Once again....Need peoples thoughts.

[Deadusernamelol]

[Archfiend Damio]

I have to say Carth is right on most fronts while there is meta-game it is usually in play. Here is the break down Lilly. While sure the knowledge of Divination magic is common knowledge (for the most part) doesn't mean that the ways to block it are. To a fighter you even mention magic and unless he has experienced it first hand then he wouldn't really know. The point is his time and focus was devoted elsewhere and he didn't have time to learn silly things like that. The point I am making is that while I can agree that somethings are common knowledge that however may not. In a game I ran Magic was a rare thing to encounter as such I made knowledge checks harder and people didn't really know about it sense things like lies and legends would have been circulating and it would have been hard to know the truth. See in that game I would say no to your characters knowledge of even Divination magic...

Its all depending. In the end if you want to play a PC in a game its kind of up to the DM I usually keep info that will be helpful in my background out of my background. Unless he trained with someone and learned how to become someone like them (more or less learned a PrC). This way whatever the DM has in store I can eitehr find out with what they tell me given my background (Ie. 'you would know...') or what I find out in game. I usually ask the DM questions like:

PC: "Would you say as a Wizard I would know what to use to block Divination magic?"
DM: "I wouldn't say its common knowledge no."
PC: "Could I roll a knowledge arcana check to possibly recall something about it in my teachings?"
DM: "I could allow that."

Its things that. You have to remember you are the character not the player any more. If I say my wizard has traveled the whole content and made detailed sketches of each place at the start of the game would seem to powerful. Unless later we needed to teleport to a spot when I got the spell and then its only a thought and a sketch away.
Like I say i would try to stick to any "PC to Character knowledge" even if some one told the character in your background still falls under you are giving your character knowledge that they have not yet rightfully attained.

Give this I know a lot about different monsters throughout different books. As such i would have my level one fighter by a Sliver weapon because he wouldn't care a sliver sword wouldn't make any sense for him to have. While I know if can be used to over come DR of Lycthropes and Vampires. My character wouldn't. And he wouldn't have been powerful enough to have fought one of either.
In a fight I may ask (if the DM didn't way it because they are supposed to.) Did the creature look like it was hurt by my blow? And the DM might say (in the case of a vampire) although undead you find that your sword strikes are usually not as potent against the creature. If I didn't know about Vampire I would have no idea what that ment other then its not taking full damage. So I would try other things maybe I happen to have an adamtian dagger in my backpack. Well I would try that and the DM would tell me the same.

But if a Player made a knowledge check succeeding it by 5 he could possibly know that they are voneralbe to silver. and let my fighter know.

Imparting this knowledge on a character is meta-gaming no mater what but asking questions and then having your character try new options after he realized it. Is in my opinion fine. Some Dms would frown upon that as well.

Anyway end of rant. Like I said I would stray away from given the Character knowledge of things that my come into play via their background most DMs wont think that is a legitimate way of obtaining the info. Sense you could really put anything there and gain that knowledge instead.