Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Definition of Metagaming
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ThirdWizard" data-source="post: 3036864" data-attributes="member: 12037"><p>It depends on how much the PCs know about each others' abilities, and how willing your group is to have a leader-type character who can keep an eye on the situation and offer in character suggestions.</p><p></p><p>For example, your PC could have said something like "Over here, we've got him right where we want him!" to the rogue PC. Or "Look at that, all bunched up! *winks to the wizard*" or something like that. I <em>encourage</em> that kind of thing. I think it adds to the fun of the game to have in character banter during combat.</p><p></p><p>Are they opposed to that kind of thing as well?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>For me it mostly depends on the situation. If its something that will be more dramatic to reveal in game later, then I like it to be kept secret from Players. So, lets say a wizard researches a cool new spell and wants to show it off in spectacular form in game, wowing everying. I think that would be a great opportunity to keep it secret from the other Players until its big reveal.</p><p></p><p>Or, if it will lead to a circumstance where a Player has to deliberate whether he's being influenced by his ooc knowledge or if he would do the same in character anyway. So a monster with fire weakness that the Player knows but the PC doesn't know is something that I consider more annoying than anything. So keeping something like that secret is best.</p><p></p><p>Then there are times when it doesn't really matter. The rogue went off to gather information and he's going to share his findings when he gets back. It doesn't matter that the others know how he found out. Or if its not something that will directly affect another PC or if the Player just doesn't care if he knows or not.</p><p></p><p>So in one game it can go both ways multiple times depending on the situation.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I believe that would be inacurate. After all, I allow Knowledge skills to be 100% accurate practically all the time. Those who actually study things and take the time to try to learn something will learn them well and will be able to find the answers to thinks they seek.</p><p></p><p>Those who just pick up their histories, monster stories, and such by word of mouth are going to have a jumbled understanding of things. If a person doesn't have the Knowledge skill, I would assume they had only secondhand exposure to what those skills represent. What they know about Monster X is from adventurers coming through town and boasting about how they killed Monster X or from stories passed down by their grandmothers or whatever.</p><p></p><p>If they want to really know the truth about things they can go learn about them... and thus take a Knowledge skill.</p><p></p><p>One PC in my games writes papers, disseminates the information to his collegues, and reads about the ones that they publish (Planescape so it isn't your basic fantasy setting). He's got Knowledge in several different areas, and if you ask him a question, he's going to know the answer more often than not.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Here's an aside that might make a difference. There are only three of us (counting the DM) in our games. One DM and two Players, meaning that there's a lot more individual attention given to each person. Do you think that might have something to do with it?</p><p></p><p>Beyond that, in my case, and I don't know why I haven't made this point yet, but: I wouldn't want someone to help me in the game of, say, Risk either. If someone said that I should attack with two armies instead of one, I would not appreciate that being pointed out to me, for example, no matter how good or bad the advice was. I would rather win or lose by my own merits.</p><p></p><p>Now, I don't mean to imply that I play D&D to win or to lose. There's no competition within the group, and there's no trying to one up each other. I have a competative streak, but it doesn't come out in D&D, it comes out in other games. However, there's still that nagging "do it on my own" feeling that I get when I play. I can't speak for the other group members, though.</p><p></p><p>To further qualify, this isn't that acting as a group is discouraged. It's just handled almost totally in character. If another PC yells out "Help me flank him!" that's fine, because he's expressing himself through his PC to my PC, a valid form of communication in my mind.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>He's a sink or swim kind of teacher. Skip the lesson, toss them in and let survival take over. I can't say I exactly agree with this, but I understand where he's coming from.</p><p></p><p>We have been thinking about having a one shot game where tactics would be important and we would discuss things out of character in order to help everyone get better at tactics and working as a team in our usual games. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><em>Status</em> sometimes, but its main use is to monitor the health of someone who is away from the group. We consider it fairly easy to look at someone and determine how injured they are, relatively speaking. We never call out our exact hp figures, though. If someone asks we can say something like "He looks hurt, but it doesn't look like anything serious" or "He looks like he might be on his last leg" or something akin to that.</p><p></p><p>We usually just call out any tactics we want to communicate in character and live with any consequences which that might bring up. So if someone wants to flank a particular enemy, that enemy might very well back into a corner or something. But, we haven't really taken extreme measure to try to do anything more.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>My thoughts exactly. Language and code words work well, and are happening within the confines of the game. In fact, I would go as far as to not make the Players memorize the codes and what they mean but to be able to do the "gloss over" thing I mentioned before even in combat. "I call out the code for flanking with me!" or something like that.