A discussion of metagame concepts in game design

[Emerikol]

Are you at all able to divorce the idea of it being the character somehow making the decision instead of it just being fate, chance, or coincidence?

In your experience, what's the best system with the least metagaming you've played with?

Well, my problem is that it is the player making the decision. I suppose some things could be fixed by making them random but then they'd be less valuable as character options.

Perhaps a good example would be a power that I could activate to automatically crit on a hit. I can do it though only once per combat. This would be problematic whereas a system where when I roll a 20 I crit would not. Why? Well, a character would like to crit every time. So if it's up to the character he's use the "power" every time to crit. He can't though for an arbitrary reason (very arbitrary in this example which I use just to make the point). Whereas, if on a roll of 20, the character crits the assumption would be that the character is trying every time. He rolls that d20 hoping it's a 20 every single time. To me that is worth something.

 

[Emerikol]

These can be explained away, but I don't think that is really going to answer the question in a satisfactory way for you.

For example: second wind - When I played American football, or wrestled, or boxed - there is a moment in the contest, fairly early on where you have an adrenaline wash. The initial surge of adrenaline leaves your body, and for a moment, you feel like all of the energy has been sapped from your body. If you don't panic, and keep playing, you get your footing and you're energy levels come back. I even warn my football players (I coach now) about this phenomena and to just take some deep breaths and keep going.

So that explains second wind for me, and why you can only do it once. However, the idea that the player chooses when this is going to happen is part of the metagaming issue you are concerned with - so, merely explaining it is not really satisfactory.

Am I right? Because I think you can come up with in-game for most of these.

I think a lot of powers are only questionable to me because of this player vs character agency. I'm not questioning at all that people could have a second wind.

 

[pogre]

I think a lot of powers are only questionable to me because of this player vs character agency. I'm not questioning at all that people could have a second wind.

OK. That's what I thought.

It's an issue that used to bother me too.

These days if I can explain away the player's agency in the context of the character's actions - good enough for me.

I do hear where you are coming from though.

I wish I could suggest a game for you, but it seems like most modern games I know of do this more than D&D.

 

[Emerikol]

My thoughts?

Life is too short to make perfect the enemy of good.

I'm probably applying the same logic but coming to potentially different answers.

I think played exactly as is the game would no longer be fun for me so life is short and I should seek fun entertainment. House ruling such a significant change may be too hard. It's why I keep debating whether I should try or not and thus this thread. Keep in mind too that I am not at all afraid of house ruling in general. But I don't want to rewrite half the game.

I raised this issue on several occasions with Mike Mearls, but I have to think he didn't understand me. He'd give an answer that sounded like he cared about the concern but then we got the game as written. So I think maybe he thought I was asking about X when in fact it was about Y. Otherwise I hope he would have not been so encouraging.

What about Pf2e? Do you think it will do this particular issue better? I've been following your posts about that game but not sure I can be sure. Realize too that I only need a workable subset of a system. If I had to ban a few classes I could easily live with that. Fighter, Wizard, Rogue, and Cleric are core and I wouldn't want to ban those.

 

[Emerikol]

OK. That's what I thought.

It's an issue that used to bother me too.

These days if I can explain away the player's agency in the context of the character's actions - good enough for me.

I do hear where you are coming from though.

I wish I could suggest a game for you, but it seems like most modern games I know of do this more than D&D.

Yes. I hate to sound anti-modernist when it comes to gaming concepts but sometimes I do just because that does seem to be a trend.

I think for me when I am playing an rpg character it's very different than playing most other games. I want to be my character and think/act as my character. If I have to keep making decisions not in the mind of the character, that means my player is not being that character but is instead just moving that character like a piece in a more traditional game. Again not condemning anyone who likes that sort of game. It's obviously popular and its used in many other games successfully that I do play. I just want that roleplaying magic I felt when I first started playing D&D. I want to be my character almost.

 

[ccs]

So how do you guys with my own sentiments (or at least some sympathy for my sentiments) handle these things. What house rules have you developed? Is the game salvageable for someone like us?

Q: How do I deal with this stuff?
A: I don't worry about the fact that this is a game & that there are some elements of it that are most easily dealt with solely as game elements.

Q: What house rules have I come up with concerning this?
A: None. I don't need house rules for this.

