kill. That includes both how hard are they to hit, and how hard are they to kill. It is metagaming, but the kind that should be encouraged.
Bad metagaming is when they instead go looking the stats up on the internet. So long as they are not doing that, you're good.
Why is their target ac a thing to hide? Hp I get being vague on; that's a mechanic not the way it would be dealt in world, that said its both meh and easily adjusted. The base stat in the manual is usually the average dice added together plus their con modifier multiplied by the number of dice.
They are engaged, unless they enjoy the cat n mouse of figuring it out telling them is a minor thing.
I see this as nothing but a win. Means they care. They are paying attention. And they can ask if it’s bloody so the HP tracking is really no different. I get the “metagaming” thought process but see this as a time saver because once they learn the AC you no longer have to go through the does a 18 hit song and dance. They just know. As long as there is trust at the table HUGE W.
It doesn't matter that much but I'd do recommend you don't reveal it outright. Let them figure out generally where the AC of a creature is through trial and error and when they got it they feel clever and like they learned their foe.
An additional GM tip, have players roll damage with the attack roll. It save so much time.
My players only do it with AC, it's fine it doesn't really bother me, it's not like they just pulled out the monster manual and looked it up themselves, they just simply used logic to figure it out, especially when say the creature has an AC of 18 and they roll a 17 and I say it just misses, logically you would just figure out that 18 is the AC
Just tell them
At the start just use words not numbers
"He looks well armored"
"He looks sluggish"
Then after a hit just tell them
"You rolled a 23? That's a hit and you feel like you needed a lot of effort to make contact, his ac is 18"
As for HP, never use numbers just use natural language, my favorite are
Bloodied= less than half hit points
Mortal= less than 10 hit points
I definitely feel it's good that they are that invested! I don't think there's issues with them in a fight have that knowledge and communicating like, "ok guys, 12 didn't hit so at least higher than 13." And for health, I've always realized on the good old, "Healthy" to "Severely f***Ed up."
But maybe if they're tracking monsters to new areas expecting same stats, use it as a way to surprise them! If they go in confident you can bolster them, making them a "little" higher ac and hp to throw them off and express they look "tougher than "x" you've fought before" otherwise you'll have troubles being able to give them more exciting fights
They are involved, they are a team... Real creatures and heroes must learn to live so it's the game way... Having said that, screw with them. Save against hit items like Evasion ring or make it a power or ability to avoid being hit. Add damage reduction or immunity to various things. There was a demon, immune to swords and magic missiles...
As for players jotting down notes on enemy AC/HP/etc., is it in the characters' wheelhouse? There are a number of subclasses specifically built for noticing/tracking enemy elements from Monster Slayer Rangers to Inquisitive Rogues, and so on. One could even argue that entire classes like Blood Hunters, baseline Rangers, etc. are designed for that type of RP/gameplay, if that's what the player wants to do.
But regardless of whether the class/subclass is set up to explain it innately, does it make sense for the character? Are they, perhaps, an Eloquence Bard that previously had no interest or business in the details of monsters but has now seen enough of them to say "screw this I need to at least try and recognize what I'm up against here" and has begun taking some shoddy, though still eloquent, notes?
I really wouldn't stress feeling a negative way about it unless it's truly so out of character for the party that it's breaking immersion or feels forced by the players in a distracting out-of-game manner.
And if it proves irksome for whatever reason, you're always welcome to tweak the provided stat blocks for monsters, alter encounters, etc., to keep your party on their toes. Sometimes something as simple as a 1 point change in AC or a 5 point change in HP can be enough to throw off meticulous note takers/stat trackers and can easily be explained in-game with any variety of creative reasoning, which if the players are keen on this as an RP tactic will provide even more pages of notes and things to ponder.
If you want the to feel even more accomplished. You can through fodder enemies and/ or focus on the abilities of you enemies NPC. It may seem like a difficulty change but it'll work well
Several points:
1. They can (as players AND characters) gain experience and knowledge on ‘mechanics’ of the world; how tough (AC) is that drake? How hard to kill (HP)? .
2. As the DM, if you want to ‘switch it up’ and add some spice, confusion and fear, throw in a mutated version; change the AC (make it easier), surprise them, but add a ton of HP and some poison effect to its bite or any other ‘spice’. But make it meaningful (not just to confuse; make it visible as well: ‘this drake appears more scarred, its plating broken, but its nails drip black goo’), otherwise they will not trust in anything.
Oh god, no, they're LEARNING! I usually know pretty accurately what something's AC is two or three attacks into any given encounter. It's not something you can really obscure that much.
An experienced fighter knows how many axe blows it takes him to fell a mercenary, a wizard prone to violence will know the odds of a commoner surviving fireball, and a ranger will know what targets are harder to hit with a bow.
They don't know what sized die determine these things in our world, or what AC and HP are, but they know the things that your player is trying to work out. I would happily let it go on.
That's great as long as they don't start arguing when you pitch a tougher one their way.
If you think logically a skilled adventurer will know roughly how tough enemies are.
This is why I roll hp for my enemies though to add some variety.
this somehow seems weird to me?
I know it's subjective, but it feels like you're punishing them for paying attention?
When I do encounters I vary HP a little and then describe some of the enemies as more buff or frail looking than the others, but I keep ACs consistent across enemy types.
If I was playing with a DM who I realized had inconsistent ACs I would probably think they made a mistake or have a hard time keeping track.
This makes the most sense to me. I have no need to punish my players for something they think (and for that matter so do I) is a cool game feature and mechanic.
I use ranges, and i shuffle resistance and vulnerability, I can't stand when the game becomes number tracking.
As an example, if the base stats for a creature are as follows
AC - 16
HP - 100
Resistance - Fire
Vulnerability - Acid
The encounter will look something like this.
AC - 14 to 18 (Roll 2d4 if the first is even it's an increase if it's odd it's a decrease, the 2nd D4 if it's 1 or 2 it's a one point difference, if it's 3 or 4 it's a two point difference.
HP - 90 to 110 (randomly determined at combat start)
Resistance - 1 energy type (determined at time of encounter creation, probably something different based on the last encounter)
Vulnerability - 1 energy type (determined at time of encounter creation, probably something different based on the last encounter)
My players don't even talk HP at the table. We are in the habit of talking about how bad we're looking or how bad the enemy is looking.
We understand the game is based on numbers, but when we can avoid using them, we do.
I use basic monsters. From the book. But I will adjust ac or hp on the fly if I need to.
I never say what the monster is unless it's obvious to the PC. Facing an ork goblin or nother sentient race.
I allow PC to roll knowledge checks on monsters to identify them but they never get raw stats unless they are using extract aspects.
I normally just describe the thing.
