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

[robus]

To learn that not only is it accepted practice at some tables but is in fact the expected norm there is, to me, mind-boggling.

Lanefan

And yet this behavior is exhibited by all the major streaming D&D shows...

 

[Corwin]

I think that is you misreading what was said. I didn't read anything anyone said as being actual in-character communication. I did read someone saying that out-of-character communication was allowed to be treated as in-character thought, however (i.e. Dave telling Mark "Maybe try turning the wheel to the left, then flip the lever up?" is not the character Brunak telling the character Leomar the same thing - it is just Dave providing Mark suggestion of something that Leomar might think to do with the wheel and lever he has encountered while alone).

[nod] It's fairly common, IMX, to see players, with characters having high intelligence scores, benefit from suggestions from the other players. Its like having the advantage of the group's hive mind to simulate that the smart PC can come up with great ideas on the spot.

Consider some games where one PC is a commander, or in a position of authority, over the other characters. Some people are of the opinion that the other players should take orders from the player of the commanding PC. Ick. No thanks. In these situations, we prefer to allow all the players to act as they otherwise would, and the narrative of that action is that the commander told him to do that particular thing. Whatever that thing was. The story remains intact, but the players get to maintain their agency.

The same here, again, with overly smart PCs. I don't have an 18 intelligence. Yet, when I play my wizard, I want him to be portrayed in the story as smart. Having other players help me come up with clever ideas aids in that narrative. Sure, my buddy Bob may have leaned across the game table to suggest I try arranging the puzzle tiles in order of the elven alphabet. But my wizard is the one who expressed that breakthrough in the narrative.

 

[Shasarak]

We're talking about metagaming, right?

To learn that not only is it accepted practice at some tables but is in fact the expected norm there is, to me, mind-boggling.

Lanefan

To me it is like playing DnD without any Monty Python quotes. I mean in theory you could do that I suppose but, as you say, the thought of it is mind-boggling.

 

[Satyrn]

To me it is like playing DnD without any Monty Python quotes. I mean in theory you could do that I suppose but, as you say, the thought of it is mind-boggling.

Oh, my table frowns on montygaming. We kicked out the player who wrote up a weremøøse sister in his character's background.

 

[Shasarak]

Around here if said advice was ignored in favour of doing something less optimal (e.g. my druid-meeting example, previous post) the table response would almost certainly start with something like "You dumbass - why'd you do that for?", or worse, said player-to-player; and the fight would be on.

Nope, don't need that.

I am lucky that in my group we are all friends so know how to take the dumbass ribbing in fun. Maybe next time it will be my characters turn to critically fumble or some such.

They are an audience. I merely expect them to be a non-disruptive one.

If you go to a live theatre performance do you call out suggestions to the actors on stage as to what their next actions should be? To me it's very close to - if not exactly - the same thing.

I know that comedians often get suggestions about what they can do if their material is not so good and there are plenty of other performances that rely on interactions with the audience. If you want a one on one with the DM and no suggestions from me then no problem, I have my phone here just let me know when you are done.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em? No thanks. I'll stick to some realism in the game where I can.

Lanefan

Exactly! That is exactly why I can not have people shouting hands back on in my game because realism.

At least have some dignity of doing jazz hands.

 

[Shasarak]

Oh, my table frowns on montygaming. We kicked out the player who wrote up a weremøøse sister in his character's background.

Weremoose sister? She should have sold spam!

 

[Lanefan]

Maybe its not so much what is being said, but *how*. I, too, get a vibe from you that your group of players seems a tad bit on the hostile side (maybe not the perfect word, put passive-aggressive isn't quite right either). Quick to snap or take umbrage, at least? So, if that's the case, of course they get into fights when one suggests something to another. I'm sorry you have to deal with a group like that. I would find it tiresome rather quickly.

Sentiment appreciated, but I'm not sorry at all.

I guess perhaps it's that in our crew people see it as their game-given right to play their characters how they want based on the reality in the game world...which by extension means that if their character is operating alone then nobody else can have input because in the game-world reality they're not there to do so. And they'll stand up for that right, as will I.

