D&D 5E How to deal with Metagaming as a player?

[iserith]

Setting the stage for metagaming implies that I want it to happen. I don't.

I don't doubt that. I do doubt your true commitment to the "No Metagaming Allowed" club though. If you're relying on your players not to "metagame" rather than removing the possibility from your games in the first place, that is.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't doubt that. I do doubt your true commitment to the "No Metagaming Allowed" club though. If you're relying on your players not to "metagame" rather than removing the possibility from your games in the first place, that is.

I don't play with children. I play with adults who are responsible for their own actions. My commitment is not compromised because I expect them to act like the adults that they are. It sucks that you don't trust your players enough to let them be responsible for their own actions.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I don't play with children. I play with adults who are responsible for their own actions. My commitment is not compromised because I expect them to act like the adults that they are. It sucks that you don't trust your players enough to let them be responsible for their own actions.

Wow.

I would say it sucks that you lack the confidence to blame your own leadership first. That's what strong leaders do; they assume responsibility rather than blaming others. (But I'd better stop before this become about politics.)

 

[Maxperson]

Wow.

I would say it sucks that you lack the confidence to blame your own leadership first. That's what strong leaders do; they assume responsibility rather than blaming others. (But I'd better stop before this become about politics.)

Yeeeaaaaah, the DM is not the leader of his players. While the DM has a bigger part and more control over the GAME, it's a game of equals when it comes to the people who play it. You should let your control issues go and stop trying to dominate your players.

 

[iserith]

I don't play with children. I play with adults who are responsible for their own actions. My commitment is not compromised because I expect them to act like the adults that they are. It sucks that you don't trust your players enough to let them be responsible for their own actions.

I don't have to trust them not to "metagame" - I don't care about "metagaming" like you do. I just question the commitment of those with your position who don't take steps to obviate "metagaming" without relying on others. It's like you say you hate it, but you're at the same time secretly inviting it at your table. Weird.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't have to trust them not to "metagame" - I don't care about "metagaming" like you do.

Your whole philosophy here is one of mistrust for the players. I trust them to be adults. You don't.

I just question the commitment of those with your position who don't take steps to obviate "metagaming" without relying on others. It's like you say you hate it, but you're at the same time secretly inviting it at your table. Weird.

No. It's like hating to be robbed, but not being a cop. It's not my job to stop robbers. It's their job. I trust the cops to do their job. I also trust the players to do THEIR job. It's not my job to stop metagaming. It's my job to let them know that it won't be tolerated.

 

[iserith]

Your whole philosophy here is one of mistrust for the players. I trust them to be adults. You don't.

No. It's like hating to be robbed, but not being a cop. It's not my job to stop robbers. It's their job. I trust the cops to do their job. I also trust the players to do THEIR job. It's not my job to stop metagaming. It's my job to let them know that it won't be tolerated.

Haha, no. I just know it's possible (and in this case easy) to control the stuff you can control and impossible to control the stuff you can't. Players also have an incentive to "metagame," so I really can't blame them if they do it when those opportunities are available. The game is set up that way. But if I cared about the issue as much as some in this thread did, I'd use some of the techniques I've offered. It takes the power away from "metagaming" without ever relying on anyone else.

But maybe that's not the underlying point in setting the stage for "metagaming" and then watching like a hawk for anyone to step over the line. Maybe it's about something else. I'm not sure what that is exactly. Perhaps it will be revealed in this thread.

Right now I'm thinking it's a matter of identity. Some people identify with being "not a metagamer." When people apply to my Roll20 games, you see this a lot when they pitch themselves for a spot in the session - "I'm not a metagamer." As evidenced in this thread, some take this to be the sign of being a good roleplayer, probably because that's what they've been told at some point. "I am a good roleplayer because I don't 'metagame.'" Then through social pressures and with some help from certain text in old versions of D&D, an entire group can be brought around to that same viewpoint. It spreads from there. It's probably common in groups that stick together for a long time.

Now here comes someone who says they don't have to worry about that! The DM can just do X, Y, and Z and *poof* the impact of "metagaming" is either greatly reduced or completely eliminated (depending on what kind of "metagaming" we're talking about) without putting any burden on the players. "Heck no!" says the DMs who allegedly don't want "metagaming" in their games. Huh?

It's a real head-scratcher unless it's about something like identity. If there is no more "metagaming" due to techniques like changing up monsters, telegraphing, modifying adventures, etc., then there's nothing to be against. But if you're not against "metagaming," you're not a good roleplayer - and we're definitely good roleplayers, right? Right?!

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

No. It's like hating to be robbed, but not being a cop.

If you aren't saying that you also don't ever lock the doors to your house or car, then your analogy isn't at all accurate - because [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] isn't saying he thinks you should be out there hunting down and punishing people that metagame because you don't like it, he's saying he doesn't get why you are doing something that is easy and within your own power to do that would help prevent the thing you don't like happening.

 

[Maxperson]

Haha, no. I just know it's possible (and in this case easy) to control the stuff you can control and impossible to control the stuff you can't.

I could do it, sure. I shouldn't ever have to, though. Adults can handle not metagaming on their own. It's their job, not mine.

Players also have an incentive to "metagame," so I really can't blame them if they do it when those opportunities are available. The game is set up that way. But if I cared about the issue as much as some in this thread did, I'd use some of the techniques I've offered. It takes the power away from "metagaming" without ever relying on anyone else.

I reward playing with character knowledge, even if at times it is a detriment to their characters. Especially at those times. That's the best sort of roleplay in my opinion.

But maybe that's not the underlying point in setting the stage for "metagaming" and then watching like a hawk for anyone to step over the line. Maybe it's about something else. I'm not sure what that is exactly. Perhaps it will be revealed in this thread.

I've never watched like a hawk. First, I play with like minded players, so they don't metagame. Second, if one did, it's as obvious as a volcano exploding. I'd have to be blind and deaf not to notice it.

Right now I'm thinking it's a matter of identity. Some people identify with being "not a metagamer." When people apply to my Roll20 games, you see this a lot when they pitch themselves for a spot in the session - "I'm not a metagamer." As evidenced in this thread, some take this to be the sign of being a good roleplayer, probably because that's what they've been told at some point. "I am a good roleplayer because I don't 'metagame.'" Then through social pressures and with some help from certain text in old versions of D&D, an entire group can be brought around to that same viewpoint. It spreads from there. It's probably common in groups that stick together for a long time.

Whereas I'm thinking that it's just a matter of personal preference. That you think that people only do it because that's what "they've been told" and peer pressure is very telling. It's arrogant and dismissive of what many people genuinely like and prefer.

 

[Maxperson]

If you aren't saying that you also don't ever lock the doors to your house or car, then your analogy isn't at all accurate - because [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] isn't saying he thinks you should be out there hunting down and punishing people that metagame because you don't like it, he's saying he doesn't get why you are doing something that is easy and within your own power to do that would help prevent the thing you don't like happening.

Minor things like locking my house and car(which actually locks itself) are equivalent to my telling the players not to metagame and incentivising that sort of roleplay. Those are minor prevention techniques.