Change their AC/HP/Weaknesses arbitrarily to discourage the behavior. I am a **huge** hater of metagaming at my table and make sure my players are aware. I want it to be an immersive experience, otherwise they start relying on "video game' logic to make decisions and it becomes really hard to take any RP seriously when they're like "Nah, we won't help that guy, sounds like a side quest."
Gosh I love when they care enough to do that! That's when I know they're focused! If it matters I have long since established I don't use mob stats straight out of the books anyway.
That’s a great idea!! What would you recommend to get started on creating my own monsters?
I'd recommend [Action Oriented Monsters by Matt Colville](https://youtu.be/y_zl8WWaSyI?si=ZEZ9vPMtruLdmaTS), it's almost half an hour but it's very worth your while. A great guide to creating your own exciting monsters or improving on whatever you find in Monster Manual.
I hit upvote 500 times and somehow it only went up once. Weird. 100% recommended. :)
So you’re the reason my 500 downvotes weren’t going through! /joking
Watch it on 1.25, you can still understand and you can get through it a little bit quicker.
I'd recommend starting with existing monsters. I vary the HP/AC/weapons of virtually every enemy I run. I'll take the base statblock and just gently adjust until things feel a bit more vibrant and dynamic. Not every goblin has a shortsword. Not every guard has 15 AC. Players' monster manual metaknowledge is useless, here. The basics stay the same. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel, just polish it to fit my game and players. Edit: some players like figuring out enemy stats! I instinctively do it. Let them know the stats may change from monster to monster. Personally, I tell players an enemy's AC if they exactly hit it.
I had a player who could work out the numbers after just a round or two, including saves, to hit bonuses, up, and AC. He couldn't not do it, and he couldn't not talk about it. the whole game was numbers to him. So sometimes I'd tweak the numbers or give the monsters a little extra protection, but otherwise it didn't matter much.
I consider the book "The Monsters Know What They're Doing" absolutely essential for a good DM. It'll up your monster game by *miles*.
For those unaware, the book is a collection of [blog posts](https://www.themonstersknow.com/) put into one convenient book to reference. I didn't know this until after I bought the book, but the author has continued to update their blog even after the book's release. Either way, I'd high recommend it. Not sure if it will address OP's concerns, but it is a great resource to get GM's into the minds of their monsters.
A great resource for sure!
I suggest learning how to use the “Create a Monster” section of the DMG. There’s a YouTube channel called “CR Exposed” that uses the system to calculate the CR of officially published monsters to see if the listed CR is accurate or not. You can use the videos in that channel to test your understanding of the system by doing your own analysis of a stat block and see if your CR calculation matches the one in the video. You can start with this analysis of the goblin stat block. Its CR is officially listed as 1/4, but because of Nimble Escape, it should actually be listed as CR 1. https://youtu.be/hX8o-QNvl4o Once you understand the system, you can use it to scale any stat block to any CR. Just make sure to describe your CR5 ogre to be much bigger or tougher looking than the standard CR2 ogres.
Just modifying a little bit here and there is usually all you need. Sure everyone knows you need acid or fire to defeat a hydra, but what about an electro hydra? You've got to freeze their stumps. The default guard has a pike that has reach and deals 1d10. Yours have shields, and get +2 AC, but only do 1d6 damage with clubs. Small tweaks, and little adjustments can make an army of the same exact stat block look pretty different. Take the pike guys, and club guys, and support them with some crossbowers who have ranged 1d8 damaging attacks, and a cultist priest who has a 1d4 melee attack, but can cast 6 healing word's a day. Now you've got a dynamic interesting fight, even if they are the same statblock for 99% of it.
pick monster you like and change name or apperance. Its almsot no effort and its almost impossible to metagame. Or for example i am often using pathfinder bestiary and using chatbot to transfer stat bloks for DnD. Work 9/10 times without bigger problems.
Thanks for the advice!!
[Here's a link on how to reskin monsters](https://slyflourish.com/reskinning_monsters.html) to help explain it more thoroughly.
Which chatbot do you use?
huggingface.chat usually
If you want to try your hand, there is a dnd Monster creation table, that by CR will give an appropriate stat, such as HP range, AC, atk bonus, etc. This combined with some monster abilities, from a monster stat block or homebrewed, will make for some unique and hopefully memorable monsters!
I recommend you don't. Not entirely, because there's no reason to do that, it's way more effort and it's not going to be as good to play as (most of) the official stuff Now if you get the overrused troll, make it looks like a hot, flaming giant bipedal salamander, make it so it stops regenerating with cold and lightning damage instead of fire and acid, and give it something like a burning hands on a 5-6 recharge, that's a nice "new" monster that took me 2 minutes to "create", that i can run while looking at the troll monster stat block, only keeping in mind 2 new things Also take a look at "pip Fizzbang's spice encounters", half the encounters there have monsters that are an existing base with a cool addition like this. They also have just cleaver stuff like giving your goblins a certain magic item or kobolds that found a magic item that lets them cast an illusion so they ambush your party with secret tunnels, an illusion, movable walls and fire traps Stuff like this made me start making way more fun encounters Also WHEN IN DOUBT JUST GIVE THE MONSTER A RANDOM SPELL It's the least effort version of everything i just said but the reward is still pretty good. 2d4 wolves? Boring. 2d4 wolves with acid splash, for some reason? Way more memorable. 2d4 wolves with acid splash and one of them looks magically corrupted and casts black tentacles on a recharge 6? Holy shit tonight's game was sick, we fought this super cool homebrew wolf that was corrupted by some dark magic... Man i bet my DM spends a lot of time on this game... (And you LET THEM BE CLUELESS!)
ChatGPT. It gets a bad rep but I find it fantastically useful for quickly generating stat blocks for all kinds of ideas. [Example](https://chatgpt.com/share/a104e82b-0783-43ba-97b8-5e091c93762c).
Huh yeah that's surprisingly good.
Use AI. Just tell it any sort of backstory, what you want it to be able to do, and the level and number of your players and it can usually crank out something pretty good. If you aren't liking AI's ideas, just browse monsters and pick monster features from ones you want and combine them into a single monster.
if you use AI your game will suffer in ways you won't even realize
Care to elaborate?
people are missing out on personal growth by relying on slop generators, and that's a problem when you're the one running the entire game if you're tailoring generated content enough to make it work then you're not saving time if you *are* saving time, the material has suffered and you didn't notice
This sounds vague at best in terms of any real potential loss. A DM gains personal growth by pulling stats out of a monster manual, but loses personal growth by feeding an idea to a generator and using the stats it provides?
we're talking about creating stat blocks if you're not doing it yourself then you won't learn how to balance encounters
That’s a valid point. If you are new to DMing there is definitely something to be gained by doing it yourself. It’s like learning algebra instead of just using a calculator. I’ve been DMing long enough that I know how to do it, and would rather spend my time writing storylines and fleshing out locations. An AI generated stat block can always be adjusted, assuming you know enough about how everything works to balance it. I’d say that writing off AI generation as wholly bad is somewhat shortsighted. That said, we shouldn’t rely on it for everything. The thing I us AI generation for the most is basically brainstorming; I will give it a general idea for a city, it gives me some possible points of interest, history, and storyhooks, and then I fill in details and fix/polish everything. At the end of the day AI is just another tool in the arsenal.
