Why do you hate meta-gaming? (And what does it mean to you?)

[Nytmare]

It is a highly questionable premise to assume that the rules are in place to facilitate the story, or that the players should care primarily about the story.

I don't understand why the idea of storytelling in an RPG is such a huge point of contention to you. Especially since there are so many role playing games that flat out say that storytelling is part of the game, and there are so many people who play them who are interested and invested in that aspect of the game.

No member of the overarching group gets to decide who gets kicked off this island. The games are inclusive of wargamers, roleplayers, storytellers, and other whatever other-ers are out there that I'm missing. Insisting that other people should use your own narrow definition of what you want those words to mean doesn't change what the actual usage and meaning of those words is.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Do you imagine it's possible to be both "immersive" and a "power gamer" at the same time?

of course it is. The two are part of a large spectrum of how we play... MOST (Yes I'm sure everyone can find that one example counter but most) of us are a little immersive, a little power gamer, a little war gamer, a little of a lot of things. No one person is 100% X... that's why I said I'm more X then Y, because I have both in me...

And if you consider "immersion" to be emotionally identifying with your character, does not "immersion" seem easier to achieve if you have the same knowledge as your character rather than a conflict where you know more than the character does (as established)?

yes the easiest thing for me to play is an almost 30 year old bisexual woman that is a bit of a looser spends WAY too much time in fantasies (books, tv shows, comics, rpgs,ect) and who is totally emotionally stunted. However I find that the way more rewarding immersion is to get into someone completely different. I loved playing Twig (4e game) she was an eladrin little girl who was raised by a tribe of savage Orcs. She didn't know how to read and fought using a magic charging style that was pure chaos. When I roleplayed her she made a lot of mistakes I never would. She was damaged in a lot of ways I wasn't. I did my best to consider what she knew not what I know... or in a Mutants and Mastermind game when I played a character in a WW2 campaign that was a GUY, Shadowfire was 1 part spawn and 1 part green lantern. He didn't understand what a computer was when he ran into a time travler (and fellow PC)

Not to answer for her, but as these same sentiments frequently mirror those of my best friend, I think I know what she meant. When my friend says it, he means that he considers himself both a role player and power gamer, but character and role playing choices trump and outnumber the numeric and mechanical choices he makes.

yes, infact my 4e Twigg character was on the optimized board. I don't remember exactly how I was doing it, but I had a bunch of teleport/charge things and hybrided Barbarian and swordmage.

 

[iserith]

yes the easiest thing for me to play is an almost 30 year old bisexual woman that is a bit of a looser spends WAY too much time in fantasies (books, tv shows, comics, rpgs,ect) and who is totally emotionally stunted. However I find that the way more rewarding immersion is to get into someone completely different. I loved playing Twig (4e game) she was an eladrin little girl who was raised by a tribe of savage Orcs. She didn't know how to read and fought using a magic charging style that was pure chaos. When I roleplayed her she made a lot of mistakes I never would. She was damaged in a lot of ways I wasn't. I did my best to consider what she knew not what I know...

or in a Mutants and Mastermind game when I played a character in a WW2 campaign that was a GUY, Shadowfire was 1 part spawn and 1 part green lantern. He didn't understand what a computer was when he ran into a time travler (and fellow PC)

We were speaking of player and character knowledge. To bring it back to this, consider the GM of the M&M game having the time traveler refer to computers by some other term that you, the player, don't know. The time traveler would refer to it and you'd have no clue - both as a player and a character - what it was.

This is setting aside that it's plausible a person from that era could understand what a computer is. And that it would be very easy to justify the character understanding what a computer is by saying one line, "That sounds like what those Army eggheads in Maryland have been working on, that machine what figures where to point the howitzers." Then making it funny by adding, "I guess they still shoot big guns at bad guys in the future." Point being it's very easy to justify player knowledge with reasonable fiction.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

We were speaking of player and character knowledge. To bring it back to this, consider the GM of the M&M game having the time traveler refer to computers by some other term that you, the player, don't know. The time traveler would refer to it and you'd have no clue - both as a player and a character - what it was.

the character in question was from almost 150 years in the future and called it a T-Watch then tried to explain it as a computer he wore on his wrist... the idea of something man made sitting on a wrist that you could type into or talk to (it made a holo keyboard on command or was voice activated) and that had more info in it then an entire encylapida set made no sense to any of us native to the 30's... there was no reason why when everyone at the table had smart phones to expect us to know about smart phones in game...

