Is it "metagaming" to remind a player their power works on a miss?

[pawsplay]

No, it's really not. In fact, as others have correctly pointed out, it's actually more "metagamey" to do what the DM is doing.

It's working out the resolution of an action in-game with an out-of-game goal in mind. You can call that what you will. I don't consider "metagaming" a bad word. Clearly, since the fourth wall as not breached and no in-character information was transmitted between the PCs, the GM had no room to complain.

 

[Vegepygmy]

It's working out the resolution of an action in-game with an out-of-game goal in mind.

No, it's not...unless the out-of-game goal is "making sure that things in-game work the way they're supposed to." And even then, it's not doing something in-game (i.e., through a character) with an out-of-game goal, and so it's not metagaming as I understand and use the term.

I don't consider "metagaming" a bad word.

Neither do I (at least, not necessarily).

 

[fuzzlewump]

I really don't even agree with going this far. Sure, it sounds reasonable for some hardcore gamers who take rules seriously like ourselves... ;-).

To be fair, the rule in question is listed directly on the power (the fact that the power in question does something on a miss.) No studying required. Of course, it is ridiculous to deny someone the game effect, but I could see myself drawing a similar ridiculous line for someone who seems to chronically not pay any attention to the game.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

There's some good advice in this thread. The main thing is that your DM seems to have his own notions of table etiquette that hasn't been coordinated with the players. I think a good talk out of game should sort it all out and get everybody on the same page.
-blarg

This, this, this.

From what you've said, the DM and the rest of the group need to sit down and sort out what is and isn't acceptable at the table. If the DM says "In my game, I don't want players to help each other by reminding other players about things they've missed" then that's fine, and that's the game he wants to run.

You, then, have a perfect opportunity to say "I don't want to play in that game. I consider that helping other players is a key part of gaming and it would frustrate me not to do that. Thanks for offering to run a game, bye."

Hopefully by talking about it, the DM can see if several of their players aren't happy with how they're running the game, and you can all agree on a new system.

Like several other people have said, this has nothing to do with metagaming.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

As to the content of this post, I too, call shenanigans. That's just crazy man; I wish I could give you more potent advice.

Here is a question I have for everyone though, which is semi-OT. Let's say we're back to the initial question, a player forgets how one power works, or that they have some bonus on, and miss with an attack. A few rounds later they suddenly remember. Do you let them retroactively apply whatever they forgot? Or does the time in between change the nature of the question? How far back would you let them "reverse time" as it were, or do you have another solution besides either allowing or disregarding the remembered bonus/ability?

Curious, so thanks!

As a DM, I'd tend to let it go if they remembered within a few seconds of the end of their turn. For example, I often let my Ranger player apply his Hunter's Quarry to his target as part of his attack roll, rather than making him state he's doing it with a minor action. He's not gaining any other minor actions (or if he did, I'd call him on it) so it's not a problem.

My players are getting pretty good at remembering all their effects - I stated at the first session that if you apply a modifier to someone, it's your job to remember it. If I blind a character with a monster power, I'll remind them on their turn. If they blind a monster with a PC power, I expect them to remind me (although I also try and remember myself, too).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I retroactively change things like:

an elf casts sleep on an elf... he wouldn´t do that if he can obviously see that he is using it on an elf...

I don´t change near hits into misses or vice versa, but i let the next miss hit instead... if this mistake had caused a character death i rule him unconscious...

trying to backtrack too many rounds just causes headache...
if a ranger applied hunters quarry but forgot about it... or used it twice a round, i just let him roll some extra dice next time he hits or i just adjust monster hp accordingly...

and when there is a TPK because of a mistake or the arch enemy is killed, you can always tell the players they just had a vision...

 

[Dausuul]

This came up last night and, quite frankly, annoyed the heck out of me. We were in combat with a group of trolls (we're about 2/3 through of King of the Trollhaunt Warrens) and our wizard cast Acid Arrow on a troll; she rolls and misses, and was about to end her turn when I reminded her that it does half damage on a miss; the DM points out that this is metagaming since my Dragonborn Fighter wouldn't know that (which is nonsense anyways, since I've seen her cast the spell before). I argue that it's not metagaming to point out the rules of the game to a player, since the character would know their own powers (the player is a little forgetful). DM says no they wouldn't, and if you forget something then oh well, your character forgets it too.

So, if the character forgets that acid burns, it doesn't happen?

