GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

One of the big things I noticed upon switching from DnD to GURPS about 7 years ago was the lack of any sort of monster compendium. An interesting byproduct of this is that my players, all of which own the DnD monster manual, no longer knew what sort of being they were facing. They went from a world where they knew the powers, stats, ac, and damage of every monster (or least the general idea from seeing its entry) to having no clue as to what they were facing.

This is mostly fine. The mystery is pretty great and keeps them on their toes. However, the players no longer knowing the monster forces all the math onto the GM. "I hit for 14 impaling, armor divisor 2, 4 burning follow up." The GM, if he didn't reveal the monsters DR, is now stuck mathing that out, nullifying the autocalculation feature of many GURPS aids and sheets (such as the GURPS Calculator, have you checked it out? It's insanely amazing.)

What's your policy on keeping the statistics of monsters secret? What are the pros and cons in your opinion?

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Only keep stats secret for boss-type monsters. Anything that can be encountered on a fairly regular basis in the wild should be well known, and the stats can be read in the Beginner's Guide to Adventuring.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I don't use many "monsters", as most of the opposition is people, whose armour and equipment varies wildly. I can usually keep track of the damage calculations in my head without any particular difficulty. I will tell the players if they don't seem to be hurting an opponent.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I think most of us use people as the primary opposition.

I do like to give the characters a chance to figure out exactly what they're up against. After the first few shots I'll give a skill range, let them know if they guy is particularly skilled, and so on. Equipment DOES have published stats. I do like to do this dependent on per and IQ based rolls though.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I have to say I always took that for granted as part of the GM's job. It isn't as if the calculations were hard; I've never felt that they slowed things up much.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

It's not too bad, but it does slow down play when using powers as you get a lot of AOE with follow up on 5 guys type stuff and they all have varying DR.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I find that in my group they have pretty much figured out the stats by the end of the first fight. After that, I let them know so they can help with calculations ect...

However, when a 'new' monster comes up they have to figure it out for themselves again. Also, if it's a variant on something they have encountered before, I make sure they know.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I don't see how simple mental arithmetic can be a problem for a GM, either.

I think I'm vaguely aware of a few cases where GURPS expects you to divide two-digit figures by a non-integer figure (granted, 1.5 is the least bad non-integer figure there is to divide by, after 0.5 and 0.33 and 0.25, but still...), which strikes me as quite error-prone in addition to being mental-labour-intensive, but if that started being relevant for me, I'd just use a spreadsheet to create a lookup table for the results.

Or if (and that's quite likely to be the case) it's the same 3 or 4 usual suspects that keep rearing their complexicated heads, then I'd just use a pocket calculator the first few times and then be able to remember the results after that.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

"Monsters" can be "people" too. Both in GURPS (including in GURPS DF), and in recent editions of D&D. It doesn't matter if the players can look up the stats of a basic Ogre in the D&D 3.0 or 3.5 Monster Manual, because this Ogre isn't a basic Ogre, it's an Ogre with 7 levels of Barbarian and 3 levels of Druid on top of that, and so many of its abilities are enhanced far beyond that of a basic Ogre.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I do things much the same way, usually saying "ping" or "ouch" depending on whether the hit's penetrated armour (and of course if there's major wounding involved that's generally visible). If a fight's lasting a long time I'll reveal after a few hits what DR the target has, and the players can take on the calculations.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

He didn't say "It's a problem" he said "It slows down play." And it does: If you attack for 10 damage with a holy sword that has an armor divisor of 2 vs an unliving zombie with a DR of 6 and an x2 vulnerability to holiness, then you need to take 10 damage, subtract (6/2) 3 DR and then multiply the result by 1.5 and then again by 2, for a total of 21 damage.

It's not IMPOSSIBLE, but it does take a few more moments than it might otherwise.

In my experience, though, you get pretty good at it. You're also the one who determines the monsters and the treasures, so if you don't like this sort of thing, don't include it. Or get some pretty standard set-ups that you're quite familiar with.