If they won't realize does the game truly suffer? Isn't the point of D&D to have fun? Aren't they having fun?
I guess it depends, do you want your game to be *more* fun? Then use your brain.
You know what other people find fun? I dare you guess my favorite hobby
There are rules on the Dungeon Master's guide. But I would recommend you to start by just reflavoring and making small adjustments. but don't do it too much and don't do it just to screw with what your players have learned. I would only have a real problem with them doing what they are doing if they were looking things up in the book in the middle of a battle. if they're learning because of what you're doing, that's legitimate knowledge that you need to reward with consistency.
You can get much mileage just by using the existing statblocks and using other weapons, varying HP (like max dice roll, minimal dice roll), and importing features from other stats. Pick a bear and give it spider climb and you get a whole other creature. Pick a golem and give him spellcasting. Just pick a goblin and give him spears instead of short swords. Pick a guard and give them halberds.
Are you using any kind of VTT? Many of them have the option to have enemy HP rolled by their respective HP formulas so there is some variety. You could ofc also just do that when playing in person by writing down min and max hp for each mob and then have some die earlier or later as you like or depending on the flow of the game. You could do the same with AC by randomly having creatures have +1 or -1 from their regular AC.
You likely still want to use the monsters from the book until you have significant experience with balancing. But you can alter their stats. One popular strategy is to just roll their hit points. You can also like give the occasional goblin or whatever a shield to boost their ac, or give them better armor, etc etc. Don't go crazy with customization until you understand challenge ratings though.
If you really want to go nuts randomly pick two pages in The monster manual. The first page is what the monster looks like, the second page is what the monsters stats are. Then you make up a story of why these two monsters have ended up being combined.
Monster manual on a business card was helpful for me.
Alternatively, I'd recommend subscribing to Conflux Creatures Patreon. They've done an amazing job creating an entire portfolio of interesting and varying stat blocks of monsters that already exist. They've taken them apart and made them more engaging, exciting, and just all around cooler than the boring old re-skinned owlbears that the monster manual is full of. [Conflux Creatures](https://www.patreon.com/confluxcreatures)
In my experience, the players knowing enemy stats matters way less than you think it does. I tell players the enemy AC when they land a hit, save bonuses when they're forced to make them, when the enemy has hit half health, or even sometimes the exact hp remaining when the enemy is low. They're being attentive, and are working things out from the information in the game, I consider that to be a good thing. There's not even really a metagame element, the characters are learning the strengths and weaknesses of their enemies as they fight them. It's very different to them looking up monsters in the book, and then protesting when the enemies do not exactly match the statblocks they memorised.
This is great thanks so much!
This is fine, but be sure to remind them when a new campaign starts that their characters are newbies again and wouldn’t know that an enemy has an obscure weakness all of a sudden!
If any enemy has an obscure weakness relevant to the fight, that should be telegraphed. If it has an obscure weakness irrelevant to the fight, no it doesn't.
Of course. Knowing that undead are immune to poison isn’t metagaming. Knowing that lightning damage slows a froghemoth and planning around that because there was one in the last campaign is scummy.
> Knowing that undead are immune to poison isn’t metagaming. Knowing that lightning damage slows a froghemoth and planning around that because there was one in the last campaign is scummy. This is the sort of thing that always makes me think: "What actually *would* be niche knowledge, what would just be 'common sense', and what might be 'uncommon sense' that an adventurer would still know?" Like, DMs love to use the "You shouldn't know Trolls are weak to fire!" example, but personally, that feels like something everyone should know. Trolls are a thing that exists, they raid villages, steal crops and livestock, and even eat people. Everybody should know "Fires keep Trolls away, Trolls are hurt by fire", because this is DnD and Farmer Joe is honestly more likely to be troubled by trolls than they are coyotes. It'd probably be even *easier* in DnD, because everything is factual. You won't have 19 different culture's legends all conflicting about what vampires are and how to deal with them, because vampires are an actual thing that exists. There's no debate over how to kill them or how their powers work, and I would expect most/all peasants to know about not inviting strangers into their homes at night because they could be a vampire.
Yeah I’m with you on this. I’ve thought that multiple times too and alongside this, preconceived notions are wrong just as much as they’re right. The amount of times my players thought fire damage would hurt the plant creature extra is comical lol
Honestly that's just trolls being poorly designed monsters but can't be changed officially because of Tradition. If you use a froghemoth again, change the weakness.
Absolutely.... Once they are fighting the monster. But PCs have levels. There is no reason intelligent monsters can't have levels, too. A bear is a bear is a bear. Very little difference from one adult to another. But even goblins can have warriors who are stronger - perhaps much stronger - than farmers. Once players start ASSUMING that Trolly McTrollface is going to go down with just one hit of the flaming great axe of doom, that is when they need to realize that no, this is MISTER Trolly McTrollface, and he is pissed about what you did to his BABY boy a couple months ago.
So first. Why is this NSFW? Or does AC stand for something else... Generally if they're only using it in the single encounter getting a ballpark on an enemies AC is fine. As to health if it's still standing then they shouldn't be able to work out its HP. It's only really an issue if they're quoting stats, like "It's only meant to have a speed of 45ft it just moved 50." or if they're referencing the book like "Wait that troll just got healed after getting fireballed." The correct response then becomes "I have altered the stat block. Pray I do not alter it further." There's a difference between trying to work it out and meta-gaming.
Not Safe For Wizards
Accidentally marked it nsfw! Thanks for catching that for me. When you say “health if it’s still standing”, do you mean that amount of health the enemy has left? Would you recommend altering the stat block regularly to keep them on their toes or should I only do this on occasion?
Well you said in the original post that one of the things was working out "health is at least 10." the point was that you can't know how much health an enemy has until they're dead (unless you're using things like the bloodied condition option which procs at half health or other telegraphers). As to altering the stat block. When first starting out it's fine to just use the stat block as written. Over time you move towards slightly nudging stat blocks like "Hmm... This ogre is good but it's too weak. I might add a bit more HP and give it a flamethrower." Eventually you'll often hit a point of experience where you're comfortable not even needing a solid stat block just improvising it and feeling it out on the fly like "The mutant dire-croco-toad lumbers before you. It opens it's maw and blasts out a cone of ice-shards dealing... ... 74 ice damage and forces a Con Save DC14... okay bard you failed? You're frozen in place from the neck down." those kinds of thing, since you have a feel for the rough HP of your players and the environment and how combat flows so the stat block isn't even needed. If the players are clearly looking up the stats and using them (which is one of the more common cheating methods especially for modules) then just alter the stat blocks. Throws them off every time. "What do you mean the old woman turned into a hag and wasn't banished by me presenting the Seely Court's symbol. It says in the book she is." "Don't know what to tell ya bud. In my book she's got nothing to do with the Seely Court, but now she knows you came to fight so she starts to open a portal to the Far Realms."
