|
1 year ago ::
Jun 16, 2012 - 8:31PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2011
|
What is metagaming and can it be harmful to your game? Weigh in with your thoughts and experiences! Metagaming - Is It Legit?!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 16, 2012 - 8:54PM
#2
|
|
|
It can be harmful. It can also be helpful. Depends on what's being metagamed and how.
For example, I have no problem with the 'I'm strangely open to trusting this complete stranger because he happens to be a fellow PC' effect, because it improves game flow and gets the new character into the game faster.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 16, 2012 - 8:57PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2011
|
It can be harmful. It can also be helpful. Depends on what's being metagamed and how.
For example, I have no problem with the 'I'm strangely open to trusting this complete stranger because he happens to be a fellow PC' effect, because it improves game flow and gets the new character into the game faster.
I'd have to agree with your 'PCs meeting for the first time scenario'. That can be challenging to pull off if the players aren't a bit willing.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 16, 2012 - 9:08PM
#4
|
|
|
Metagaming in my opinion is using knowledge that you as a player has that your character doesn't.
For the most part in Dungeons and Dragons 4e you can use certian skill checks to determine knowledge on monster you're encountering.
It can be harmful but I find it less harmful in my 4e game.
I have more problems with it in my Mutants & Masterminds game where I write cutcenes for players. In that game it becomes a regular problem for some players.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 12:11AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
Metagaming is a fact of life. Try to quash it, and it tends to pop up more. Harness it, and games can become much more interesting and creative.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 9:29AM
#6
|
|
|
I think the key factor that determines whether metagaming is harmful or helpful is intent. Players that use knowledge that their character couldn't have for their own benefit - likely harmful. Using it for the benefit of the game - likely helpful/positive.
The worst kind of player is the one that uses a professed loathing of metagaming as an excuse for bad behaviour. Remember that the game is suspposed to be fun for everyone at the table and you can't go far wrong.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 9:41AM
#7
|
|
|
I think the whole concept is the last redoubt of the fantasy realists. It's a problem that exists only in their minds because of limited thinking. It ruins their "immersion" if something doesn't line up in the fiction with the one way they can imagine it. "How could Ragnar possibly know trolls must be burned? He's not from a region where trolls can be found and I've never put one in the adventure! What do I do?!"
Well, we can sit around and waste time pretending I don't know the answer to something until I meet some prerequisite in the DM's brain that makes it "realistic" enough for me to have information I already know OR we can take a minute to work together as a group to explain the reason why I know it, establishing new fiction about the character and the world, and can then get on with the game already.
There's a clearly better choice here. Use everyone's imagination and there is no problem.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 10:55AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jul 18, 2008
|
I have started using "DM notes" to pass players information that only their character would know. It helps keep metagaming in check since now the player has this bit of information that is only his/hers, if they metagame and share this info with the group OOC, it dissolves its uniqueness. This technique worked great last night, where every character was able to figure out different things and steer the encounter accordingly.
In the same session, I put a very tricky puzzle. The player for the dumb orc PC was able to contribute majorly to solve the intelectual puzzle. The players were having a good time, and calling off metagaming would have hurt my session. So I let it slide and we all had a good time.
Metagaming is bad if it discourages fun for the players. But if the DM is not having fun with the amount of metagaming, this should be considered and communicated to the players, too.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 11:24AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Mar 10, 2011
|
...I think the whole concept is the last redoubt of the fantasy realists. It's a problem that exists only in their minds because of limited thinking. It ruins their "immersion" if something doesn't line up in the fiction with the one way they can imagine it....
I think this is pretty close to the heart of it. I'm not so sure the most vocal critics of "meta-gaming" are really all that concerned with immersion, however, as much as they are about controlling how other people play the game.
It really comes down to accusations of "meta-gaming" being a fancy way of claiming that other people are "winning at D&D" only because they are "cheating". In a way, it's the role-playing "purist's" way of saying he "pwns" you at role-playing... "UNFAIR - I could be as good as you guys at this game, if only you weren't 'meta-gaming' so much!"
To be fair, it goes both ways... I've seen folks on the other side of that fence accuse the role-playing "purist" of deliberately being a "loser" because he won't play the game their way.
In the end, it's a matter of looking at it as an all-or-nothing game, where the subject's way of playing the game is supposedly the only right way to play it.
'Meta-gaming', or its supposed complete opposite, are only problems in the game when the players and/or DM make it a problem by refusing to make room for different styles of gameplay.
New DM Tips
Show
- Trying to solve out-of-game problems (like cheating, bad attitudes, or poor sportsmanship) with in-game solutions will almost always result in failure, and will probably make matters worse.
- Gun Safety Rule #5: Never point the gun at anything you don't intend to destroy. (Never introduce a character, PC, NPC, Villain, or fate of the world into even the possibility of a deadly combat or other dangerous situation, unless you are prepared to destroy it instantly and completely forever.)
- Know your group's character sheets, and check them over carefully. You don't want surprises, but, more importantly, they are a gold mine of ideas!
- "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." It's a problem if the players aren't having fun and it interferes with a DM's ability to run the game effectively; if it's not a problem, 'fixing' at best does little to help, and at worst causes problems that didn't exist before.
- "Hulk Smash" characters are a bad match for open-ended exploration in crowds of civilians; get them out of civilization where they can break things and kill monsters in peace.
- Success is not necessarily the same thing as killing an opponent. Failure is not necessarily the same thing as dying.
- Failure is always an option. And it's a fine option, too, as long as failure is interesting, entertaining, and fun!
"Broken or not, unbalanced or not, if something seems to be preventing the game from being enjoyable, something has to give: either that thing, or other aspects of the game, or your idea of what's enjoyable." - Centauri
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jun 17, 2012 - 1:20PM
#10
|
|
|
There is also a problem of "reverse" metagaming - stuff a character knows in character but the player hasn't a clue. Part of this is the DM not telling players enough information about the game world so that the player commits a faux pas in a roleplaying situation. Another aspect of this is a DM complaining about a warrior player figuring out the AC of the monster and calculating the most optimal Power Attack. The character is right there in the combat. He knows the difficulty of fighting the monster and is determining tactics against it. That translates to the player via knowing the AC and calculating Power Attack. "Metagaming!" cries the DM.
This line of thinking affects the skills as well. A player who in real life is a bit introverted cannot play an effective bard because the player himself does not know or incapable of the charismatic words necessary to win over the audience to roleplay as the DM demands, thus his +15 in Diplomacy is irrelevant. The DM requires the rogue player to describe exactly how he is searching for and disabling traps and plays "gotcha" when the player fails to mention the ceiling, his +20's in Search and Disable Device are just inks on paper. Woe be any cleric or druid player who wants to use the healing skill without a medical degree!
Support Cedric Diggory, the real Hogwarts Champion!
|
|
|