Also, you don't HAVE to hide the monsters from the players. I prefer it in horror games, but for a game like DF, I wouldn't bother to hide most traits from my players.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Oh, it can. One of the best GMs I know for story and characterisation has to count on their fingers to add up some combinations of 3d6. They don't run GURPS and don't like to play it, calling it "too number-crunchy". They're happy with a fairly simple standard of D&D, or oWoD.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I know what you mean. I recently had to GM a single werewolf. It had Unliving, a Vulnerabilty to silver, and Regeneration. It's GURPS, so I could easily have used common sense when determining the actual injury caused by my player's various attacks. But, I'm more than a bit of a simulationist GM, and I know my way around a spreadsheet, so I made a spreadsheet that tracked everything.

I like to make my combat rolls in the open. I enjoy the look of abject hopelessness on my player's faces when I roll for a monster's attack, throw a 15, and say "that hits". :)

Also, I think allowing them to see the rolls and their consequences allows them to develop a realistic assessment of their foe's abilities over the course of the encounter, much as they would in "real life".

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I've long reached the point in GURPS where I can imagine a creature and spontaneously ballpark what rolls should make it succeed at what action, closely enough for table play. That's ridiculously faster than adding seven barbarian levels, and more versatile.

That said, I'll inform my players after a few rolls that "They have just 7 ST", and "it's Block is, like, 15!", as they should start to guess. I'll also give rolls to know or guess these things, as appropriate - I'm especially generous about revealing resistances and hinting at vulnerabilities, because using an unusual for of attack is pretty much always way more fun than killing everything with raw damage.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I'm not one to 'hide' much. But I also don't go out of my way to ell them, or even reveal everything if they ask.

If they ask specific questions their characters should know the answers to (ie stats for common foes) I'll give it to them. If it's something they could know based on specialized skills (stats for uncommon or rare foes) they get a roll. If it's something they couldn't know, they get a "Nope" (which is damned rare).

As for plots and such, they generally know the early overarching plot line going in, for example in my currently running Kingmaker campaign:

They knew their mission would be to survey an area for future settlement and clear trade routes going through it. They also knew they'd have to deal with the bandits in the area and negotiate with indigenous residents (how so ever they chose). They also know that as they finish this mission they'll encounter some serious mission creep in the "And now you're to build a city, and then a 'kingdom', and stuff".

They don't know all the other stuff going on in the background or the final chapters. And they know me well enough to know that even if they went and read the Pathfinder Adventure Path I'm stealing the plot line from, they still wouldn't get those answers, because they've changed.

They also know that there are things that will happen or mysteries uncovered or plots or such that will never get answered. Mostly because I never bothered to have an answer, just an occurrence, a side plot, or a one-shot event to spice things up or have fun, and think some mysteries are best when unsolved.

As time goes on I'll give hints and clues ingame to show them where the plots are going, or if it looks like they aren't noticing, flat out tell them. This way we stay 'on the same page', I'm not expecting them to go one way when they decide to the other, and they aren't expecting one type of campaign that goes a different direction.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

My policy is that enemy DR is secret unless you know the enemy type, but you start to get a feel of the DR after a while in the fight.

When encountering monsters the player can roll against appropriate hidden lore to know things about the monster, then they get 1 random piece of information for success and one more for each 3 success by. Those include things like DR,HP,Attributes,Defenses,attacks and so on. I have a table for it.

Also when they hit they get feedback on resistance and defenses and so on.
Thing like "It feels that the enemy armor stopped most of your damage/almost all of the damage/about half your damage/a small part of the damage". and whatever. The same thing with things like defense "The enemy dodges your attack with ease" "The enemy just barely gets his weapon in time to parry position" and so on.

Normally it does not take many hits to get a feel for the damage or many defenses to get the feel for the defense level and so on.

