Cutaways while DMing

>>52157565

Never. The players know what the PCs know. In fact, I start all my games that have new people with a little spiel about what methods of communication I use from GM to player, and their various differing levels of reliability. But I wouldn't simply tell them that something is going on in some place without them having some in universe reason to know what's going on over there.

>As a player, what's your opinion on your DM doing this shit?

I don't want to categorically say it's stupid, but you'd have to work pretty hard to come up with a reason for that shit.

File: fluffy2.jpg (57KB, 550x504px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 550x504px

>>52157565
You revealing important setting developments or plot information is almost always a good idea. But there's a difference between you presenting this information as GM fiat (ie this is how it is), and through the filter of character perspective, told to them from other npc characters who may be somewhat misinformed, exaggerating, biased, lying, or just plain wrong.

The latter is what you want to be doing, because it is more realistic in terms of what gossip is like, and because it spurs serious debates and conversations and roleplaying, and makes them try to figure out what is reliable and isn't and understand the motivations and capabilities of the npcs around them.

That said, if one of the PC's is some sort of oracle or diviner, then them having visions of far away places and conversations from another time or place is perfectly cool too, as long as it's limited.

>>52159679
>You revealing important setting developments or plot information is almost always a good idea. But there's a difference between you presenting this information as GM fiat (ie this is how it is), and through the filter of character perspective, told to them from other npc characters who may be somewhat misinformed, exaggerating, biased, lying, or just plain wrong.
>The latter is what you want to be doing, because it is more realistic in terms of what gossip is like, and because it spurs serious debates and conversations and roleplaying, and makes them try to figure out what is reliable and isn't and understand the motivations and capabilities of the npcs around them.
>That said, if one of the PC's is some sort of oracle or diviner, then them having visions of far away places and conversations from another time or place is perfectly cool too, as long as it's limited.

This. Newspapers, town criers, TV, internet, wizards, etc.

I especially like fucking with the players by telling them there's a werewolf loose in the next time so they prepare for a werewolf fight, but it's actually just a really really messy vampire with really messy feeding habits.
Or it turns out that it wasn't a fire-breathing dragon, but a poison-breathing dragon. The guy who ran burning out of the dragon's den just lost control of his limbs as the toxins began interfering with his nervous system and he set himself on fire with his own torch.

>>52157565
there is a spell called scry that does literally this

>>52159979
Not in the game I'm running, no sirree.

>>52157565
I do two or three line brief cutaways to play up on a player detail or joke sometimes.

Like one time the gnoll wandered into the scene eating a sandwich. So I did a short cutaway to the town constable everyone loves to razzle wondering where the hell his lunch went. Cut back.

>>52157565

As some people already pointed out, I never do this. One of the most fun things about GMing is your opportunities for surprising your players is endless. Why would I willingly relinquish some of that control?

As for being a player, I also don't like it. When I play a character, I play the character. Meta-knowledge I get from a cutaway does absolutely nothing for me because I can't actually use it. I'd rather discover it in character.

I'm opposed to the idea. A party should never have any meta knowledge of events. It's not a third-person story, it's all first-person for them, unless they hear about far off events throughh the grape vine or scrying or whatever sources the setting employs to spread news they should not be allowed knowledge of simultaneously occurring events.

If you really need them to be made aware of these events, then it should be worked in as foreshadowing or it should reach them after the fact.

>>52159679
Agreed. News, rumor, and gossip should spread around. Most of these games are set in times where people's forms of entertainment were very limited, so any goings on were discussed and repeated because that was one of the few things that didn't cost money to do to not be bored.

>>52157565

I've only ever done this sort of at the end of a campaign when the party specifically asked what became of several NPCs.