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

[robus]

That sort of playing doesn't sound like it would be fun for me.

Agreed. This sounds more like performance than playing a game.

 

[guachi]

In terms of the game, there is no challenge to the character. The challenge always goes to the player. So what you're doing here is presenting a challenge to your players that they're not allowed to use their skills and knowledge to solve unless the DM tells them they can based on what the DM judges the character "would" do. If they are not allowed to, then the difficulty of the challenge goes up (sometimes) because some otherwise viable solutions are forbidden. Anyone who doesn't do this is, to some, not roleplaying or is a filthy "metagamer" or "powergamer."

Contrast this with someone like me who designs and presents a challenge where I expect players to use their skills and knowledge - because this is a game. And when they do use their skills and knowledge to reduce the difficulty of a challenge, I don't judge them for doing so. I know they're roleplaying because they are making choices their characters could make in such situations. To me, there is no "your character will, would, or must do this." That is not for me to judge and I don't know why anyone would want to put themselves in the position to judge that. (Though I can speculate, but none of the reasons are very flattering.)

The type of game you've described in this thread that you play and DM is one I would find horrible to play in. A D&D game where players brought in knowledge that their characters would almost assuredly have no knowledge of and were applauded for it would be a game I would leave and never go back to.

In another response (about a code to defuse a nuclear bomb or something similar) you rhetorically asked that if there is no challenge why bother?

Why bother? Because it's a role-playing game. And I'm playing a role. There is no challenge in breakfast, but I've had great fun role-playing breakfast (and other meal times). Thinking as your character, talking as your character, acting as your character, doing the things your character would do is incredibly fun. I've played D&D where my character felt little more than a widget and some stats and other times I've played D&D where my PC has a personality I knew inside and out. "Gratuitous play-acting" - as Elfcrusher called it - is what made my most memorable D&D games so memorable and something more than a computer game or board game (both of which i like. But I play RPGs for something different).

I don't primarily play RPGs to overcome challenges by any means necessary. Or even by means of using information my character wouldn't likely have. Heck, I don't even primarily play D&D to overcome challenges. I play D&D to play a role and have fun. The adventures we go on and challenges we over come are the means to that end of having fun and playing a role.

Now, I can't play D&D and totally separate character and player knowledge. But there is a difference between interacting with the game world based on what the player knows and interacting with the mechanics with what the player knows. As an example - exactly what is the character knowledge for a divination wizard and his two rolls he gets to replace a day? How does he know what the die rolls are?

TL;DR - I'd rather play in secondhander's game with people getting into their roles and trying to think and act as their characters, even if they aren't very good at it.

 

[seebs]

Guys, guys, I have amazing news. Different people approach roleplaying games differently!

This is almost certainly a new discovery.

... Actually, though, I want to point out: Discussions like this can be really fun if they're approached as "I'd like to talk about what we do, and hear what other people do". They are a lot less fun when approached as "that sounds really unfun and I wouldn't do it".

 

[iserith]

TL;DR - I'd rather play in secondhander's game with people getting into their roles and trying to think and act as their characters, even if they aren't very good at it.

What makes you think that the players at my table don't do that?

In my games, players earn Inspiration by acting in accordance with the character's established personality traits, ideals, bonds, and flaws. During short rests, the players can also earn Inspiration by talking about how some aspect of an established tie with another character came into play in an earlier scene. Players can also earn Inspiration by using their trinket in an interesting way. Further, at the end of the session, they can earn bonus XP for resolving character ties and creating new ones as their relationship with the other characters develop. Players can also earn experience points by overcoming challenges via social interaction.

So with 8 different ways to earn Inspiration and plenty of opportunities for bonus XP as described above - and Inspiration being very useful in overcoming challenges - you don't think the players are "acting as their characters?"

Au contraire.

 

[Arial Black]

If it can be cast for free and lasts all day, sure - why not? (was that in 4e?)

It was in 5E; Storm King's Thunder.

Here's the spell from the 5E PHB p287:-

W a t e r B r e a t h i n g
3rd-level transmutation (ritual)
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, S, M (a short reed or piece of straw)
Duration: 24 hours
This spell grants up to ten willing creatures you can see
within range the ability to breathe underwater until the
spell ends. Affected creatures also retain their normal
mode of respiration.