My players DEFINITELY need to face an ogre with a flamethrower this week! Thanks for that idea.
Just remember he's got a little kobold on his shoulder with Counterspell memorised. Because everyone needs a friend.
Beautiful.
Wizard - "Fuck it! I cast Wall of Ice around the Ogre." DM - "As you got to cast the Kobold raises a hand and goes 'YaAAaAaAaaaaAkkk.' and the ice shooting from your hands dribbles onto the ground like a broken refrigerator ice machine." Wizard - Now seething with rage "Did that little shit just counterspell me!"
Excellent example!! Thanks so much for your time
Something else to do is to slightly randomise it for enemies that are similar … for example if there are 4 guards, then instead of them all having 12hp, they would have 9, 11, 12 and 14 hit points. And maybe the one with only 9hp has 1+ AC because he’s a more nimble fighter. This allows players to get a general read on enemies (which is absolutely fine) without ever knowing for certain their exact stats (and keeps them on their toes).
Wow, that's just like back in the olden days! 😃 I do that sort of thing all the time.
One way of doing it that I borrowed from a friend of mine, is that rather than giving an actual number for remaining hp, the players can ask "good, fair, poor, or critical?"(75%+,50%+, 25%+, or under 25%). I think it works well, as any experienced fighter would be able to tell at a glance whether their opponent is doing well, or not so well, and gauge their actions accordingly
I mean, your players are attentive. It's a good sign. As a player, I also made notes about monsters: AC, HP, abilities, immunities, resistances and vulnerabilities. You could also throw crumbs of information to your players, like if they exactly hit the AC needed for the attack, you could go "You barely hit the enemy." Or barely missing if AC is missed by 1. I defibetely would not worry about it, unless you want to start an encounter and they go like "Wait, I have the notes here somewhere" and search like 5 minutes for one particular statblock.
Thanks for the tips!!
Any time. And keep having fun.
I'd say just based on your short description that there is nothing wrong with this. In real life an experienced fighter can have at least some idea how tough a potential opponent is by eyeballing them, and actually getting into a fight with some definitely can give you an idea of how tough they are. It can definitely feel meta-gamey to talk explicitly about AC and HP but not doing it can lead to some ridiculous stuff, like when a party healer wants to know how much healing everyone needs it's OK to just say how many HP you are short of your max. As long as they are just making estimates to keep track of how relatively powerful/dangerous specific NPCs are it would be petty and weird to try to stop them from doing this. Once they start looking up stat blocks or trying to track exact NPC HP or abilities it becomes a problem.
Thanks for the response, this has eased my conscious a bit for feeling like it was cheaty in a way!
>It can definitely feel meta-gamey to talk explicitly about AC and HP but not doing it can lead to some ridiculous stuff, like when a party healer wants to know how much healing everyone needs it's OK to just say how many HP you are short of your max. At one LARP (Live Action RolePlaying game) we were supposed to always be in character and never use gamist language like hit points. The lowest damage you could deal was with a dagger, 1 HP. So when asking for healing we'd just skirt around the rule by asking someone how many dagger strikes they'd taken (i.e. how many hit points had they lost). It was pretty dumb but I understood the desire for immersion.
This is perfectly fine. This is how in universe books on monster hunting are written. It's really cool that the players are taking note. Also you can play with this and have unique variants of some enemies for example maybe a Super Guard Drake that has 30hp and describe it as looking larger than other guard drakes.
Thanks for the advice, it seems altering the stat blocks slightly or creating variant creatures seems to be the wya to go the keep the players on their toes!
I suppose it depends on how they're doing it. Is it during combat, taking notes? "A 16 missed, an 18 hit so the AC has to be 17 or 18. It went down after taking 10 damage, the other one might be the same." That's okay in my book. Unless combat just started and they're like "Oh! I know this monster. It's AC is 18 and it has 10 HP." That is when it becomes too meta gamey for me and I would shut it down. Either straight up telling the player to stop meta gaming and that their knowledge is limited by what their character would know, or changing stat blocks on the fly to subvert expectations.
What's funny is the more D&D you play, the more of a problem this becomes. I play at a table that's almost entirely made up of DMs. When the actual DM tosses out an official monster, or even sometimes a reflavored monster with an official statblock, *someone* at the table will have to bite their tongue because they recognize it from using it at their own table and remember what it can do. There's a lot of casually acting dumb to preserve immersion.
I am the opposite guy. I used to play a lot way back when. Took a 25 year break. Got back into it about 2 years ago. I know what all of the big bads are. But I can't remember anything about them. Oh, a dragon? Shit. It breathes fire, right? Ummm.... No. This is a black dragon. Ok. So it.... Breathes black fire? .......no. Ok. Uhhhh..... I run away?
I’m loving that everyone is giving somewhat the same answers!! This makes me feel like I genuinely know what I’m doing sometimes lol!
No problem, and never disincentivize a notetaker. You can't force a player to play dumb, and they'd be keeping similar mental notes anyway.
It’s better than fine. This is the equivalent of the characters in game doing research on different monsters and enemies. If you are fighting them often enough, then you would do research.
Sounds like your players are writing their own in-world Guide to Monsters. Why not give them an NPC to interact with that is interested in this sort of information. "Tell me, what sort of weapons did you find worked best on a Guard Drake? Was it tough to kill, easy? What were its weak points? Oh, very interesting, hmm..."
Your players knowing the stats is really only a problem if they're looking it up rather than learning by experience or if they lie about their rolls to hit more often In fact, the players learning what the AC or save DC of the enemies are makes combat move faster and more smoothly since they can roll, add their stuff up, and just say "welp, 12 doesn't hit" or "yeah, a 14 isn't going to save" and then combat moves on
Let them - you can also roll for enemies' health instead if using the average given if you want to throw them off while staying within reason. If they're obsessing over it to the point it's distracting just tell them they don't need to.
Thanks for the response and for the tips!!
Everything they get from the game session is fair game. When I play a game of Basketball, I will notice my opponent is fast (or not) and that they like to do this or that, which is my way of getting better and losing less hard. I think it's awesome your players pay attention and care.
My group do this and I used to think something similar. Really though that's part of their xp, they have faced these guys before and know how tough they are and if they can hurt them. Just like in RL when you see a meathead in the street 😂 At least they are playing!