But, yes in the end I do the math, I do not find that it really takes any more time than keeping tally of the hitpoints as I use a spreadsheet for the tracking anyway.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I've always just used a pad of graph paper, and noted the number of points of injury, the location, and the functionality of each combatant. I do now have a tablet with spreadsheet functionality, but I've never really become familiar with spreadsheets to the point of using them for simple record keeping.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

For human opponents, I usually let players know the DR, since characters can see the armor, unless there is some magical or other hidden protection the characters would have no way of knowing about.

For previously unencountered creatures or human(oid)s with secret protection, I keep DR secret at first. Once the PCs get in a couple of hits that actually penetrate, and can see the results, I often let them know the DR number so they can help with the number crunching.

For something obvious like zombies, I would be open with letting players know they have IT: Unliving. For less well known creatures, or a vampire that they don't know is a vampire for example, I'd probably keep that to myself, and do the math for injury tolerance in my head.

I don't announce opponents' stats, but I roll in the open, so if a fight goes on for a little while, players start to get an idea of the opponents' skill and defense levels.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I did find a useful spreadsheet online for tracking damage and fatigue.

I downloaded it and modified it a bit, so that it reminds me when a character is down to 1/3 hit points, in addition to when they go to 0.

I also added a couple of columns for speed, move, dodge and parry, and skill level and damage for NPCs' primary weapons. It helps me keep track of combats with large numbers of mook-level opponents.

For smaller fights, I get by with a pencil and notepad.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

For the first couple decades of our playing D&D, my players intentionally avoided the monster manuals in favor of being surprised by monsters. Each of them either didn't like spoilers, felt like it was cheating, or both. It was actually a lot of fun. When I moved away, one guy took up the mantle of DM and reluctantly looked in the monster manuals.

These days we play a lot of GURPS and not much has changed. We don't talk in terms of stats other than the PCs' stats. As the GM, I use the types of non-GURPS specific descriptors that you might find in a novel when describing the world. This includes monster traits as well as wounds. The players can usually guess certain traits based on the descriptions. But they tend to focus on how traits relate to the story rather than numbers. Sometimes, I don't even describe the PC's injury in terms of HP during action (unless of course they ask).

I do make exceptions for times when the players specifically ask about GURPS stats. To get an accurate answer, the PCs may need relevant skills. But they very rarely ask.

When it comes to making calculations, I have the benefit of Mathematical Talent. So I make just about all the calculations and it doesn't slow down game play. The players tend to like this and generally don't bother looking under the hood as that would slow down the game and take away from the action.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I roll everything in secret. Whatever they discover they must discover in game. If they do metamathmatics to figure out some game numbers that's cool. It only works if they know all of the modifiers and I don't really care if they figure it out. If they have HT 13 and no armor and they get hit by a creature's claws and take 9 injury, they know they are in danger. That's the part I care about. The math is simple and I play with a extremely intelligent group. Luckily, they care more about the story and adventure than about the math. The mystery of not knowing and the thrill of discovery excites them.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

One pro is that it gives a simple mechanical benefit for those points spent on Hidden Lore and/or the effort of getting an intact monster corpse home for study.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

My BS includes a minor in mathematics, meaning I've gone through diff-eq, stats, etc. but I have what GURPS would classify as incompetence with basic arithmetic. After middle school, the math portions of my brain were filled with other things, and calculators worked better than my faulty rote memory. Thankfully, my fellow gamers can add better than me, so I sometimes just start saying the dice numbers and bonuses. :)

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I put what G&AInc calls a "spreadsheet" on a whiteboard visible to everyone. Each PC has a line, and there's an empty line between every PC. Each row includes Move, Speed, Perception, Observation, preferred defense, and some notes.