Apparently your campaign is set in the world of Looney Tunes. Tell your DM that your next character is going to be an absent-minded fighter who constantly forgets that wounds cause him to lose hit points. Alternatively, run off cliffs and demand Perception checks to see if you notice the lack of ground.

On a slightly more serious note: Your DM may be using this "metagaming" business in a poor attempt to express a different objection - perhaps he feels there's too much kibbitzing and retconning going on in combat, or that the knowledgeable players are "crowding" the less rules-savvy folks with constant corrections. The latter is a common problem at the gaming table; when one sees a player making a tactical mistake, the immediate impulse is to point it out, but many players get annoyed if it happens too much. How do the other players feel about your input?

On the other hand, your DM may just be a jerk.

Here is a question I have for everyone though, which is semi-OT. Let's say we're back to the initial question, a player forgets how one power works, or that they have some bonus on, and miss with an attack. A few rounds later they suddenly remember. Do you let them retroactively apply whatever they forgot? Or does the time in between change the nature of the question? How far back would you let them "reverse time" as it were, or do you have another solution besides either allowing or disregarding the remembered bonus/ability?

Generally, if it can be retconned quickly and painlessly, I'll go ahead and do that. For instance, if a player announces, "I forgot I had a +2 to damage on my last three hits on that monster," I'll go ahead and knock off 6 more hit points. If they can make a good case that "My character wouldn't have used this power because it would have made no sense for him to do so*," I'll let them retroactively have not used it.

However, changes apply only to the present. If that 6 extra damage should have killed the monster two rounds ago, its last two rounds of actions are not retroactively erased. You don't get a new action to make up for the power you didn't use.

It can go the other way too, of course. I forget stuff now and then just like the players. However, when retconning in a monster's favor, I don't generally announce the fact. I just add 6 more points of damage to the monster's next hit.

[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-2]* Note that by "no sense," I don't mean, "tactically sub-optimal." I mean something that the character would have known was totally pointless but the player got mixed up on - e.g., using Turn Undead against creatures which are clearly alive, because the player confused Turn Undead with the sunburst spell.[/SIZE][/SIZE]

 

[roguerouge]

I'm going to have to fall on the "The DM is frustrated with your game play" interpretation of things.

Yes, he used the wrong terminology. Let's get over that.

What he seems to be frustrated about is that the players aren't reading the power card right in front of them! After a year, is it really too much to expect of people to be able to read their own powers? Either off a card or out of the book? I mean, I've played with a great gamer whose character sheet consisted of a bunch of scrawls and occasionally forgot to level her character. She could have cared less about the mathy parts of 3e. But she knew to read the spell in its entirety from the player's handbook before casting it.

Basically, your DM is doing the rules version of "let the dice fall where they may." IF you forget your bonuses, you don't get them retroactively. Is it the best solution? No. Of course not. But this should be a communal talk, as the players are a part of the problem.

So, I think visual representations of floating bonuses are a good idea here, but I also think that if a player can't read their own powers they need to take the consequences. It's too bad that your character is put into greater danger as a result of player indifference, but those are the breaks.

 

[Krensky]

As much as your DM is wrong, it also sounds like you guys should be learning your stuff better. Know what your character can do. Read the power's description before you use it. Don't keep it all on your DM's shoulders.

And yet the DM's actions work against this. This isn't like touching a hot stove, which is what the DM is emulating. The player doesn't get burned (in a literal sense) because they forgot an effect. It's like math when someone forgets a step in a proof, leading to a subtlely wrong answer, without having the correct answer to compare it to. Granted, in the math example a person would learn more from finding the error on their own, but there's no feedback in the eample here.

Or, put another way, if the player doesn't know they forgot something or made a mistake, how can they ever learn? The only way that they could possibly learn under this DM's rules is if he keeps detailed notes and has an After Action Review after every session, and that requires a major buy in from the PCs (ie, that their characters and prefromances will be brutally examined and critiqued, even if they won).

 

[howandwhy99]

In my opinion it's not metagaming because it is the GM's job to enforce the rule. If the effect doesn't happen because the player forgot the power's full effects, then it isn't the player's fault for forgetting. It's the GM's fault for not applying the rules. The players don't need to know the rules at all. That's what makes the combat system different in an RPG. For a miniatures battle game, sure. All sides should know the rules and all sides should be considered responsible for applying the rules.

That said, if folks miss applying a rule every once and awhile, it isn't the end of the world. Usually. A character could still die of course.