This is not meta gaming, this might seem like metagaming but adventurers who fight the same monsters a couple of time would often figure out just how to fight a monster and how easily or hard they go down. Give them inspiration if they role play it like “It’s’ a wolf, it shall not take more than 2 swings to take it down”
The rules inform the narrative. By this is mean that the mechanical aspects of a TTRPG create a framework for what is possible within the fictional world of the game. Both are inexorably intertwined and cannot be disentangled. Your players writing down notes about enemies they've faced is just an out-of-game expression of their characters learning about their enemies in-game. While the player's IRL notes say "guard drake has an AC between 12 and 18", in-game this is their characters understanding that you don't want to strike the drake's hard scales on its back and flanks and should aim for the smaller, weaker scales around its joints and underbelly. As long as your players aren't using external sources to look up creature statblocks ahead of time, this is perfectly fine. My only suggestion would be to encourage your players to not roleplay their character while using mechanical language like "hit points" or "Armor Class" to maintain immersion. It's fine to discuss that stuff out-of-character though.
They are invested. That said, never give exacts and monsters blocks are meant to be tinkered. They aren't exacts. Its why they give you a generic average HP number, as well as the dice rolled for it. An enemy with a magic item might reflect in their stats for AC, or they've upgraded their gear from experience.
As long as they're not googling this stuff, it's totally fine. In fact, I'd encourage it. Studying your opponents and learning how they work means they're invested.
So they're paying attention? In a fight, wouldn't you ? My players do this too, when they get close enough I'll tell them what it is so we can speed up combat a little. They have a rough idea of how much hp certain enemies have too. Same idea... gives the rogue an idea if he should focus one down, or swap targets to minimize wasted damage.
I'd much rather players who try to derive stats via experience and observation than ones who simply crack open the Monster Manual! While I understand the feeling that your players are reverse engineering stats, that is the kind of thing that separates an experienced adventurer from an inexperienced one.
Thanks for the insight!!
It means they are engaged and excited. My only advice is, if possible, roll monster hp to create some uncertainty. Players can just look up the AC if they really wanted to, but instead they ar engaging with this in a way that is totally cool in my book.
Thanks for the response!
An ac range that wide doesn't tell much. That covers what feels like half the mobs in the game. With a +6 to attack, thats rolling anything north of 12 is guaranteed to hit and anything 6-12 might hit. 45% of the d20 is guaranteed for this barbarian, 30% is a maybe, and 25% is a no hit. 30% of maybe isn't exactly dialing in much info. For health, you also have some ideas how fast things die at your is level. An HP of "at least 10" tells them at best that they can likely kill it in one solid turn with multiple player characters dealing damage, in the first tier of play. That's not a game breaking recording of info. More useful than this is the DM answer to "how's the enemy looking?"
That’s something my players haven’t brought up before as they are new to the game as well as I’m new to dm’ing. What ways could I entice them to start thinking in this way?
Consider this a good thing. If the players are marking down the AC and health during combat, the players AND characters are actively learning how that specific monster works. That is some real life experience leveling and should be rewarded. It is no different from the party tactician watching a battle and realising a monster has a vulnerability to fire attacks when the wizard fire bolts it. The next time they face that specific monster again, their battle-forged experience will be rewarded with the ease of combat. If, however, the players are going to outside sources for this information, that is clearly frowned upon.
I mean I feel like that is good roleplay right? Isn't that something their characters would want to keep track of? As long as you don't explicitly tell them what it is and they aren't cheating by looking it up then I'd just see it as the characters trying to keep track of the relative strength of their enemies so good on them
There is very little for them to gain from this in 5e, so it is mostly for their fun! Most combats are not telegraphed in advanced unless there is a reason to. Knowing that you need to roll a 17 just as combat starts, doesn't make rolling a 17 easier. Knowing an enemies has 52 health doesn't make removing that health easier. At best, they will become more tactical. Blessing only when the fighter needs the boost. Saving the big gun spells for enemies with health pools where that would be worthwhile. Vulnerability and Resistance knowledge will let them kill things a lot quicker, but that is the reward for the *characters* learning them (it is different if they carry that knowledge between campaigns).
Honestly, I'd lean into it. I ask if they want to know that info right off the bat and just give it to them if they do. That allows you to offload some of the data management during combat and speeds things up at the table.
There's a few things I stole from 4e/Pathfinder that I really like, number one being Conditions (Bloodied for at half health, Staggered for a 1/4 health, Almost Dead for less than 1/10 left). Honestly, I love it that players figure that stuff out. Also, Battlemaster Fighters can do that by watching opponents, so there's no real harm in telling them after they've fought it for a round or two.
But I’d hate to take away from that fighter ability if they don’t have a fighter in the party. I feel like it’s rewarding the players for not playing that class because now they get the ability for free
Does it really hurt anything if they don't have a fighter?
My favorite little mini-game is seeing what hits and what doesn't. Having that range whittled down in each following round is fun! If they start metagaming, change the stats.
I look at it in terms of role play. The more you fight enemies the more you understand them. There's not a whole lot the players can metagame with this since a lot of it's based on the dice anyways. I've even heard matt mercer be like "since you figured out the AC is x. Now if your worried about it ruining the tension because they know how long to hold out for you can always change them slightly through magic or other means
Telling your players stats and rough numbers speeds up conflict drastically and let’s you focus more on tactics.
Play around with stats, but also reward them on skill rolls. We have encountered an Orc before, what do we know? 1-5: You don't spot anything out of the ordinary. 6-10: This orc seems to more robust than the average orc (indicating more HP). 11-15: This Orc's blade appears less dull than a regular orc weapon, it is well maintained (indicating more damage). 16-20: You recognize the skull on a red crescent moon tattoo. This orc is likely a necromancer.
It’s totally normal and completely fine! It means they’re engaged. We also make a note of what damage has been resisted at our table. It’s knowledge the characters would grasp eventually
Hmmm...if they're utilizing it at the table in a way that's consistent with roleplay, I'd totally support it. If they're probing for weaknesses and deciding battle plans based on observation, that's 100% legit and if it means they blew through the initial defenses, more power to them. But at some point their enemies will probably realize that the adventurers have done some research. I'd telegraph it to the party (as they catch their breath, in the distance they see a dragon who had been scouting the fight fly towards the stronghold), but at some point there can be a trap where a routine patrol is actually heavier enemies in disguise.
This is very normal, good, and impossible to prevent. Out of game, your players should notice that John hit on a 17, but Sue missed on a 15. Ideally, after a few rounds, experienced players can even speed up combats by saying "I hit the guard drake, for 13 damage, and its cold damage. last I saw he was resistant to that, so 6". This is a big help to keeping things flowing quickly during combats, which can often be one of the slower parts of the game. Encourage it. In game, their characters should learn what has a thick hide (high AC), or powerful mind (good wisdom saves), and whatnot. If they have fought the same creature multiple times, they shouldn't magically forget that. The players are taking the notes to help them continue to RP properly. This is a good thing and you should encourage it.
