General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
Do the characters have any in-game down time? Do they stop to camp for the night? Do they stop to eat dinner, lunch & breakfast while preparing to adventure? Would your characters have conceivably used any of this time to discuss their powers and what they can and cannot do in combat? We normally just hand-wave that sort of stuff in our game - "before we go to sleep, I'm going to try to learn to speak Orc from the half-orc NPC, or I'm going to practice some combat maneuvers with the help of the fighter..." or "I'm going to discuss battle strategy with the group"
And, does your group game 24/7? If not, then I also don't think it's fair if you meet every week or two weeks for 4-6 hours that everybody remembers every detail of what might have occurred only 2 minutes ago in game. People have real lives that may sometimes intrude on gaming.
__________________ "Who's more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows him?" - Obi Wan Kenobi
It is metagaming (in that it is outside the context of the characters' POV), but it is not bad metagaming (in that it has nothing to do with what your character knows). In older editions, if your caster didn't know that fireball or sleep was going to affect her friends, then that was the breaks. It didn't change how the spell worked. Likewise, in this case, not knowing that it still does half damage shouldn't change how the spell works. If you didn't bring it up, the DM should have.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
How much you want to bet this guy's a rules lawyer when he's a player? I can see him letting it slide the other direction (adding something in that shouldn't be) as long as it isn't brought up (and assuming it suits him).
Oy. I'm not one to court the disruption that bickering about rules brings, but if this wasn't a one-time thing because of bad mood or something, I'd only cause as much disruption as laughing at him, getting up and leaving the game would cause. Gaming with douches is not fun, and the point is to have fuin, right?
It is metagaming (in that it is outside the context of the characters' POV), but it is not bad metagaming (in that it has nothing to do with what your character knows). In older editions, if your caster didn't know that fireball or sleep was going to affect her friends, then that was the breaks. It didn't change how the spell worked. Likewise, in this case, not knowing that it still does half damage shouldn't change how the spell works. If you didn't bring it up, the DM should have.
No, it's not metagaming at all. Unless you consider players having any access to the rules to be metagaming.
__________________ Have you ever known a person who always behaved exactly the way you expected? Real people don't stay in character.
How much you want to bet this guy's a rules lawyer when he's a player? I can see him letting it slide the other direction (adding something in that shouldn't be) as long as it isn't brought up (and assuming it suits him).
My online gaming group, Torch of Spirit (Contains all information for the current game I'm co-DMing as well as lots of houserules I'm using or considering for the future. Feel free to check it out.)
No, it's not metagaming at all. Unless you consider players having any access to the rules to be metagaming.
AFAICT, metagaming means to pay attention to that which takes place outside the game situation that the characters are in. Arguably, all reference to rules is metagaming.
Metgagaming, though, is not necessarily a bad thing.
How do you define the term?
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
AFAICT, metagaming means to pay attention to that which takes place outside the game situation that the characters are in. Arguably, all reference to rules is metagaming.
Metgagaming, though, is not necessarily a bad thing.
How do you define the term?
RC
The definition I use for "metagaming" (and I think the generally accepted one) is, "Using out-of-character knowledge to make in-character decisions."
Examples of metagaming:
You've read Order of the Stick, and know that liches have phylacteries. So as soon as your party kills a lich, you go hunting for the phylactery, even though your character has never before encountered a lich, has no training in any relevant skill, and has no background that would imply knowledge of what is in your game world a closely guarded secret.
Your DM is running a published adventure by a writer you're familiar with. You know that this particular writer is very fond of menacing the PCs with illusions of gigantic monsters. When you run into an ancient red dragon, you announce that your normally cautious PC is going to walk right up and attack it.
Your character is blinded and deafened for 3 rounds. On the first round, a series of lucky crits drops a fellow PC into the negatives, in a location out of your line of sight. That PC then fails two death saves in succession. When you recover, you immediately rush to that location to stabilize your dying ally, even though your character can't see the fallen character and there are other threats close by.
Examples of things that are not metagaming:
Your party runs into a lich. Your character is a necromancer with excellent Religion and Arcana skills and a backstory that involves having been enslaved by a lich for ten years. You ask the DM if you can make an Arcana check to know that liches have phylacteries.
Your party runs into an ancient red dragon, in a dungeon where you have already encountered a couple of illusion-themed traps. You note that there are no signs of the depredations of a dragon on the lands around the dungeon, and nobody said anything about a giant dragon in the nearby village. You also observe that all the doors in this room are too small for the dragon to fit through. You announce that your somewhat reckless PC is going to walk up and attack the dragon.
Your character is blinded and deafened for 3 rounds. You come out of it, and see a fellow PC on the ground bleeding out not ten feet away and no monsters in sight. You rush to stabilize your dying ally.
In the OP's case, there is no in-character decision - the character doesn't get to decide whether the acid does damage or not! - so the question of metagaming doesn't even arise.
__________________ Have you ever known a person who always behaved exactly the way you expected? Real people don't stay in character.
Well, then, we are agreeing, then. Certainly this is not "Using out-of-character knowledge to make in-character decisions."
Nor should it be a problem for the DM, IMHO.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
The definition I use for "metagaming" (and I think the generally accepted one) is, "Using out-of-character knowledge to make in-character decisions."
