Requesting feedback on term META-Gamer

[Vykarius]

Forgive the length of topic in advance please? So I have been gaming since I was 11 years old from 1982 to present. I haven't made any attempted to play 4th edition, but have several years of experience with each & every previous edition of Dungeons & Dragons. I first started hearing the term META-Gamer thrown around in mid-to-late 3rd edition. I am aware what the term is trying to paint of those whom are labeled "META-Gamers". One thought struck me when I first heard the term, was the fact that it always seemed to be the player with the worst of luck making a character build (over and over ad nausea) who was accusing others of the "META-Gaming" dreaded title. It reminded me of the type of people in life that envy the skills/abilities of others they can't emulate, but find a way to make an observation such as 'your an underachiever" cause you don't utilize your abilities to their fullest. It is always referencing others ability with taint due to their own lack-there-of. I began to informally analyze the interactions of the lesser effective character builders with those of the succesful ones both in D&D campaigns and online server based Neverwinter Nights game. I wanted to see if there was a correlation between that of inefficient character builders/players & expressed META-Gamer label being used towards the effective character builders/players around them. The conclusion over about that 7-8 year period was overwhelming in distribution of META-Gaming label being alleged almost exclusively by the ineffective players. In short, those who can't or rarely make efficient character builds, are the primary source of alleging that the the effective character builders were in fact usually simply the dreaded META-gamers! My thesis is that they found a creative way to be critical of a player's efficiency of good character builds by creating/espousing a label which criticizes efficiency & functionality by stating that is the ONLY focus of the efficient player's role-playing! In a nutshell they found a way to never have to acknowledge veteran player's skill level as such and to have a defense mechanism for their seeming lack of success in building effective characters in general. It's like saying "Yeah that team beat us in the super bowl, but they only did it because they were so pre-occupied with winning it that they lost site of the "real meaning" or some other esoteric hidden meaning. It is sour grapes pure and simple in my opinion. You wouldnt tell a great experienced athlete he was a META-Athlete and marginalize him/her because they are so efficient would you. In my book if you've been role-playing a number of years, there are just some basic character developing build aspects that become innate in their functionality. The fact that some lazily or ineptly don't acquire said skills as fantasy gamers is in no way a negative reflection on those who possess the skills to shine at the table! Don't most folks who hone their craft even in a hobby like D&D eventually get better and more efficient as time goes by?!? It is Envy that found a coy gaming engineered label to vent their jealousy without losing face as being insecure or jealous of the others! They desperately want there 2 be some in-game explanation for their inefficiency & it not being their lack of ability to blame. In my experience, the lot of rules-wise players with good PC-building skill, are also some of the best at engineering a realistically role-played conceptual character. In other words they are usually better at role-playing & roll-playing too! Just my theory...sorry 2 drag it out but as you can guess, it's kinda my soap-box! lol Any guesses if I have been called a META-Gamer?

DM's and players alike please give any feedback on the topic, as I am interested to hear if good character builders in other games have been the target of the inefficient with this coy defense-mechanism label IMHO. Thanks for listening and giving any and all feedback I will take emails at Vykarius@gmail.com for those not wanting 2 post in forums as well.

~Vykarius the Intrepid

 

[concerro]

Forgive the length of topic in advance please? So I have been gaming since I was 11 years old from 1982 to present. I haven't made any attempted to play 4th edition, but have several years of experience with each & every previous edition of Dungeons & Dragons. I first started hearing the term META-Gamer thrown around in mid-to-late 3rd edition. I am aware what the term is trying to paint of those whom are labeled "META-Gamers". One thought struck me when I first heard the term, was the fact that it always seemed to be the player with the worst of luck making a character build (over and over ad nausea) who was accusing others of the "META-Gaming" dreaded title. It reminded me of the type of people in life that envy the skills/abilities of others they can't emulate, but find a way to make an observation such as 'your an underachiever" cause you don't utilize your abilities to their fullest. It is always referencing others ability with taint due to their own lack-there-of. I began to informally analyze the interactions of the lesser effective character builders with those of the succesful ones both in D&D campaigns and online server based Neverwinter Nights game. I wanted to see if there was a correlation between that of inefficient character builders/players & expressed META-Gamer label being used towards the effective character builders/players around them. The conclusion over about that 7-8 year period was overwhelming in distribution of META-Gaming label being alleged almost exclusively by the ineffective players. In short, those who can't or rarely make efficient character builds, are the primary source of alleging that the the effective character builders were in fact usually simply the dreaded META-gamers! My thesis is that they found a creative way to be critical of a player's efficiency of good character builds by creating/espousing a label which criticizes efficiency & functionality by stating that is the ONLY focus of the efficient player's role-playing! In a nutshell they found a way to never have to acknowledge veteran player's skill level as such and to have a defense mechanism for their seeming lack of success in building effective characters in general. It's like saying "Yeah that team beat us in the super bowl, but they only did it because they were so pre-occupied with winning it that they lost site of the "real meaning" or some other esoteric hidden meaning. It is sour grapes pure and simple in my opinion. You wouldnt tell a great experienced athlete he was a META-Athlete and marginalize him/her because they are so efficient would you. In my book if you've been role-playing a number of years, there are just some basic character developing build aspects that become innate in their functionality. The fact that some lazily or ineptly don't acquire said skills as fantasy gamers is in no way a negative reflection on those who possess the skills to shine at the table! Don't most folks who hone their craft even in a hobby like D&D eventually get better and more efficient as time goes by?!? It is Envy that found a coy gaming engineered label to vent their jealousy without losing face as being insecure or jealous of the others! They desperately want there 2 be some in-game explanation for their inefficiency & it not being their lack of ability to blame. In my experience, the lot of rules-wise players with good PC-building skill, are also some of the best at engineering a realistically role-played conceptual character. In other words they are usually better at role-playing & roll-playing too! Just my theory...sorry 2 drag it out but as you can guess, it's kinda my soap-box! lol Any guesses if I have been called a META-Gamer?

