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="Quickleaf" data-source="post: 3037140" data-attributes="member: 20323"><p>Interesting topic, thanks for starting it Fusangite.</p><p></p><p>My answer...</p><p></p><p>d20/D&D is a tactical game with competition built into it (mostly between player and GM, but in tournament play also between players) - the hassle-free way to use the game is as a tactics game. When a GM accepts this framework and enters into competition with the players the GM's goal is to "win" where "winning" means challenging the players to think tactically (puzzles, problem-solving, complex battles) because this is what's fun for tactical play.</p><p></p><p>So when a GM gets frustrated because Bob's Player provides information that his character could not provide, what's really happening is...the GM feels the situation is no longer challenging enough (and hence, un-fun) after being "disarmed" by Bob's Player. This action is derogatorily dubbed "meta-gaming."</p><p></p><p>Those players who prefer tactical gaming are glad Bob's player remembered. <em>Too bad Bob's dead, I really could have relied on his tactical mind right now, but good thing his player is friendly enough to help us plan the battle.</em> Thinks the tactical player.</p><p></p><p>Those players who prefer strong identification with their characters (we call this "immersion") become frustrated because they feel Bob's player's comment brings them out of their character's head-space and back to the gaming table. <em>There goes Bob's player again, having to prove his vastly superior perception. I swear he takes notes on the GM's plans. Shoot! Now I'm totally out of character...</em></p><p></p><p>For his part, Bob's player was thinking tactically just like the GM. He saw the situation as a challenge for his fellow players to overcome. Wanting to contribute to their fun (overcoming the challenge and feeling a sense of accomplishment), but unable to do so through the vehicle of Bob (alas, slain by kobolds!), Bob's player reminded the other players about the funny looking tattoo being a sign of a villainous secret society. Bob's player thinks: <em>Oh shoot! The GM played that NPC so smoothe. I'd better warn them about that tattoo before he can take one of them out.</em></p><p></p><p>It seems unrealistic for the deceased Bob to convey critical plot information to his living allies from beyond the grave. The GM was counting on the subtle comment about the fiery tattoo being overlooked or else requiring a difficult Sense Motive check (making sure the NPC's alignment was masked magically to prevent spells from revealing incriminating details), but Bob's player blew the dramatic moment, and now the GM feels his hand of cards has been exposed - there go those plans for a dramatic betrayal down the line. The GM is already beginning to cringe at the thought of a really neat bad guy getting beat-up by the party again. <em>Why can't they just play along?</em> The GM wonders in exasperation.</p><p></p><p><strong>So, how is the situation reconciled?</strong></p><p></p><p>I think the GM and other players need to expand their "tactician" hats to the fantasy campaign setting. The PCs live in the fantasy world and if a player forgets something chances are it's no fault of his character. It's natural to forget things in a game as complex as D&D, and you want your friends to enjoy the game as much as you do, so you'll help remind them when something slips by them. </p><p></p><p>But, for the sake of argument, let's say that Bob's player was providing NEW information (not simply reminding the other players) based on a discovery Bob made before he died. In essence, the party just got the benefit of a <em>speak with dead</em> spell to communicate with Bob. </p><p></p><p>If I was in this situation, and there wasn't a plausible reason the other PCs would have the information, I would turn to Bob's player. "What? How do they know that?" Then I'd turn to the other players. "Can you think of a way the rest of you would have that information?"</p><p>If a convincing explanation was provided, then it would be on with the game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Quickleaf, post: 3037140, member: 20323"] Interesting topic, thanks for starting it Fusangite. My answer... d20/D&D is a tactical game with competition built into it (mostly between player and GM, but in tournament play also between players) - the hassle-free way to use the game is as a tactics game. When a GM accepts this framework and enters into competition with the players the GM's goal is to "win" where "winning" means challenging the players to think tactically (puzzles, problem-solving, complex battles) because this is what's fun for tactical play. So when a GM gets frustrated because Bob's Player provides information that his character could not provide, what's really happening is...the GM feels the situation is no longer challenging enough (and hence, un-fun) after being "disarmed" by Bob's Player. This action is derogatorily dubbed "meta-gaming." Those players who prefer tactical gaming are glad Bob's player remembered. [i]Too bad Bob's dead, I really could have relied on his tactical mind right now, but good thing his player is friendly enough to help us plan the battle.[/i] Thinks the tactical player. Those players who prefer strong identification with their characters (we call this "immersion") become frustrated because they feel Bob's player's comment brings them out of their character's head-space and back to the gaming table. [i]There goes Bob's player again, having to prove his vastly superior perception. I swear he takes notes on the GM's plans. Shoot! Now I'm totally out of character...[/i] For his part, Bob's player was thinking tactically just like the GM. He saw the situation as a challenge for his fellow players to overcome. Wanting to contribute to their fun (overcoming the challenge and feeling a sense of accomplishment), but unable to do so through the vehicle of Bob (alas, slain by kobolds!), Bob's player reminded the other players about the funny looking tattoo being a sign of a villainous secret society. Bob's player thinks: [i]Oh shoot! The GM played that NPC so smoothe. I'd better warn them about that tattoo before he can take one of them out.[/i] It seems unrealistic for the deceased Bob to convey critical plot information to his living allies from beyond the grave. The GM was counting on the subtle comment about the fiery tattoo being overlooked or else requiring a difficult Sense Motive check (making sure the NPC's alignment was masked magically to prevent spells from revealing incriminating details), but Bob's player blew the dramatic moment, and now the GM feels his hand of cards has been exposed - there go those plans for a dramatic betrayal down the line. The GM is already beginning to cringe at the thought of a really neat bad guy getting beat-up by the party again. [I]Why can't they just play along?[/I] The GM wonders in exasperation. [B]So, how is the situation reconciled?[/B] I think the GM and other players need to expand their "tactician" hats to the fantasy campaign setting. The PCs live in the fantasy world and if a player forgets something chances are it's no fault of his character. It's natural to forget things in a game as complex as D&D, and you want your friends to enjoy the game as much as you do, so you'll help remind them when something slips by them. But, for the sake of argument, let's say that Bob's player was providing NEW information (not simply reminding the other players) based on a discovery Bob made before he died. In essence, the party just got the benefit of a [i]speak with dead[/i] spell to communicate with Bob. If I was in this situation, and there wasn't a plausible reason the other PCs would have the information, I would turn to Bob's player. "What? How do they know that?" Then I'd turn to the other players. "Can you think of a way the rest of you would have that information?" If a convincing explanation was provided, then it would be on with the game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Definition of Metagaming
Top