Q: Is the game salvageable?
A: Easily. Refer back to my answer to the 1st question.

 

[pogre]

Q: How do I deal with this stuff?
A: I don't worry about the fact that this is a game & that there are some elements of it that are most easily dealt with solely as game elements.

Q: What house rules have I come up with concerning this?
A: None. I don't need house rules for this.

Q: Is the game salvageable?
A: Easily. Refer back to my answer to the 1st question.

Clearly, you do not share his sentiments. The questions were not really intended for folks who do not perceive this as a problem.

 

[Emerikol]

Q: How do I deal with this stuff?
A: I don't worry about the fact that this is a game & that there are some elements of it that are most easily dealt with solely as game elements.

Q: What house rules have I come up with concerning this?
A: None. I don't need house rules for this.

Q: Is the game salvageable?
A: Easily. Refer back to my answer to the 1st question.

Not sure you qualify as "someone sympathetic to my dilemna" If it doesn't bother you then it's moot anyway. And being able to tolerate it and still have fun is good enough to say it doesn't bother you. For me it's a dealbreaker.

 

[Ted Serious]

While I have a strong opinion on metagame design elements, I by no means intend to imply that those who enjoy such concepts are doing it wrong or should convert to my way of thinking. This is about a preference. It would be just as silly to try to convert everyone who prefers chocolate ice cream to vanilla. Vanilla is better in my opinion but philosophically "a matter of taste cannot be disputed"

So a short definition: Metagaming.
Metagaming is when a player makes a decision that the character the player is playing could never conceive of or know about.


Here are some examples of metagame rules in 5e.

1. The player chooses the number of hit dice to apply towards healing during a short rest. There seems to be no analog for the character. There also seems to be a resource being consumed but what is that resource? Potential healing?

2. Action surge. Why is this limited (besides game balance) early on to once between short rests? Can a fighter really only once in the course of a battle choose an exact moment to make an extra effort and then not again? This again seems like the player is choosing something the fighter would know nothing about.

3. Second Wind. A player decides to give his character a surge of energy. The character just gets it apparently unexpectedly. It happens in the fast and furious furer of combat so it's not even something the character could think about much.

4. Inspiration. Since this part of the game is pretty optional (and my guess is anyone close to my thinking ignores it anyway), it's not that big a deal.


I realize I'm picking on the fighter but the fighter is pretty egregious in these areas. I'm sure may of the other classes have at least some issues like this though perhaps not to the same degree.

So how do you guys with my own sentiments (or at least some sympathy for my sentiments) handle these things. What house rules have you developed? Is the game salvageable for someone like us?

I've been thinking about Pathfinder 2e as another possibility. Do you think it will do better in that particular area? Worse? I'm going to check out the pdf.

What about you old schoolers? There is a lot to like in some of the old school games but I find them not systematic enough for me. Heck 5e probably isn't as much as I'd like. Everything is a special class rule. I do think feats as a mechanic might be better ala Pf2e. But I am also thinking they'll make some pretty awful feats as well.

Thoughts?

You should definitely look at Pathfinder if you're not already playing it.

Pathfinder 2 has a lot of promise, but I'm not sure exactly what is triggering you from your examples.

For instance you might not like legendary skill feats.

 

[Umbran]

I'm probably applying the same logic but coming to potentially different answers.

I think about half your answers are the same as mine.

Keep in mind too that I am not at all afraid of house ruling in general. But I don't want to rewrite half the game.

This is the half we agree upon. If a given game really doesn't do it for you, on more than just on a few fiddly points here and there, find a different core ruleset that is closer to what you want, and houserule that. Don't bother rewriting half the game.

But the other half of my answer is... well, make sure that you're focused on the right thing at the table. You may be fundamentally different from me, but I find the *people* make it worth sitting down and playing. My interactions with people are far more rich, interesting, and entertaining than my interaction with a ruleset. It then follows that the ruleset really isn't something I should worry about so much. I need to know how to make them do what they are good at doing, but the bits I don't like will fade into the background when I am in a game with good people. The system has to be nigh-FATAL levels of bad for it to ruin my day.

What about Pf2e? Do you think it will do this particular issue better? I've been following your posts about that game but not sure I can be sure.

You must be thinking of someone else. I have never posted about Pf2e.