I agree with your definition. Most OOC talk in a typical rpg is not metagaming. For metagaming to occur a character must act in a 'wrong' fashion, clearly possessing knowledge he doesn't have.
1) Informing another player about a rule? Not metagaming, because it hasn't been used to make an in-character decision.
2) Attacking a troll with fire or acid when the PCs don't have that knowledge? Metagaming.
3) Player A reminds player B his character knows about trolls. Player B's character then uses fire on the troll. Not metagaming because the character does possess the knowledge, it was the player who forgot.
4) Welcoming the orc's prisoner (a new PC) into the party immediately? Metagaming, but in a good way.
__________________ The female tiefling's horns are not 'handlebars'.
4) Welcoming the orc's prisoner (a new PC) into the party immediately? Metagaming, but in a good way.
Adventurer A: I don't know, how do we know we can trust him?
Adventurer B: Because he has a PC halo, silly.
Adventurer C:
Adventurer A: Oh, alright then.
Classic.
__________________ We can lick gravity, but sometimes the paperwork is overwhelming. - Werner von Braun
Right now you have no idea how lucky you are that I am not a sociopath. - A sign seen above my desk.
Never confuse movement with action. - Ernest Hemingway
Adventurer A: I don't know, how do we know we can trust him?
Adventurer B: Because he has a PC halo, silly.
Adventurer C:
Adventurer A: Oh, alright then.
Classic.
I'm totally using the phrase "PC halo" from now on.
__________________ Have you ever known a person who always behaved exactly the way you expected? Real people don't stay in character.
Ugh. That sounds horrid. Just rehashing what was said, yeah, it's metagaming to ignore the effect of an attack because the player forgot it. You're not reminding the player, you're reminding EVERYONE...and if your DM didn't forget, then he is FREAKING CHEATING.
My advice is to have a grown-up conversation about it with him, maybe let him read this thread. If that doesn't work, I implore you to just GTFO and never look back.
Adventurer A: I don't know, how do we know we can trust him?
Adventurer B: Because he has a PC halo, silly.
Adventurer C:
Adventurer A: Oh, alright then.
Classic.
I have a player in my game that can only make occasional sessions, so we tend to give him a "one-off" character to play, rather than have the same person pop in and out of the story.
We get a lot of conversations like that.
__________________ DM of Adventure Path Story Hour (now in Thunderspire Labyrinth!): Ryam Plays Dice - updated 8th June 09 (campaign on indefinite hiatus).
Player in Swordlands Story Hour: Interview with a Fey - updated 15th June 09. News just in - this campaign may be restarting in the near future! Watch this space!
I also have the singular honour of being Rouseketeer #20.
Adventurer A: I don't know, how do we know we can trust him?
Adventurer B: Because he has a PC halo, silly.
Adventurer C:
Adventurer A: Oh, alright then.
Classic.
We use the universally accepted code phrase: "I see that your party has no Wizard..."
I'm totally using the phrase "PC halo" from now on.
We use the phrase "PC glow." Although it didn't stop my players from (politely) locking a newly introduced PC into a closet for 3 days, just because their characters had cause to be suspicious and wanted to confirm his backstory. Stupid roleplayers.
I have a player in my game that can only make occasional sessions, so we tend to give him a "one-off" character to play, rather than have the same person pop in and out of the story.
We get a lot of conversations like that.
Lol. Same here, I have an occaqsional drop-in. Last time I created an Evil Dwarf warlord (from the Hammerfist clan from Mines of Karak, SoW AP).d
He shows up and I expect some fireworks or something, but the player notices "Evil" on his sheet and says, "Oh I'm Evil, okay, I've got no loyality to my clan, I'll just join you guys and we'll loot the place". hmmm, I guess you had to be there...
__________________ Pablo El Vagabundo
"Mercy!? You want MERCY? I'M CHAOTIC NEUTRAL!!!"
We use the phrase "PC glow." Although it didn't stop my players from (politely) locking a newly introduced PC into a closet for 3 days, just because their characters had cause to be suspicious and wanted to confirm his backstory. Stupid roleplayers.
We did something similar many years back... we had a big group and had gone through a lot of stressful in-game situations. A new guy joined the group (new to the gaming group) and came in with a new PC that acted a bit funny at first, like he was sneaking around to follow us on our journey upriver.
So, the guy playing the group spokesman/leader basically refused to let him come along, and most of us agreed with him - we (in game) had no idea if this guy could defend himself and we had just seen some pretty serious stuff the previous several sessions. So, why would we let an innocent come along only to die? It got to be so serious that the DM called a timeout and basically said that he has the PC halo on him, so we shouldn't be so tough... our response was that he should have shown us a reason to come along and that his PC won't be a liability.
Eventually, we relented, but it took a while at the table.
__________________ "Who's more foolish: the fool, or the fool who follows him?" - Obi Wan Kenobi
We have lost some PCīs who thought they can just com into the group by PC halo or something...
actually i phrase it like this: you can make a monstrous character... but donīt blame someone if the party kills you before you can introduce yourself...
tis actually makes DMing a lot easier...
usually however players join the group... but this ensures, that no player can play a character which is obviously diruptive...
quite funny...
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
