Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Once a Fool" data-source="post: 3004026" data-attributes="member: 35783">In my current campaign, I have been playing around with ways to help the players delve into the setting by intentionally bluring the line, at times, between "metagame" and "in-game."Now, I don't mean that I'm trying to drive my characters crazy in a "Mazes and Monsters" kind of way, but I try to take my cues about when to change the pacing, what interests or lack-thereof to play upon from the general atmosphere of the gaming group during a session as I let them speak freely on- or off-topic for as long as I feel is appropriate (that is to say, if the group obviously wants to get to some action, talk time is over).This is probably something that every group does to some extent or another, but what I am finding is that as the party evolves, so, too, does the gaming group and dynamics that are present in the party are reflected in the group, or vice-versa.This, in itself, may not be much of a revelation, but I have realized that, if I am subtle enough, I can use this relationship to guide the party (often in different directions, based on each character/player's own particular perspective and motivation).  In this way, the party creates its own hooks without even realizing it.  I find that (with very little preperation) I am able to run intensely character-centric adventures, simply by paying attention to the players' off-topic, metagame talk.Now, of course, when the player of the fighter is the one looking up the spells, that's a problem, but that's not the kind of metagame stuff I'm talking about.  I'm referring to the stuff that I feel represents the kind of talk that would happen in-game during down-time (though not the topics, of course), or the type of talk that players will use to break the tension when things seem ominous or perilous (which is, given the line of work of the characters, all too often!).Of course, there is a risk I have had to keep in check; that being the risk of dividing a group whose characters diverge widely in perspective, motive, and background, or of appearing to play favorites (or even inadvertantly actually doing so).  Now, I enjoy playing up these differences and even hightening the tension (subtley, of course), but I have to be observant enough to know when to ease up.  This usually coincides with situations requiring teamwork.This leads me to another observation, upon which I may elaborate further some other time.  I have realized that, not only do the characters evolve individually during the course of a campaign, so, too, does the party, so, too, do the players' relationship/understanding with/of their characters, and so, too, does the gaming group's understanding of its dynamic as well.  So, too, do I, the DM.That is my favorite thing about the game.Now, this wordy preamble out of the way, I have a question or two:What lines between "metagame" and "in-game" do you all cross intentionally and for what purposes?</blockquote>

Verification