(In my game, Perception allows someone to see -- for instance -- the two young men hanging out on the stoop of the building across the street, the young, scantily-clad woman under the street light eyeing them, the bum with the paper bag lying in the mouth of the alley halfway down the block, and the car moving slowly down the block toward the area with the street light. In addition to surveillance, Observation allows them to note that the thugs seem to be armed and guarding the entrance to the building, the two people in the car are looking at the thugs and not at the woman, and that the woman has her hand inside a large, heavy handbag, and the bum seems to be talking into his paper bag while watching the whole situation -- including the actions of the PCs.)

Once the encounter starts, I'll note where in the turn-order the opposition acts. Some will be faster, and others slower. I roll dice openly, so the players mostly know, by the end of the first round, the speed and general capabilities of what they face.

However, that first round is pretty fraught, because they're never sure what the villains/monsters can or will do. Also, if the thing can do special things on follow-ups (poison, rakes with back claws, that sort of thing), they won't know that until it gets tried -- on them.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Im im agreement with the policy of revealing relatively mundane information, specially after a blow or two has been exchanged.

Im all for a quicker pace in combat, and due to the sheer volume of NPCs in some battles, I feel like im doing everyone a favor if I reveal some information that would otherwise be secret, such as the enemy mage skill level at a certain spell that he is spamming, specially if hes using it at the very edge of his range.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I tend to be in Maptool alot. And since it calculates math for me I don't have these problems.

/rollsecret ((15 - 4) * 1.5)

I keep stuff hidden, not cuz I'm worried that players know monster stats or figure out weaknesses, etc. I just like them to rely on my description of what happens. state of things, etc. And I handwaive a lot of number to speed things along sometimes or change a few outcomes. Easier to do when players aren't totally sure where the thing is at =)

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

On the whole thing about human opponents making knowledge of stats unlikely I'm going to have to disagree. First of all mooks will be wearing munitions arms, so knowing how tough their armor is is probably a matter of public record. General stats of the person inside the armor, while not as likely is still highly probable

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

"What's your policy on keeping the statistics of monsters secret? What are the pros and cons in your opinion?"

I almost always keep all game statistics of things that aren't on a PC record sheet, described only in terms of what the PCs perceive about them.

Reasons:
I think game stats (attributes, damage, skill levels, die rolls, etc) tend to "break the third wall" and move the experience in the direction of game rules and away from the fictional situation the game is about. I want the primary source to be the game world, not the game system. The reason our group converted from The Fantasy Trip to GURPS, was because after several years playing TFT, we couldn't help relating to the game system (which we had mastered) more than the imagined situation (and the limitations in that system), which is particularly disappointing when the rules don't represent the situation well, and where they give advantage to strategies that are gamey and wouldn't really happen that way in that situation.

What I do do instead, is provide information in English descriptions and hints appropriate to the PCs' abilities (and often die rolls). For example, a decent perception roll may tell a fighter watching another what that person's skill levels seem like in comparison to their own. Similarly for what attacks seem to be doing to targets, and how injured other people are. I DO want aware characters to have a good idea what is going on, but I don't want them to relate to it in terms of numbers, let alone to have accurate information what the numbers are.

If they showed a "health bar" during the final fight in the film Rocky, it would (be hilarious and) undermine the tension and wonder about it.

However, I happen to be quite good at doing math in my head quickly, especially GURPS math, since I've done so much of it it's nearly automatic for me. I remember how it was when I was first learning the system, though. If it helps to have other players help with math, and players haven't gotten to the point where that's a threat to the third wall, I'm sure it could work ok to let that information out.

The automatic die-roller page doesn't have damage multiplier and damage resistance, but it'd be quite easy to make a simple computer tool to do damage rolls. One could even have a bunch of shortcut buttons for common cases. Maybe even break it into two buttons, so you click once on the attack and another on the armor to get the result.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

One specific thing I'm curious about:
Are GURPS characters entitled to know the Move stats of creatures they can see? Are they entitled to know if such creatures have some amount of Enhanced Move, and if yes are they entitled to know how much it has?

I mean, in some cases the answer for Enhanced Move is obviously "no", such as with the Dungeon Fantasy Monk with his EM with the chi Power Modifier. That's clearly meant to come as a surprise. You can't see that he has that ability before he actually uses it.