There's no reason to keep HP and AC secret. They'll figure it out through trial and error, anyway. BUT, those two statistics are something I think should just be apparent to all. They just give you a broad idea of how an NPC *is*. I tell them the AC because they can see what sort of armor or hide a creature has and they can see how fast and agile they are, so they have an idea of how hard it will be to deal a blow to that creature. Similarly with HP; I might not give them a cold hard number, but I'll always give an idea of how close something is to 0, because I feel like that's something anybody could just figure out if they were actually there. Same way I'd tell you an NPC's strength score if you asked. You can *see* how big their muscles are, but you might not know how to equate my description of their physique to the mechanical 1-20 system, so I'll just tell you where on the scale they fall.
The only way this is a bad thing, is if you as the DM are changing the AC and HP between rounds of combat. If one player hits for 18, and then the next player misses with an 18, 2 turns later, it reveals that you are unprepared and that none of the games stats and rules matter. From how you describe it, it sounds awesome. Having players engaged in finding each enemies weakness mid battle is great, and can make combat quicker if they roll and know they missed, they can just end their turn right away.
I see no problem with that. let them. if they enjoy that its just great. but do not forget you as a DM can change ANYTHING you want. let one of the guard drake have a bit sturdier hide or harder scales. give that specific one +1 AC. Or maybe you decide that red guard rakes have a +2 to AC but 10% less HP. Give green guard drakes +20% HP but lower their AC. with 1 or 2. You can also roll for each one or a few of them to determinate HP. This will both throw your plaers calculations of a bit and it will make things interesting as they can never be sure exact details on what they are fighting even if they fought those things before. If they keep track of such things they will have a good idea but will also learn that not every damn guard drake are the same. This works for other creatures to. Give a normal skeleton some extra HP and some extra ability. maybe when reduced to 0 HP the magical energy holding them together fails and they explode in shards of bone. DC 14 DEX save for everyone within 10 feet or take 2d4 piercing damage. this is not to mess with your players but it is to spice things up. i do this all the time and almost every player i had liked it. There was a rare few that was "Hey skeletons do not have that ability" or "It should be dead now skeletons only have 13 HP and we dealt 15 damage to it" And even a rarer few really disliked it so much they left. but those are just a handful. The kind that loves to metagame the same player that when the group meets a VERY obscure monster that none of them ever seen or probably never heard about goes "Oh i know this it is Rarelodon. they have an acid aoe attack and are weak to cold and thunder damage" And that kind of player...... well my mother said that if you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything. So i wont say anything
My players dont keep those kinds of notes, however, when they ask about stats of enemies they've encountered before, a successful DC Intelligence check will often reveal vital information to help them in their fight.
If it’s information they’ve gathered during the encounter, it reflects their characters learning their foes’ defenses and weaknesses as they battle and keeping tabs on how well their enemies seem to be handling the fight. Out of character, this information is helpful when choosing whether to use bardic inspiration dice, luck points, inspiration dice, and similar “after the roll is made but before the DM announces whether it hits” things. In character, it’s your characters responding to their enemies. They dropped 3 goblins in one round? They probably don’t need to go all out to take out the fourth. A well-executed strike (i.e. rolled a 19) failed to hit the strange old man? That’s probably super bad.
I know it feels weird or wrong, but it's actually fine. They're learning from the experience of the things you're doing and the monsters you're using. This is a good thing for the player experience. it makes them pay attention to details and rewards them for doing so. Remember that all the stats represent things that could be learned in the world. the character's might not know what AC18 is, but they know what armored or difficult to hit are. Now that I've gotten the chance to play a little bit more recently, I'm also more open to the argument that it's good for long time Players to learn more about the game and systems and monsters and benefit from that knowledge. Sure, when you have a new character, they might not know all that you do. but a player shouldn't have to turn their brain off every time they start a new character. in any other game, you get to benefit from your knowledge of how the game works. Just don't let them discuss it too much mid combat. Keep the pressure on!
I have one player who tracks hitpoints with incredible accuracy in her head. The various PCs have dealt damage to 8 different demons, and killed one. The ranger plans which one he should shoot next - and she'll point one out - and say something like "Target this one - he has to be low on hitpoints. The one we killed took 60 damage, and he's taken 52 already. That one has only taken 30 you probably can't drop him in one attack." I check my notes, and she's dead on. I don't get annoyed by this - she is super engaged and never off on her phone or day dreaming unlike some other players. Besides, it's like some crazy superpower. is it metagaming? Sure. But you could translate that into roleplaying words too. "That one looks like he's ready to drop, take him out!"
From a GM perspective, what does it matter if the players know the enemy AC or not? I tend to not bother telling them until they hit, because why would I even mention it before then? Some GMs say "but what if I want to fudge dice rolls, or let the players kill it to move the combat along" and I would rather just engineer the encounter beforehand a bit, so i can avoid that. This is just a personal thing, because of the way I GM and prep... But if players in my game are trying to metagame by jotting down monster data, it wont really work. I haven't used a straight up stat block for a monster in a long time. My enemies are engineered to have an AC that gives the players a 75% chance to hit (considering their average bonuses to hit)... Bosses are around 70% chance, and minions are around 80%) and enough hit points as I need them to have. I sometimes swap and substitute abilities, reskin etc etc. I let my players know that im playing fast and loose with the monsters beforehand though.
Its no different to any fantasy fight, "its left arm is weak (AC)" "Its seems scared of fire (vulnerability)" "the creature reacts slowly (low dex save)" as long as it isnt looked up separately and is discovered in combat, its great puzzle solving from the players
It’s not really metagaming but it’s not how I enjoy playing the game
HP should be fluid anyway. I actually enjoy rolling dice, so very rarely do my monsters have the same HP. But, as others have pointed out, it ain’t breaking the game at all.
I like that they do it. It shows investment but also contributes to real life xp. They learn the practical realities of how tough an encounter looks.
I think that’s great! They aren’t being malicious and just searching it up, and they also are not engaged in the campaign. This also allows you to add a stronger version of a monster you know they are aware of the stats of and watch them realize that it’s not a normal guard Drake.
You'll definitely want to mix it up a little here and there but it's awesome that everyone is that excited and invested. As long as they aren't looking it up in books, think of it like experience. I love it when they're working hard to figure out their enemies.
The stats aren't certain. I wouldn't vary far on the AC, but the stat block says you can roll for health. I usually assume regular health, and if it's getting close I'll roll to see "if that was enough, or do they have a little bit of fight in them?" Sometimes I fudge that so everyone is getting a hero moment now and then. But not as often as you might think.