DM's and players alike please give any feedback on the topic, as I am interested to hear if good character builders in other games have been the target of the inefficient with this coy defense-mechanism label IMHO. Thanks for listening and giving any and all feedback I will take emails at Vykarius@gmail.com for those not wanting 2 post in forums as well.

~Vykarius the Intrepid

I did not read your entire thread, but a metagamer is someone that uses out of game knowledge in the game.
I guess I should explain this. The player and the character's knowledge's are as separate as an actor and the character he plays in a movie. The player may know Monster X has 120 hp, SR 20, an AC of 24, is vulnerable to fire and so on. The character does not unless he makes a knowledge check.

A metagamer would use his real life knowledge to power attack for 4 knowing that as long as he power attacks for 4 or less he only has to roll a 10 on the dice. He would also using his flaming longsword as opposed to his icing longsword.

Many consider it cheating to do so.

 

[Vykarius]

I did not read your entire thread, but a metagamer is someone that uses out of game knowledge in the game.
I guess I should explain this. The player and the character's knowledge's are as separate as an actor and the character he plays in a movie. The player may know Monster X has 120 hp, SR 20, an AC of 24, is vulnerable to fire and so on. The character does not unless he makes a knowledge check.

A metagamer would use his real life knowledge to power attack for 4 knowing that as long as he power attacks for 4 or less he only has to roll a 10 on the dice. He would also using his flaming longsword as opposed to his icing longsword.

Many consider it cheating to do so.

That is cheating in my opinion as well. I get it's meaning of player knowledge being used as well. I guess I was referring 2 it's "Min-Max" component and knowing what class/prestige class levels and combinations for good character building. It is that kind of skill they call Min-Maxing and sum up as Meta-Gaming as I have witnessed it anyways? I call that good character building and a veteran player. I would say "what do you have 2 do waste a feat on power attack or something aimless when building a good arcane caster to not be a Min-Max Meta Gamer?!? Frustrating. We all use player knowledge in character design whether we admit it or not, but 2 use it blatantly in game usually brings harsh criticism from all parties I have been around. Thanks 4 feedback.

 

[Runestar]

Now you see why there are no specific boundaries delineating what constitutes metagaming?

What you deem as "cheating", I consider to be pure "common sense". I suspect different players will have different definitions as well.

You may think that knowing exactly how much to PA for is metagaming, to me, it is simply the fighter being skilled enough to control his swings.

There are several other examples which tread a fine line.

1) Aiming a fireball just high enough above the ground so it torches the larger foe, while leaving the shorter fighter PC unscathed. Some protest that the wizard PC should not be able to control his spells to such an extent.

2) Table talk. Some DMs have been known to frown on players who openly discuss their tactics in the midst of combat. I say that the PCs should be familiar enough with one another to know how to complement one another.

I would say "what do you have 2 do waste a feat on power attack or something aimless when building a good arcane caster to not be a Min-Max Meta Gamer?!?

I don't quite understand your point here. Power attack is easily one of the best feats a melee character can take.

If you are saying that one has to suck in order to prove that he is not a min-maxer, then I say it is utter nonsense. There is nothing preventing me from building an optimized character who is good at what he does, and roleplaying him properly.

 

[Vykarius]

>>>don't quite understand your point here. Power attack is easily one of the best feats a melee character can take.If you are saying that one has to suck in order to prove that he is not a min-maxer, then I say it is utter nonsense. There is nothing preventing me from building an optimized character who is good at what he does, and role-playing him properly.<<<

Yeah what I meant was do you have to basically make feat/skill/character building choices unwisely to avoid being labeled a min-maxer or a meta-gamer. Power Attack for a Wizard feat would be an example of an unwise or wasted feat choice in my example. I agree with you 100% that you can make an optimized & efficiently built character and yet still be able to role-play their intricate personality traits with the best of the role-players! I been doing it for most of the last 15-20 years outta 27 gaming lol!

 

[NewJeffCT]

Metagaming has been around a lot longer than 3E - I remember people using it in my old gaming group in the 1990s, which was 2E territory. It refers to using out of game knowledge to affect play at the table - i.e., the barbarian knowing a vampire is repelled by garlic because the guy playing the barbarian saw it in a vampire movie, and not because the barbarian learned about it in game.

