Do you pull the chain?

[malraux]

Isn't having your PC pull the chain "because the DM <whatever>" an example of blatant metagaming?

Why is that okay in this case (if your opinion is that metagaming is usually "not okay")?

Yes it is metagaming. But then again, in most cases, if you didn't metagame to the point of having your PC doing interesting things, after a few levels, your PC would sell his magic items, buy a bit of land, and hire a few nubile maidens to keep him warm for the rest of his days.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Yes it is metagaming. But then again, in most cases, if you didn't metagame to the point of having your PC doing interesting things, after a few levels, your PC would sell his magic items, buy a bit of land, and hire a few nubile maidens to keep him warm for the rest of his days.

Why in the world would I create a character who wanted those things? (Or, if I did create a character who wanted those things, why in the world would I not morph his goals away from those things?)

I think you're confusing "gaming" and "metagaming."

 

[Reynard]

So far so good. Until later, when me and player and player are hanging out, he asks me what level or CR the trap was. (Note to new DMs, think of your selves as magicians, never tell your secrets! Learn from my mistakes!) I tell him. He goes crazy because the trap is, in his not so humble opinion, either to high in level and CR or the trap is to deadly for that level and CR. Attempts to point out that he survived fall on deaf ears.

I hate this. I hate it so much I can't even express it. The worst thing 3E did was give whiney players* an excuse for their whining via CRs and ELs (not to mention wealth by level guidelines). And the worst part is that it didn't even work -- CRs and ELs were broken from the get go anyway, so even following them could still result in an "unfair" encounter.

Here's the thing: the world is not level appropriate. Players should have a reasonable expectation of being able to assess the general risks of any given activity, but the specifics are often hidden and unknown (or even yet to be determined; see "Random Encounters"). And it is entirely possible that your 2nd level party, while walking through the Forest of Unknowable Monstrosities, will get eaten by a Vampire Treant. They don't become Zombie Twigs just because you're too low level.

*I don't mean to suggest all players are whiney, or that any complaints of fairness are due to whininess. Rather, there's a breed of player that will piss and moan about everything; you know who you are.

 

[Reynard]

I think you're confusing "gaming" and "metagaming."

Those two things are inseparably intertwined. I don't think there is an appreciable difference between the two, to be honest.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Those two things are inseparably intertwined. I don't think there is an appreciable difference between the two, to be honest.

So when somebody says "metagaming," you don't have an idea what he or she means?

 

[Doug McCrae]

Shouldn't the players interact with the world in a way that makes sense?

If they did that, they'd never enter a dungeon.

 

[Reynard]

So when somebody says "metagaming," you don't have an idea what he or she means?

That's not at all what i said. I know very well what metagaming is. I just don't think it is separate or different from "gaming". Every time you look at your character sheet or pick up a die or engage the game in any appreciable way, you are metagaming. So the one extra step of consciously considering the game parts of the game when playing the (wait for it) game doesn't make it suddenly badwrong metagaming.

But then, to me the game isn't a form of improv dinner theater or group writing exercise. It is a game. And particularly in the context of levers and pull chains, what makes it a fun game is thinking about all the things that the lever/chain could do, and why the smiling-like-an-idiot RBDM across the table put it there in the first place.

Playing dumb and pulling the chain because your half orc has a 6 wisdom is a cop out. You -- the player -- pulled it because you wanted to, and you used your character as an excuse. Similarly, invoking character personality and motivations to not pull the chain is equally a ruse: you the player didn't want to. And that's fine, and keeping the "in character" veneer on is fine too, but suggesting it is somehow not okay for someone to play the game directly and honestly seems kind of ridiculous.

 

[The_Warlock]

I would endorse pulling the chain, but only while I remain 65' or more away from the door, since the whole THING is a trap, which means there is probably a Golem on the other side of the door with a Symbol inscribed on it's chest. Furthermore, I would recheck the corridor for traps, as it is most likely that portcullis, or blocks of the ceiling will lower/fall/collapse to trap you in the room with the Peak-a-boo Symbol Golem.

In fact, I would at that moment recall that the rogue noticed strange seams in the stonework at the entrance to the dungeon, and retreat out with the important object, and send a summoned creature to pull the chain.

Because no one in their right mind would install a chain in a room which would set in motion a complex series of weights that would cause the entire dungeon complex to sink into the ground and collapse.

But then, whoever made the dungeon made a DUNGEON, so they can't be in their right mind.

However, I couldn't let such an exquisite Rube Goldberg dungeon go without being triggered at least once, which is why I would, with all due precautions, Pull That Chain!

 

[Festivus]

I never quite know what to do with players that think that because there's a monster, they are meant to fight it and win.

What about player responsibility? Shouldn't the players interact with the world in a way that makes sense? The chain is a danger to PCs whose players feel little responsibility to think the situation through.

I struggle with this too at times, particularly with Dark Sun Encounters... running away is sometimes the thing to do, but so many players are conditioned to fight to the bitter end. I offer hints and suggestions, possible exit routes, etc, yet they continue to slug it out.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Playing dumb and pulling the chain because your half orc has a 6 wisdom is a cop out.

And very deliberately not pulling the chain, and advising your companions against it, because you have an 18 Wisdom ... also a cop-out? (But wait ... I haven't said whether I, as a player of the game, want to pull the chain or not.)

We apparently have very different ideas of what a roleplaying game is about, which would explain our disagreement on whether there's a meaningful distinction between "gaming" and "metagaming." I think we can probably leave things there.