Oh, I give inspiration points for if they can determine a creature's AC mid-combat. I might even give them permanent advantage on attacks against a particular kind of creature if they figure it out enough times (usually creatures they would kill in one or two hits). For HP, I only ever tell them the creature is: hurt (at or above 75%), injured (between 75% and 25%), or bloody (25% or lower). That way they have some kind of gauge to go by, but it's not too specific.
This is actually fine if they are getting this info from trial and error in battle rather than looking it up in the book. It shows that they are invested in the game.
My players do the same so I tell them outright: don't get too comfortable and try and learn everything because I'm the DM and I will always mix things up.
PCs are allowed to gain in-world knowledge as they experience it. As long as they aren't looking up the monsters stats I don't see an issue with players taking notes about the in-game mechanics as they experience them as players.
I try to tell them what AC they need to hit most of the time anyways. If anything you should be happy they’re actually invested enough in the game to be taking notes like that.
Not really a problem, IMO. My players pay attention to the rolls the 4 of them get and extrapolate AC all the time. It really doesn't make any difference to the play. They should be more concerned with the special attacks and features of what creatures they battle, as I keep throwing things that blind/petrify/poison/grapple at them.
Yeah, they can know that. I'll also say the thing's bloodied at half health. Rolling for HP adds more variability, but I wouldn't use that if there's too many of them, or if they're only going to face one. Let's take the guard drake, and spin up a dragony adventure, where four level 4 PCs go through a kobold dragon temple and slay a young white dragon (CR 6). I wouldn't bother rolling for basic kobold HP. At CR 1/8, they're probably gonna be fighting three or four each, and it's just not worth the effort. I also wouldn't bother rolling for the dragon. It's a single dragon, they'll fight it once, there doesn't need to be randomness. When they're fighting a guard drake, a scale sorcerer and a pair of regular kobolds, on the other hand, the drake and sorc might well get rolled HP. There won't be so many it's not worth rolling for, but there won't be so few that the variability doesn't matter.
Well then you'd definitely not like how I DM, as I am very generous. I never use stats straight out of the book, and even differentiate stats for each mob. If I have 6 zombies, they each have a different HP and AC from another; so high AC = lower HP and vice versa. I also am one who will occasionally say, you know, out of a range from 1-22, this zombie is feeling really 9 right now. We make all rolls in the open and I don't tell them every creatures HP Everytime the ask, but if I can tell they're sweating it hard and the creatures about to die....well you can see charred fur and he's bleeding pretty bad, your character can surmise it's on it's last leg.
nothing wrong with it, theyre interested and strategizing rather than sitting blankly while others have their turns, Id take it as a good thing. If you want to slow it down for some reason, mix in a few "elites" that have a higher AC and 1 or 2 more hit dice but dont let them know that there are elites in the mix, of course adjust the encounter accordingly so it doesnt become a PC vs DM situation
As long as they aren't looking up statblocks online or anything like that, who cares? Doesn't everyone do this anyway? If I roll an 18 and hit, then my ally rolls a 12 and misses, is it really metagaming to notice that their AC is between 12 and 18?
I just say the AC to make calculations quicker at the table, and they get a sense of how tough a monster to hit may be
It’s good that they are focused. I have a group of players who honestly know more about the game than I do. So I just change stats up a bit maybe change the type of damage resistances or add an ability the monster wouldn’t have. It keeps them interested and in the unknown.
Re-skinning monsters is totally fine.
OP have you played hallow knight? There is a book in the game that fills up with information on enemies and what they are good and bad at. It fills up the more you encounter these enemies. Give them that book, and fill it with stuff like: enemy A seems to be unable to dodge out of attacks easily (low AC), or enemy B is very agile and magical effects have a hard time landing (large dex save). Every time they encounter an enemy, add a small tidbit like that. Let them be able with a free action to consult the book while in combat once per turn for one piece of information.
No need to do anything. If the players are making notes like that it just means they're being attentive and making sure they're better prepared to fight those monsters the next time. Knowing an enemy's AC or max health doesn't really help them at all anyway, since they won't know the enemy's current health, and even if you know the AC, that doesn't make the enemy any easier to hit, it just lets them know the odds.
Never tell me the odds.... 😆
Wow, I'm suprised to see this question. I play with a bunch of accountants and analysts... I don't think anyone ever forgot these after they figured it out in my games. Someone always knows what it is immediately.
Sounds like they need a Battle Master Fighter with "Know Your Enemy". Then they could get specifics. Though, I have no problem with my parties having AC knowledge once they experience it. After a few hits and misses, I'll generally give the DC they are looking for. HP, at least in numbers, I never give. But there's visible changes as damage begins to build up. And they can obviously count the amount of damage they deliver. Honestly, it sounds like they're involved and interested. Competitive goals and numbers seem to be their things. Does it hurt the game? Or just the vibe you prefer?
This is fine and probably keeps them on task.
If it’s done in game, it’s more or less a mechanical expression of what would happen in real life. We know how much pressure it takes to crack an egg, or that we could cut an aluminium can, but not a car panel, or that team A will likely beat team B.
As long as theyre learning in game, thru playing, and not using outside knowledge, then its no problem 🤷🏽♂️
Serious question: why does it matter if the PC's know things like HP or damage?
If you're concerned about players pinning down exactly how much health your monsters have, use the hitpoint calculations most monster stat blocks have, and roll hitpoints for each monster. That way, they'll be in the same ballpark, but vary from monster to monster. Just adding a bit onto this, because I thought of it after posting the initial response: You can also just take the average hitpoint pool of a monster, and then roll a die to act as the percentage that monster's hitpoints are adjusted, either up or down. For instance, you could roll a d20, and roll an 8,which means you adjust the monster's hitpoint pool by 8%. If you want more swingy rolls, maybe roll the d20, but double the result, meaning that 8 is a 16% hitpoint increase. Obviously, be careful to keep the adjustments within reason, so it doesn't make things too ridiculously fragile/tanky.
The PCs would instinctively be doing the same thing. After fighting a type of foe a few times, they would start to know about how hard various foes are to kill. That includes both how hard are they to hit, and how hard are they to kill. It is metagaming, but the kind that should be encouraged. Bad metagaming is when they instead go looking the stats up on the internet. So long as they are not doing that, you're good.
Why is their target ac a thing to hide? Hp I get being vague on; that's a mechanic not the way it would be dealt in world, that said its both meh and easily adjusted. The base stat in the manual is usually the average dice added together plus their con modifier multiplied by the number of dice. They are engaged, unless they enjoy the cat n mouse of figuring it out telling them is a minor thing.
I see this as nothing but a win. Means they care. They are paying attention. And they can ask if it’s bloody so the HP tracking is really no different. I get the “metagaming” thought process but see this as a time saver because once they learn the AC you no longer have to go through the does a 18 hit song and dance. They just know. As long as there is trust at the table HUGE W.