Min Maxing refers to maximizing your PC's ability to the extreme - some min-maxing is expected, because everybody wants their PC to be as effective as possible. After all, why would a fighter take a metamagic feat if he is melee oriented? However, if you build your PC towards some obscure and powerful prestige class without having an in-game reason for it, then you have min-maxing.

 

[concerro]

Now you see why there are no specific boundaries delineating what constitutes metagaming?

What you deem as "cheating", I consider to be pure "common sense". I suspect different players will have different definitions as well.

You may think that knowing exactly how much to PA for is metagaming, to me, it is simply the fighter being skilled enough to control his swings.

There are several other examples which tread a fine line.

1) Aiming a fireball just high enough above the ground so it torches the larger foe, while leaving the shorter fighter PC unscathed. Some protest that the wizard PC should not be able to control his spells to such an extent.

2) Table talk. Some DMs have been known to frown on players who openly discuss their tactics in the midst of combat. I say that the PCs should be familiar enough with one another to know how to complement one another.



I don't quite understand your point here. Power attack is easily one of the best feats a melee character can take.

If you are saying that one has to suck in order to prove that he is not a min-maxer, then I say it is utter nonsense. There is nothing preventing me from building an optimized character who is good at what he does, and roleplaying him properly.

1. I see how that could be cheating, but I thinks its acceptable.

2. I agree with this also depending on how much talk is going on. You can speak as a free action according to the rules so telling someone you are about to cast fireball or telling them you want a flank is not bad. When the plan involves great detail I would have to draw the line, but there is no one correct way to make this ruling.

 

[concerro]

That is cheating in my opinion as well. I get it's meaning of player knowledge being used as well. I guess I was referring 2 it's "Min-Max" component and knowing what class/prestige class levels and combinations for good character building. It is that kind of skill they call Min-Maxing and sum up as Meta-Gaming as I have witnessed it anyways? I call that good character building and a veteran player. I would say "what do you have 2 do waste a feat on power attack or something aimless when building a good arcane caster to not be a Min-Max Meta Gamer?!? Frustrating. We all use player knowledge in character design whether we admit it or not, but 2 use it blatantly in game usually brings harsh criticism from all parties I have been around. Thanks 4 feedback.

Min-Maxing is not inherently a bad thing. I think you are referring to what is know as power gaming or being a munchkin. Many people lump them together, but to me they are different.

Powergaming is making you character as strong as you can. Every group has an acceptable power limit, and you should stay within that limit or try to bring the group up to yours if possible so as not to hurt anyone's feelings

Munchkin uses the most abusable interpretation of a rule to make the most powerful character they can. This is widely frowned upon.

There is some level of metagaming when making characters, but it does not involve player vs character knowledge so most people dont think that is cheating.

 

[concerro]

>>>don't quite understand your point here. Power attack is easily one of the best feats a melee character can take.If you are saying that one has to suck in order to prove that he is not a min-maxer, then I say it is utter nonsense. There is nothing preventing me from building an optimized character who is good at what he does, and role-playing him properly.<<<

Yeah what I meant was do you have to basically make feat/skill/character building choices unwisely to avoid being labeled a min-maxer or a meta-gamer. Power Attack for a Wizard feat would be an example of an unwise or wasted feat choice in my example. I agree with you 100% that you can make an optimized & efficiently built character and yet still be able to role-play their intricate personality traits with the best of the role-players! I been doing it for most of the last 15-20 years outta 27 gaming lol!

Nope. I think giving you a feat slot, just for you to be expected to waste it would be counter-productive.

 

[Vykarius]

Min-Maxing is not inherently a bad thing. I think you are referring to what is know as power gaming or being a munchkin. Many people lump them together, but to me they are different.

Powergaming is making you character as strong as you can. Every group has an acceptable power limit, and you should stay within that limit or try to bring the group up to yours if possible so as not to hurt anyone's feelings

Munchkin uses the most abusable interpretation of a rule to make the most powerful character they can. This is widely frowned upon.

There is some level of metagaming when making characters, but it does not involve player vs character knowledge so most people dont think that is cheating.

Regarding Power Gaming. You said it is making your character as powerful as possible. Why would that approach need a specific title for it? Isn't doing something to the best of your capacity without breaking the rules what most people do with any hobby or skill in this world. The old cliche..."Anything worth doing is worth doing right" or "Give it your best effort" should apply to gaming as well. Why half-ass your way to building a character when you can put some thought into it's development and do the best possible job to make him/her as powerful as you can? Wouldn't anything les make mediocrity your gaming goal for your character? Again to me it seems labels like "power gaming" are derogatory in nature when in fact we should call these gamers terms such as skilled, quality & veterans...titles of decency that compliment their prowess instead of safeguarding the egos of the inadequate or careless character builders by labeling the achievers as somehow approaching character building wrong? It's like criticizing or labeling the Champions of the sporting world to make the lesser athletes feel better about lacking the champion's skill...it just seems backwards and most likely derived by a poor character builder who was jealous of those he/she saw at the table. Just my thoughts.