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

[Guest 6801328]

Language does indeed evolve which is also why one equally can't say that metagaming has one specific meaning over decades. That's just implausible. And based upon the fierce debates this forum has had over the metagaming, including whether it's possible for the GM to metagame, it's difficult not to get the impression that what "most people on this forum" think constitutes as metagaming is pretty open-ended. (I'm equally reminded about internet discussions regarding what constitutes a "Mary/Gary Stu" character. Ask twenty different people, and I'll likely get twenty wildly different answers.)

QFT.

My perception is there is a minority of people most likely to get bent out of shape over "using knowledge the character wouldn't have" (but, again, within a vague boundary around that definition that seems to shift whenever you shine a light on it), and that group is mostly likely to use the word "metagaming" in the first place, so there might be a false sense that it is the accepted definition.

 

[Caliban]

QFT.

My perception is there is a minority of people most likely to get bent out of shape over "using knowledge the character wouldn't have" (but, again, within a vague boundary around that definition that seems to shift whenever you shine a light on it), and that group is mostly likely to use the word "metagaming" in the first place, so there might be a false sense that it is the accepted definition.

Yeah, that really doesn't match my perception at all. And I really don't make a big deal about metagaming unless it's something egregious.

And more to the point, the definition I gave seems to be the definition that the OP is using, based on his comments. Arguing that it should mean something else is kind of beside the point.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Bear in mind that I still find it irksome that so many people use "liberal" to mean "left-leaning".

 

[Caliban]

Bear in mind that I still find it irksome that so many people use "liberal" to mean "left-leaning".

I find it irksome when people use "QFT" when it's really not something that is true at all. Especially when they then go on to talk about how vague it is...

 

[dco]

Funny, I'd argue that a word with a rather precise and etymologically obvious meaning doesn't change just because a handful of anonymous internet zealots insist on using it incorrectly* in order to advance an agenda. Especially when that new, incorrect meaning is so poorly defined that nobody can agree to what exactly it does and does not include.

*c.f. definition of "moot". Or, more recently, "truth".

What are you talking about? The word is not in the dictionary.
Meta comes from greek and when it is paired with different words it can have different meanings.
It will be poorly defined for you in any case the person that started the thread was very clear what he was stating.

Language does indeed evolve which is also why one equally can't say that metagaming has one specific meaning over decades. That's just implausible. And based upon the fierce debates this forum has had over the metagaming, including whether it's possible for the GM to metagame, it's difficult not to get the impression that what "most people on this forum" think constitutes as metagaming is pretty open-ended. (I'm equally reminded about internet discussions regarding what constitutes a "Mary/Gary Stu" character. Ask twenty different people, and I'll likely get twenty wildly different answers.)

Ok, open ended, the person that opened the thread has his opinion.
Why is the definition discussed when the problem is not the definition? Or is this another example of "internet zealots advancing their agenda" with witty responses because they don't tolerate how that person defines metagaming?

 

[Guest 6801328]

Why is the definition discussed when the problem is not the definition? Or is this another example of "internet zealots advancing their agenda" with witty responses because they don't tolerate how that person defines metagaming?

Which was the first example?

 

[Aldarc]

Good thing I didn't say that then. I'm pretty sure I provided three different definitions for metagaming based on context and outright stated that it means something else in different contexts.

The only person insisting on a single, specific, technical definition for metagaming is Aaron.

There is no reason for you to be defensive. My statement that you quoted was not alluding to what you wrote, but to the statement Elfcrusher was himself quoting.

Ok, open ended, the person that opened the thread has his opinion.
Why is the definition discussed when the problem is not the definition? Or is this another example of "internet zealots advancing their agenda" with witty responses because they don't tolerate how that person defines metagaming?

To be perfectly honest, I don't particularly care how one defines metagaming in this context. I care far more about the the serious problem of a player not having fun. I agree that debating the definition of metagaming does nothing to address the problems of the OP. He is facing a real social problem at the gaming table affecting his fun that needs to be addressed directly by the player in hopeful cooperation with the other players and GM.

 

[Caliban]

There is no reason for you to be defensive. My statement that you quoted was not alluding to what you wrote, but to the statement Elfcrusher was himself quoting.

Then you should have been quoting his post instead of mine in your reply. Since you included my entire post before your reply, it makes it look like you are in fact replying directly to me.

If you then include replies to other posters without any attribution it is just confusing, and makes it look like you are putting words in my mouth.

You call it being defensive, I call it clarifying the issue.

 

[MNblockhead]

Bear in mind that I still find it irksome that so many people use "liberal" to mean "left-leaning".

Yeah, it bugged me for about a year after some political science courses in undergrad. Felt nice to be annoyed at the parochial ignorance of most of my fellow Americans. Then I grew up, realized that is just what the word commonly means in wider American society, and it recognized as a definition in American dictionaries. Now I just get irked about those darn liberals trying to raise my taxes. ;-)

 

[MNblockhead]

And...call me old, but...what are roofies?

Term comes from the mid-90s. A short, altered version of Rohypnol, a trademarked name for a tablet of a powerful benzodiazepine sedative and hypnotic drug C16H12FN3O3.

It became notorious as a "date rape" drug. Eventually, "roofie" became more widely used for any "black-out" drug used to remove inhibitions and make someone unconscious so that he or she can be taken advantage of.

While it was the mid-to-late 90s when you started seeing public-service announcements targeted women, it was from the news surrounding the Jeffrey Dahmer trials that where I first heard about them.

In other words, the game that the OP is playing in sounds pretty messed up.