A slightly expanded version of what I'm talking about is the notion...and I've often played in games that do this and not minded at all...that every word said by a player at the table is assumed to be coming out of their character's mouth at roughly the same volume. That has led to some amusing times where, say, a Ranger and a Magic-user suddenly seem to know an awful lot about some guys called the Vancouver Canucks, but that pretty quickly gets squashed. The corollary assumption to this is that only those characters (and NPCs, monsters, etc.) able to hear what is said can do so in the game world. In theory this immediately puts a stop to out-of-character suggestions; in practice it also stops a lot of unnecessary distractions at the table.

Lanefan

 

[Shasarak]

A slightly expanded version of what I'm talking about is the notion...and I've often played in games that do this and not minded at all...that every word said by a player at the table is assumed to be coming out of their character's mouth at roughly the same volume. That has led to some amusing times where, say, a Ranger and a Magic-user suddenly seem to know an awful lot about some guys called the Vancouver Canucks, but that pretty quickly gets squashed. The corollary assumption to this is that only those characters (and NPCs, monsters, etc.) able to hear what is said can do so in the game world. In theory this immediately puts a stop to out-of-character suggestions; in practice it also stops a lot of unnecessary distractions at the table.

Lanefan

Just as long as every word the DM says is assumed to be projected over the scene as a voice over I see no problem with the Ranger having to ask the narrator if he can make a survival check or the Magic-user exclaiming that he is down to 4 hps.

 

[Lanefan]

That's what we were talking about, until people tried to bring "realism" into the mix.

Once someone did that, there were two separate topics - what is or isn't metagaming (or in my case whether the word is or isn't useful as used by non-DMG sources), and what is or isn't "realism" - that some folks are falsely treating as one topic, and doing so in a way that falsely implies that anyone disagreeing about the first topic is also not interested in the second.

OK, let's be clear: I'm equating player communication with character communication wherever it makes sense. Dave telling John that he's figured out the real name of the guy John's druid is meeting is - or should be - the same as Valeri the Wizard telling Balthar the druid...only Balthar isn't there to hear Valeri say this because he's off meeting with this guy. Balthar has no in-game way of knowing this information and it breaks realism if suddenly he does.

I think that is you misreading what was said. I didn't read anything anyone said as being actual in-character communication. I did read someone saying that out-of-character communication was allowed to be treated as in-character thought, however (i.e. Dave telling Mark "Maybe try turning the wheel to the left, then flip the lever up?" is not the character Brunak telling the character Leomar the same thing - it is just Dave providing Mark suggestion of something that Leomar might think to do with the wheel and lever he has encountered while alone).

To me it is the same; and if Leomar is off messing with this wheel on his own then Brunak can't tell him a thing...until and unless Brunak goes and finds Leomar.

This is where metagaming and realism meet.

Lanefan

 

[Imaculata]

OK, let's be clear: I'm equating player communication with character communication wherever it makes sense. Dave telling John that he's figured out the real name of the guy John's druid is meeting is - or should be - the same as Valeri the Wizard telling Balthar the druid...only Balthar isn't there to hear Valeri say this because he's off meeting with this guy. Balthar has no in-game way of knowing this information and it breaks realism if suddenly he does.

After hearing what Dave said, can't John decide that his Druid draws the same conclusion?

And if there is no reason for John's Druid to draw that conclusion, can't John decide for himself that his Druid doesn't reach the conclusion, despite him as a player knowing the information?

I trust that my players will do this as they feel fits their character. I don't feel a need to stand guard, and keep an eye on what their characters do or do not know.

Just as long as every word the DM says is assumed to be projected over the scene as a voice over I see no problem with the Ranger having to ask the narrator if he can make a survival check or the Magic-user exclaiming that he is down to 4 hps.

Whenever a player at my table says he's down to 4 hp or less, I tend to tell my players: "Your characters notice that, yeah, he looks pretty bad. He is covered in blood, and has a deep wound across his chest that won't stop bleeding."

Thus what my players know outside the game, they now also know inside the game. I merely dress up the same information for them in a way that is a bit more immersive. But I have no issue with one player telling another how much hp he has left.