But what about other cases?

A large creature, that has a certain Move value and might have a little EM too, solely based on the shape of its body and its natural musculature?

What about a Scout or Thief PC (or NPC) who has bought many levels of Move? Can you see that he has those? If yes, when can you see it?

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

In my games, you could only see people's high Move scores when they move or dodge. Even a not very perceptive character can of course notice when someone runs faster than others, or when someone keeps successfully dodging attacks. In my games, players are only "entitled" to know what they see in terms of who moves first, how far they move on the map each turn, and any information the GM gives them in descriptions based on their characters' actions and abilities (and possibly perception rolls) to remark that someone seems so fast or slow or agile or clumsy.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

So if my anatomy-savvy Ranger character sees a new-to-him monster, he cannot even make an educated guess as to its movement capabilities, based on what he can see of its body shape and musculature?

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

This is me as well.

I dont. Especially in DF. Make up weird stuff and throw it in there.

This boggles me in ways I cant describe. After the first round or 2 in a Combat encounter, Things settle down quite a bit and the math from the previous rounds guides you.

ALSO, alot of that math should be sorted in the Design of the Encounter. You know the party AND the opposition before hand. YOu dont know exactly what they'll do, but you have a pretty good idea of what their ads/dissads/skills/gear are. That helps narrow the set of possibilities of what will happen and what math will be needed.

Funny isnt it? As soon as you learn Algebra, arethmetic goes out the window. As soon as you get Calculus, Algebra goes out the window. Fortunately my education in PDE didnt cost me my Calculus.

Depends on how odd the monster is. How can you be educated about a monster that you've never see or heard of before?

Is it more plausible (for those of you who dig that sort of thing) that he know or NOT know the location of a Beholders gonads? DO these species of ogres have spleens? If you de-scent a were-feret while in feret form, and he changes back into a human and back again into a feret, does he come back with or without those scent glands? What bits are he missing in his human form?

Body shape and musculature? Hippos top out about 9 yds/sec, Rhinos at 15 and Elephants at 12.

Deer = 23
Gazelle = 15
Impala = 16
Bongo = 21

Zebra = 10
Horse = 15

And these are all mundane animals in our real dirt and meat world.

The ranges are broad enough that Id say its relatively useless except to say 'faster than me'.

Nymdok

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

This is what I do, as well. I put the names on the whiteboard when it becomes obvious how quickly the opposition acts and reacts, but I don't fill in any numbers. The players have to see that happen on the battle-mat.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

I'm talking very specifically about *movement* capabilities, not bizarre details of internal anatomy.

And I'm positing a very expert big game hunter / monster slayer, who has personal experience with a wide variety of enemy types. Probably don a tonne of dissections too.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Thats kind of the point I was making by posting the mundane real world animals. THeres a large range in there for animals you could expect to encounter that look at least somewhat similar to each other but as far as thier speed goes, they aint.

If you extend that into a sufficiently bizzare fantasy setting, and its a never been seen monster, where would you even begin to guess? How fast can a giant stampeding centipede move? Vs a Caterpillar? IF hese never seen them before, how can he even BEGIN to guess.

Nymdok

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Real-world big game hunters mostly shoot at prey that can't fight back, and even when the prey is dangerous, those real-world big game hunters only need to discern between animals that "can run faster than a Human can" and animals that "can't", unlike a fantasy world monster hunter who might very well have the ability to buff his own movement speed at small or great expense, and so needs to discern rather more finely than just the binary distinction of the RW big game hunter.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Pete my argument has nothing to do with Big Game Hunters, whether they hunt with rifles, bare handed or not at all is far removed from the point.

My point as I attempted to illustrate with real world examples is that Animals with similar shape and musculature can have a rather broad range of Basic Move, so in short:

Of course YES, your Ranger with the Suitable skill in your Monster Hunters Game CAN make an 'Educated Guess' but, having never seen the animal before, there should be no expectation for him to be remotely close to accurate in that guess.