In my game, however, all spells use slots.

Are you saying that you've houseruled ritual casting out of your 5E game?

Why?

 

[FrogReaver]

Absolutely; and that's what - in absence of any other background or evidence pro or con - random dice rolls are for.

And now you are not letting me play the character I want because you are making me roll for something I've already decided my character knows. My character didn't have to think about whether the troll was weak to fire, he outright knew it and now you are giving me a chance for failure.

Maybe you do know what's up; or you've been here before; or you've heard about trolls around a campfire somewhere. Maybe not. But I absolutely disagree with the notion of simply being able to assume the character knows these things just because the player knows.

If the player knows something and wants to pass that knowledge onto their character in a believable way in game there are any number of justifications they can use for it because the world is fictional and not all the facts are preestablished. Heck even randomness and spontaneity are valid in game justifications for why a character performed a certain action. So I'm not sure why any knowledge needs assumed in the first place.

People get struck by lightning, sometimes even from a clear sky without warning. Given that, how often do you (or I, for that matter) prepare for it before going outside?

Some people may.

Didn't think so.

Lan-"clear-sky lightning: the ultimate real-world 'gotcha' event"-efan

What kind of players prepare for a lightning strike on a clear day? None unless they have read the script and already know it's coming. Maybe we should draw a distinction between using knowledge of preplanned events in an adventure with general setting knowledge you impart to your character. I think we can all agree that one is not okay.

 

[Imaculata]

@Imaculata is that map in post #296 one of your own design, or one taken from a published module? I ask as it's brilliantly done, and if it's yours I'd like to compliment you on it.

Lanefan

This is a great looking map. Did you create it yourself?

Yup, yup.

Thank you, that is a map I made for my pirate campaign. Glad you both like it.

 

[Lanefan]

It was in 5E; Storm King's Thunder.

Here's the spell from the 5E PHB p287:-

W a t e r B r e a t h i n g
3rd-level transmutation (ritual)
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, S, M (a short reed or piece of straw)
Duration: 24 hours
This spell grants up to ten willing creatures you can see
within range the ability to breathe underwater until the
spell ends. Affected creatures also retain their normal
mode of respiration.



Are you saying that you've houseruled ritual casting out of your 5E game?

Why?

Were I running 5e I'd certainly rule that one out as it's written: way too generous for a 3rd-level...anything. To me that reads more like what a 6th or 7th level spell ought to be capable of. For 3rd level...maybe 1 target for a long time, or your level's worth of targets for a much shorter time (15 minutes? Half an hour?). But 10 targets for 24 hours...yeah, why wouldn't you cast that every single day even if you're in mid-desert.

As for ritual casting in general, I'd certainly take a very long hard look at it, with axe in hand, if this one spell is a typical example.

Lanefan

 

[Imaculata]

The type of game you've described in this thread that you play and DM is one I would find horrible to play in. A D&D game where players brought in knowledge that their characters would almost assuredly have no knowledge of and were applauded for it would be a game I would leave and never go back to.

But as I said earlier in this thread, don't most players stock up on healing items before entering a dungeon?

That's players anticipating monsters. Their characters have no reason to assume an underground structure would be crawling with monsters, with probably a boss at the end.

And yet, most of us would agree (I presume) that this is totally fine. Because we all understand that we're playing a game, and our characters need to be properly prepared for the challenges ahead.

 

[Lanefan]

And now you are not letting me play the character I want because you are making me roll for something I've already decided my character knows.

Er...sorry. You don't get to arbitrarily make those decisions. End of story.

My character didn't have to think about whether the troll was weak to fire, he outright knew it and now you are giving me a chance for failure.

Au contraire, mon ami - he outright didn't know it unless the dice happen to say that by some chance he did.

What kind of players prepare for a lightning strike on a clear day? None unless they have read the script and already know it's coming. Maybe we should draw a distinction between using knowledge of preplanned events in an adventure with general setting knowledge you impart to your character.

I guess the argument, then, is where are the boundaries of "general setting knowledge" going to be? And that one is probably a table-by-table decision.

Lanefan