This is setting aside that it's plausible a person from that era could understand what a computer is.

BUT NOT FOR MY CHARACTER... the most advanced thing he knew was guns and cars...

And that it would be very easy to justify the character understanding what a computer is by saying one line, "That sounds like what those Army eggheads in Maryland have been working on, that machine what figures where to point the howitzers."

yup... or not, see that is where CHARACTER knowledge comes into play, sometimes you know something sometimes you don't...

Then making it funny by adding, "I guess they still shoot big guns at bad guys in the future." Point being it's very easy to justify player knowledge with reasonable fiction.

yea, but this 'big gun' could pull up maps, and history that wasn't written yet, and was just shy of an AI...

 

[iserith]

the character in question was from almost 150 years in the future and called it a T-Watch then tried to explain it as a computer he wore on his wrist... the idea of something man made sitting on a wrist that you could type into or talk to (it made a holo keyboard on command or was voice activated) and that had more info in it then an entire encylapida set made no sense to any of us native to the 30's... there was no reason why when everyone at the table had smart phones to expect us to know about smart phones in game...

Oh, kind of like Dick Tracy's 2-way radio wrist watch. Something that was known about in 1931. I imagine futurists of that time put forth the idea of machines being storehouses for knowledge, too.

Again, you can play your character as dumb if you want, but there are so many ways to imagine the character understanding what a computer is that one doesn't have to. And doing so doesn't make one a "power gamer" or less "immersive" in my view.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Oh, kind of like Dick Tracy's 2-way radio wrist watch. Something that was known about in 1931. I imagine futurists of that time put forth the idea of machines being storehouses for knowledge, too.

Again, you can play your character as dumb if you want, but there are so many ways to imagine the character understanding what a computer is that one doesn't have to. And doing so doesn't make one a "power gamer" or less "immersive" in my view.

it is far less immersive if you go out of your way to find corner cases to explain away why your character happens to know everything you do...

what harm does it do to pretend you are not yourself with your own knowledge base?

I think one of the other character did ask if the thing was a radio, and the voice was someone at a liabrary looking up all the answers...the player with the tech was so slack jawed at the question that neither he nor his character knew how to answer it...

 

[iserith]

it is far less immersive if you go out of your way to find corner cases to explain away why your character happens to know everything you do...

It doesn't have to be. It depends on how well you can justify your character's knowledge and actions. I find it to be exceedingly easy.

what harm does it do to pretend you are not yourself with your own knowledge base?

I don't assert that it is harmful at all. You, however, asserted that not doing so is less "immersive," or at least you don't do it because you consider yourself more of an "immersive" player than a "power gamer."

Though I have seen it where players of this particular mindset play dumb to the point of stalling the game or making it boring or implausible. "Metagaming" can be quite useful in avoiding these particular kinds of outcomes.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh, kind of like Dick Tracy's 2-way radio wrist watch. Something that was known about in 1931. I imagine futurists of that time put forth the idea of machines being storehouses for knowledge, too.

They envisioned a watch walkie talkie, not a smart phone or modern computer. They would have no understanding of how to use a computer properly, but could probably puzzle out some of the easier parts like turning it on.

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

It doesn't have to be. It depends on how well you can justify your character's knowledge and actions. I find it to be exceedingly easy.

sometimes... again I think I can explain why my character knows a lot...but I don't think I have to..

Though I have seen it where players of this particular mindset play dumb to the point of stalling the game or making it boring or implausible. "Metagaming" can be quite useful in avoiding these particular kinds of outcomes.

I would love to see an example of it stopping the game or slowing it. I gave some up thread about PCs working togather...

 

[iserith]

They envisioned a watch walkie talkie, not a smart phone or modern computer. They would have no understanding of how to use a computer properly, but could probably puzzle out some of the easier parts like turning it on.

Oh yeah? You researched what all the futurists of the early 20th century posited as technological possibilities for the future?