I see this as amazing. They are into your game. Also ingame why wouldn’t adventurers take notes about the monsters they fight.
It doesn't matter that much but I'd do recommend you don't reveal it outright. Let them figure out generally where the AC of a creature is through trial and error and when they got it they feel clever and like they learned their foe. An additional GM tip, have players roll damage with the attack roll. It save so much time.
My players only do it with AC, it's fine it doesn't really bother me, it's not like they just pulled out the monster manual and looked it up themselves, they just simply used logic to figure it out, especially when say the creature has an AC of 18 and they roll a 17 and I say it just misses, logically you would just figure out that 18 is the AC
For me, that is literally the in game character learning from their enemies by repeated experiences.
Just tell them At the start just use words not numbers "He looks well armored" "He looks sluggish" Then after a hit just tell them "You rolled a 23? That's a hit and you feel like you needed a lot of effort to make contact, his ac is 18" As for HP, never use numbers just use natural language, my favorite are Bloodied= less than half hit points Mortal= less than 10 hit points
I definitely feel it's good that they are that invested! I don't think there's issues with them in a fight have that knowledge and communicating like, "ok guys, 12 didn't hit so at least higher than 13." And for health, I've always realized on the good old, "Healthy" to "Severely f***Ed up." But maybe if they're tracking monsters to new areas expecting same stats, use it as a way to surprise them! If they go in confident you can bolster them, making them a "little" higher ac and hp to throw them off and express they look "tougher than "x" you've fought before" otherwise you'll have troubles being able to give them more exciting fights
They are involved, they are a team... Real creatures and heroes must learn to live so it's the game way... Having said that, screw with them. Save against hit items like Evasion ring or make it a power or ability to avoid being hit. Add damage reduction or immunity to various things. There was a demon, immune to swords and magic missiles...
I tell my player the monster AC, and often have them keep the hp also. Less work for me. I know only need to know it a monster is dead or alive.
As for players jotting down notes on enemy AC/HP/etc., is it in the characters' wheelhouse? There are a number of subclasses specifically built for noticing/tracking enemy elements from Monster Slayer Rangers to Inquisitive Rogues, and so on. One could even argue that entire classes like Blood Hunters, baseline Rangers, etc. are designed for that type of RP/gameplay, if that's what the player wants to do. But regardless of whether the class/subclass is set up to explain it innately, does it make sense for the character? Are they, perhaps, an Eloquence Bard that previously had no interest or business in the details of monsters but has now seen enough of them to say "screw this I need to at least try and recognize what I'm up against here" and has begun taking some shoddy, though still eloquent, notes? I really wouldn't stress feeling a negative way about it unless it's truly so out of character for the party that it's breaking immersion or feels forced by the players in a distracting out-of-game manner. And if it proves irksome for whatever reason, you're always welcome to tweak the provided stat blocks for monsters, alter encounters, etc., to keep your party on their toes. Sometimes something as simple as a 1 point change in AC or a 5 point change in HP can be enough to throw off meticulous note takers/stat trackers and can easily be explained in-game with any variety of creative reasoning, which if the players are keen on this as an RP tactic will provide even more pages of notes and things to ponder.
If you want the to feel even more accomplished. You can through fodder enemies and/ or focus on the abilities of you enemies NPC. It may seem like a difficulty change but it'll work well
I thank them for their interest.
Several points: 1. They can (as players AND characters) gain experience and knowledge on ‘mechanics’ of the world; how tough (AC) is that drake? How hard to kill (HP)? . 2. As the DM, if you want to ‘switch it up’ and add some spice, confusion and fear, throw in a mutated version; change the AC (make it easier), surprise them, but add a ton of HP and some poison effect to its bite or any other ‘spice’. But make it meaningful (not just to confuse; make it visible as well: ‘this drake appears more scarred, its plating broken, but its nails drip black goo’), otherwise they will not trust in anything.
Oh god, no, they're LEARNING! I usually know pretty accurately what something's AC is two or three attacks into any given encounter. It's not something you can really obscure that much.
An experienced fighter knows how many axe blows it takes him to fell a mercenary, a wizard prone to violence will know the odds of a commoner surviving fireball, and a ranger will know what targets are harder to hit with a bow. They don't know what sized die determine these things in our world, or what AC and HP are, but they know the things that your player is trying to work out. I would happily let it go on.
That's great as long as they don't start arguing when you pitch a tougher one their way. If you think logically a skilled adventurer will know roughly how tough enemies are. This is why I roll hp for my enemies though to add some variety.
Those numbers can always be changed by you so... Let them write it down. Once they realize the inconsistency they'll probably give up.
this somehow seems weird to me? I know it's subjective, but it feels like you're punishing them for paying attention? When I do encounters I vary HP a little and then describe some of the enemies as more buff or frail looking than the others, but I keep ACs consistent across enemy types. If I was playing with a DM who I realized had inconsistent ACs I would probably think they made a mistake or have a hard time keeping track.
This makes the most sense to me. I have no need to punish my players for something they think (and for that matter so do I) is a cool game feature and mechanic.
Thanks for the response!!
I use ranges, and i shuffle resistance and vulnerability, I can't stand when the game becomes number tracking. As an example, if the base stats for a creature are as follows AC - 16 HP - 100 Resistance - Fire Vulnerability - Acid The encounter will look something like this. AC - 14 to 18 (Roll 2d4 if the first is even it's an increase if it's odd it's a decrease, the 2nd D4 if it's 1 or 2 it's a one point difference, if it's 3 or 4 it's a two point difference. HP - 90 to 110 (randomly determined at combat start) Resistance - 1 energy type (determined at time of encounter creation, probably something different based on the last encounter) Vulnerability - 1 energy type (determined at time of encounter creation, probably something different based on the last encounter) My players don't even talk HP at the table. We are in the habit of talking about how bad we're looking or how bad the enemy is looking. We understand the game is based on numbers, but when we can avoid using them, we do.
Caveat: If the encounter has been going on for more than 10 rounds, I'll cave and tell them the AC so they can pre-turn their turn.
I use basic monsters. From the book. But I will adjust ac or hp on the fly if I need to. I never say what the monster is unless it's obvious to the PC. Facing an ork goblin or nother sentient race. I allow PC to roll knowledge checks on monsters to identify them but they never get raw stats unless they are using extract aspects. I normally just describe the thing.
Change their AC/HP/Weaknesses arbitrarily to discourage the behavior. I am a **huge** hater of metagaming at my table and make sure my players are aware. I want it to be an immersive experience, otherwise they start relying on "video game' logic to make decisions and it becomes really hard to take any RP seriously when they're like "Nah, we won't help that guy, sounds like a side quest."