D&D 5E Average damage or rolled damage?

[AaronOfBarbaria]

But where I take issue is when you generalise from "that event wasn't metagaming" to "there's no such thing as metagaming".

It's fine that you take issue with it, but seriously - if you'd never heard of metagaming prior to that event, do you think you would still believe that what you had done in that situation was actually wrong? Do you think that you wouldn't feel like the ST was trying to police your thoughts by saying it's okay to do what you did if you were thinking "that's just unbelievable, so I'm not going to have my character believe it," instead of "I know that's wrong, so I'm not going to have my character believe it"?

Because the only way that something can actually be confirmed as metagaming is by the player saying that it is, and metagaming is a concept that doesn't naturally occur (by which I mean players never learn of what it is by just playing the game - someone that has read about it in the book and passed that knowledge on to them, even over multiple pass-alongs from player to player in between, has to explain that certain reasons for taking actions are wrong even when the action is allowed with different reasons) the only conclusion that I can reach is this: Metagaming does not exist, not until it is invented by the people that are trying to avoid it.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I always roll my own PC's damage. When I DM I'll use Average Damage, except for crits, where I use Avg + extra die rolls (so if average damage is 1d6+3 = 7, I'll use 7 +1d6 for a crit).

 

[delericho]

It's fine that you take issue with it, but seriously - if you'd never heard of metagaming prior to that event, do you think you would still believe that what you had done in that situation was actually wrong?

Once the harm was explained to me? Sure.

"You're playing a role. Part of that role includes the fact that your character is different from yourself, and has different knowledge from yourself - for example Joseph knows business where you do not, and you know computers in a way he does not. If you apply knowledge that you have but that Joseph does not, you detract from the fiction in the game, and make the game less fun for everyone else as a result. Don't do that."

by which I mean players never learn of what it is by just playing the game - someone that has read about it in the book and passed that knowledge on to them...

That's clearly not the case, since the term originated somewhere. Meaning that, sure enough, someone did determine the problem without having read it in a book or otherwise had it passed on to them.

Metagaming does not exist, not until it is invented by the people that are trying to avoid it.

A thing can exist before someone defines it. And defining something does not necessarily cause it to come into existence.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Azurewraith]

Metagaming is a brand new phenomenon.

Dragon Magazine #10, 1978. Article: Random Monsters.

One of the problems with D&D is that the players always know too much. This is news?
“You obtain surprise over three Clickclicks.”
“Clickclicks? Oh, yeah, they’re in Supplement Three. Hand it to me. And where’s Greyhawk? It had a note about them.”
A pause.
“We shout out ‘November’.”
“That’s right, the Clickclicks fall over dead.”

Sound familiar? The answer is to occasionally throw a monster at the party that i.e., keeps them on their toes, one that they have never seen before because it is unique. No rules cover it, so they have to find out the hard way what it’s like.

Fin

I must admit one of the best thing about dming is the look on your players faces when you go "off book"

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[the Jester]

I like dice, so I roll. I like the variability of the results and dislike the predictability of "40 points of damage every time".

 

[Azurewraith]

I agree.

That said, I think people can, in good faith, disagree about how extensive metagaming is, how improper it is, and what should be done. I am a little surprised that anyone would either deny it exists, or try to define it away. But hey- it's the internet! People can, and will, argue everything.

Sometimes, it's hard to remember just how versed we are in even the most basic rules and assumptions of D&D. I was running a kids game one time where they encountered a troll. And the kids didn't have that "D&D knowledge." And they had the darnedest time. I remember the absolute shock I went through because they ... just ... couldn't figure out that fire might be helpful. It was both awesome, enlightening, and funny as hell.

They talked about that encounter for months afterwards.

I must admit as a Guy who knows pretty much the entire dmg upside down n backwards I have to concentrate on not Meta gaming but then I have to wonder why trolls being harmed by fire isn't common knowledge

 

[Fedge123]

I must admit as a Guy who knows pretty much the entire dmg upside down n backwards I have to concentrate on not Meta gaming but then I have to wonder why trolls being harmed by fire isn't common knowledge

"KILL IT!!! WITH FIRE!!!" is pretty common knowledge everywhere

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*