How to punish a metagamer?

[StreamOfTheSky]

Charm spells are a bit different. If you fail your save you won't know you're enchanted until the spell expires. If you do save, you won't know that an attempt to charm you has occurred.

Wrong.
"A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells."

This was basically a copy-paste from the very same 3E rule.

Whether he can deduce that he was targeted with charm specifically is questionable, but if he makes the save, he totally senses an attempted mind-rape of some sort occured.

 

[Walking Dad]

This is no-doubt going to get ignored by most future posters but...

The question was "how to punish a metagamer?" not "who's actions were justified?", not "do fighters know about charms?", not "Does this make the wizard evil?", etc.

The GM seems to have already made her choice on all those issues, and it seems most of her group agree with her. The topic seems to have gotten derailed into more questioning of everyone's judgement than actually addressing her question though.

Ok, you can stop metagaming in the OP case by not handing out items to a character, if you totally want the item to end with another...

come on, we all metagame from time to time... but we usually do it to keep the story flowing and to ignore possible plot holes.

The problem in the OP was that one guy refused to matagame that his guy will unselfishly give a valuable magic item to someone else without any benefit or payment.

He should be punished for disrupting the game and being uncooperative as a player, not for metagaming. There is no need to punish metagaming at all, if it doesn't decrease the fun for anyone.

 

[gamerprinter]

Wrong.
"A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells."

This was basically a copy-paste from the very same 3E rule.

Whether he can deduce that he was targeted with charm specifically is questionable, but if he makes the save, he totally senses an attempted mind-rape of some sort occured.

I was looking at the PF Charm Person spell, and didn't see the word 'tingle' there. Perhaps its elsewhere. I don't deny that one should recognize that a spell was cast on you, even if it failed, but its not worded that way in the spell. The real point is that the fighter shouldn't automatically recognize that a charm spell was attempted against him - that's all I'm saying.

I admit before actually looking for a spell citation which I finally did, I may have misworded my meaning to suggest otherwise, this was not my intent.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Not a charm spell, like being IDed with spellcraft. But if he makes his save, he knows a) someone just tried to mind rape me and b) the wizard was using weird gestures and vocal sounds and looking at me.

At that point, if i were the fighter, I would be initiating the "hands to throat" combat maneuver, followed by my spellcraft check of yelling at him, "WHAT THE DID YOU TRY TO DO TO ME?!?!?!"

 

[gamerprinter]

Me, I'd just say goodbye and leave the table as soon as another player tried to charm me. That's uncalled for, dirty pool and not a group that I would feel comfortable to play any games with. If the DM and other players thought I was being as ass-hat for character selfishness, I would hope the players would be adult enough to talk to me out of game asking me to play differently - not use a game spell to control my character. Who wants to play with a group like that?

 

[cyderak]

This is no-doubt going to get ignored by most future posters but...

The question was "how to punish a metagamer?" not "who's actions were justified?", not "do fighters know about charms?", not "Does this make the wizard evil?", etc.

The GM seems to have already made her choice on all those issues, and it seems most of her group agree with her. The topic seems to have gotten derailed into more questioning of everyone's judgement than actually addressing her question though.

I was assuming you were playing with friends........and I don't know how your game sessions go, but I don't "PUNISH" my friends........ That kind of behavior is demeaning and condescending at best.......

No one likes to be pulled aside like a child to be slapped on the wrists for a stupid move. .......

If one of your friends can't take a little good natured ribbing (being cursed for grabbing a magic item their character can't use) because of a stupid move on their part then you really need to take a good look across the game table to re-evaluate who your gaming with.

 

[lobsterGun]

My issues with this:

Charm Person: as has been said, realizing you were charmed would ruin charm, so a failed saving throw would mean you are charmed and do not realize it. Now, if someone later said "that guy controlled you" that is another story

Charm Person is a first level spell with a duration of 1 hour per level. There is nothing in the description of the spell that claims that it makes the user forget it was cast on him.

As a GM, I'd rule that the wizard should be glad it lasts as long as it does because it gives him time to get out of town.

 

[Dingo333]

Charm does not control anyone, and even says you can not control them

it says

This charm makes a humanoid creature regard you as its trusted friend and ally (treat the target's attitude as friendly). If the creature is currently being threatened or attacked by you or your allies, however, it receives a +5 bonus on its saving throw.

The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton, but it perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing. Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell. You must speak the person's language to communicate your commands, or else be good at pantomiming.

So the fighter would still have no idea, making the throw or not, that he was charmed. The wizard cast the spell, asks nicely and the fighter willingly agrees. Then the player, unhappy that his control of his character was circumvented, attacks said wizard. That is metagaming my friends.

On another note, making your save does not mean you know who did it or how. This is out of character knowledge and the player using it is again metagaming.

Dick moves all around, and I would recommend, if you do not like playing with him, then dont, blacklist/black ball, can it really stop you and the rest of your friends from gaming at someone's kitchen table?

 

[prosfilaes]

On another note, making your save does not mean you know who did it or how. This is out of character knowledge and the player using it is again metagaming.

A wizard casting a spell with somatic and verbal components is obviously casting a spell; if you annoy a wizard, and he starts casting a spell, and you feel yourself save against something (as was quoted from the rules above), it's pretty darn obvious what just went down even if you don't know the specific type of spell.

And frankly, metagaming seems moot here. We haven't even proven intent, since there's enough opinion here that he would know it for us to give the player the benefit of the doubt. It's the PVP that's the problem, not the metagaming.

 

[Walking Dad]

Charm does not control anyone, and even says you can not control them

it says



So the fighter would still have no idea, making the throw or not, that he was charmed. The wizard cast the spell, asks nicely and the fighter willingly agrees. Then the player, unhappy that his control of his character was circumvented, attacks said wizard. That is metagaming my friends.

On another note, making your save does not mean you know who did it or how. This is out of character knowledge and the player using it is again metagaming.

If he makes the throw, he knows it (rule cited some posts above).

If not:

The characters are mass charmed to give most of their gold for an orphanage (hint: this is a lie) by a NPC. After the spell duration, they didn't wonder why they did it unquestioning and live happy ever after...
not happening!

Dick moves all around, ...

Yes, requiring a character to give away an item without in-game reason, charming a player character, bending the rules and then move as a group vs a single player and blame him on the internet...

and , yeah, a character who didn't surrender immediately an item to another character.