Come to think of it, if hes THAT well versed on the topic, he'd know ahead of time that you cant reliably judge an animals move just by looking at it.

Nymdok

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

And in my most recent battle, it was a starship boarding action, and I gave the marines and crewmen of each side "generic" stats. The opponents are regular marines, using the same standard issue body armor they've been using for a decade, using the same standard issue rifles. There wasn't much room for surprises, since everybody would know what the other side has, except for a particular person with above or below average stats. It also ended up using a flexible scale - in the big shootouts I often didn't bother with death checks, simply assuming "casualty," while every last thing was taken into account when in melee in a small room with a pair of hostile marines.

I also bent the rules once and ruled a rifle hit to the left hand, instead of crippling it, gave something like 1-2 HP of damage and -1 DX until it healed. (Or more accurately, for the rest of the battle, since sickbay would be setting any broken bones and that's where he's headed once it ends anyway, and that's far from the most important of his injuries.) Perhaps instead of a direct hit, it was a ricochet or fragment off of or from the barricade he was shooting over.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Basically what I was going to post so +1


For me yes, if he takes the time to study (and I roll a result good enough for the specific situation), however as the GM I'll tell him what they think is correct not what actually maybe correct. And I certainly won't describe it as "oh it has Move X with and probably enhanced move Y) but in terms of "it looks a bit like a lighter built version of an 'X' so you think it may be bit faster than an 'X"

Obviously anything magical will mess that up

One thing thing studying the creature as it moves about in general way is one thing getting a look at it as it exerts itself are two very different things when it comes to making an accurate assessment.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

The PC can know anything he can perceive. The players can know as much as the GM wants to tell them.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

There are creatures which can be described as "deceptively fast", but I don't think a fantasy ranger in a world full of magic should be expected to fail at guessing a deer's speed - the ranger's trained eye can surely do better than "it's roughly the size of a gazelle, so it must be a gazelle", focusing on the shape of muscles and other stuff.

Of course there are non-natural creatures which don't follow the normal rules, but said ranger lives in a world full of non-natiral creatures, and surely these give clues as well, just clues that we cannot fathom.

GMs can always be as secretive as they want, but -- especially with PCs possessing the right skillset -- there is no reason that they need to.

Re: GM Secrecy and Metagaming
 

Of course he can. Anyone can make a guess, and your character even has a relevant skill. The GM rolls and then gives the person an appropriately-accurate estimate. If your character is also really practically familiar with his own speed and trying to outrun animals, I might even express it to you in terms of numbers. Otherwise probably I'd use comparisons such as, "it looks like it's probably faster than a lion but not by much". I wouldn't want either of us talking about it in terms of GURPS Speed numbers in front of the other players though, unless perhaps you were training them offline and you all had good understanding/experience and communication skills. Otherwise, there should be a lot of communication filters between natural language and being able to plot tactical moves on a hex grid where you know the enemy max speed and are picking exactly where to stand based on that.

Even if I did say a Speed number to a player, it'd be an estimate. Knowing the actual Speed score of an animal by looking at it is not realistic, as real animals don't of a species don't all have the same Speed, just as humans don't, nor do they all always run at the same speed all the time, and if you're outdoors, ground varies too and affects Speed, etc. Even if a master anatomist examined me nude when I was a teen, he'd just see that I was almost the tallest kid in my class and had strong legs, but was not very fit - there's no way he could tell I could out-sprint my entire class and the track team by about 20% unless he saw me do it. Even if you've memorized the max speeds of Gazelles and Impalas, that doesn't mean you know the max speed of that gazelle right there, nor how fast it is going to run when spooked this time, and if I tell you the Speed score, then you're liable to think of it in terms of how many hexes it can move in one turn on the game map, and not relating to what your character's actual thoughts and experience would be.