</p><p></p><p>Of course if you're in a <em>silenced</em> area, or your enemies learn the codes or have <em>tongues</em> if you use Terran or something like that, then you have to deal with the in character consequences of that.</p><p></p><p>*phew* Responding is almost tiring. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ThirdWizard, post: 3036864, member: 12037"] It depends on how much the PCs know about each others' abilities, and how willing your group is to have a leader-type character who can keep an eye on the situation and offer in character suggestions. For example, your PC could have said something like "Over here, we've got him right where we want him!" to the rogue PC. Or "Look at that, all bunched up! *winks to the wizard*" or something like that. I [i]encourage[/i] that kind of thing. I think it adds to the fun of the game to have in character banter during combat. Are they opposed to that kind of thing as well? For me it mostly depends on the situation. If its something that will be more dramatic to reveal in game later, then I like it to be kept secret from Players. So, lets say a wizard researches a cool new spell and wants to show it off in spectacular form in game, wowing everying. I think that would be a great opportunity to keep it secret from the other Players until its big reveal. Or, if it will lead to a circumstance where a Player has to deliberate whether he's being influenced by his ooc knowledge or if he would do the same in character anyway. So a monster with fire weakness that the Player knows but the PC doesn't know is something that I consider more annoying than anything. So keeping something like that secret is best. Then there are times when it doesn't really matter. The rogue went off to gather information and he's going to share his findings when he gets back. It doesn't matter that the others know how he found out. Or if its not something that will directly affect another PC or if the Player just doesn't care if he knows or not. So in one game it can go both ways multiple times depending on the situation. I believe that would be inacurate. After all, I allow Knowledge skills to be 100% accurate practically all the time. Those who actually study things and take the time to try to learn something will learn them well and will be able to find the answers to thinks they seek. Those who just pick up their histories, monster stories, and such by word of mouth are going to have a jumbled understanding of things. If a person doesn't have the Knowledge skill, I would assume they had only secondhand exposure to what those skills represent. What they know about Monster X is from adventurers coming through town and boasting about how they killed Monster X or from stories passed down by their grandmothers or whatever. If they want to really know the truth about things they can go learn about them... and thus take a Knowledge skill. One PC in my games writes papers, disseminates the information to his collegues, and reads about the ones that they publish (Planescape so it isn't your basic fantasy setting). He's got Knowledge in several different areas, and if you ask him a question, he's going to know the answer more often than not. Here's an aside that might make a difference. There are only three of us (counting the DM) in our games. One DM and two Players, meaning that there's a lot more individual attention given to each person. Do you think that might have something to do with it? Beyond that, in my case, and I don't know why I haven't made this point yet, but: I wouldn't want someone to help me in the game of, say, Risk either. If someone said that I should attack with two armies instead of one, I would not appreciate that being pointed out to me, for example, no matter how good or bad the advice was. I would rather win or lose by my own merits. Now, I don't mean to imply that I play D&D to win or to lose. There's no competition within the group, and there's no trying to one up each other. I have a competative streak, but it doesn't come out in D&D, it comes out in other games. However, there's still that nagging "do it on my own" feeling that I get when I play. I can't speak for the other group members, though. To further qualify, this isn't that acting as a group is discouraged. It's just handled almost totally in character. If another PC yells out "Help me flank him!" that's fine, because he's expressing himself through his PC to my PC, a valid form of communication in my mind. He's a sink or swim kind of teacher. Skip the lesson, toss them in and let survival take over. I can't say I exactly agree with this, but I understand where he's coming from. We have been thinking about having a one shot game where tactics would be important and we would discuss things out of character in order to help everyone get better at tactics and working as a team in our usual games. [i]Status[/i] sometimes, but its main use is to monitor the health of someone who is away from the group. We consider it fairly easy to look at someone and determine how injured they are, relatively speaking. We never call out our exact hp figures, though. If someone asks we can say something like "He looks hurt, but it doesn't look like anything serious" or "He looks like he might be on his last leg" or something akin to that. We usually just call out any tactics we want to communicate in character and live with any consequences which that might bring up. So if someone wants to flank a particular enemy, that enemy might very well back into a corner or something. But, we haven't really taken extreme measure to try to do anything more. My thoughts exactly. Language and code words work well, and are happening within the confines of the game. In fact, I would go as far as to not make the Players memorize the codes and what they mean but to be able to do the "gloss over" thing I mentioned before even in combat. "I call out the code for flanking with me!" or something like that. Of course if you're in a [i]silenced[/i] area, or your enemies learn the codes or have [i]tongues[/i] if you use Terran or something like that, then you have to deal with the in character consequences of that. *phew* Responding is almost tiring. ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Definition of Metagaming
Top