Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Meta-Gaming: Definition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Occhronustinrist" data-source="post: 2243943" data-attributes="member: 22215"><p><strong>Follow Up Thoughts</strong></p><p></p><p>Thank you all for the replies. </p><p></p><p> The basic situation is this. I have a player who, like many out there, takes the time to know the rules. What I have called Meta-Gaming may be more accurately described as simple rules-lawyering, which I can handle. The crux is that I have told him that his actions are meta-gaming and that he needs to cut it out. His response is that he is not and he finds it offensive that I make that accusation. So first, I needed to determine if I was using the term "Meta-Gaming" with any accuracy.</p><p></p><p>General Examples:</p><p>1. The Rules Laywer (L) complains in-game that the encounter used is far too high for the party (A treant vs Party Level 3-4, 6 characters) and that "If I were the DM, I would never send such an encounter against the party. (insert pout here)"</p><p></p><p>2. L using out-of-character discussions to develop group tactical strategy or to get information from player's characters are not in the same room as his character.</p><p></p><p>3. I am not running a Ravenloft campaign. I am running a campaign in the Forgotten Realms with a Gothic Horror/HP Lovecraftian theme. Yet, L insists that I need to reconsider the calls I am making in the game because "In Ravenloft, the rules work this way..." "Oh, I see the DM has The Ravenloft Monster Manual, get ready guys!..." He is understandably confused even though I have told him that I am not running a ravenloft campaign. </p><p></p><p>Specific Example:</p><p></p><p>A. One of my players (P1) missed a campaign session that ended right in the middle of combat at a cliffhanger. Another player (P2) had unexplainedly shot an NPC in the back that was suspected of trying to assasinate a third player (P3). The session ended with the group turning tail and running in one direction, and the NPC running in the other. The following gaming session, P1 returned to the table. I explained to P1 everything that her character would have seen happen prior to the session. </p><p></p><p>B. The next session opens, and three of my players, P1, P4, and L move down into my basement to explain to P1 what had happened in the previous game. I felt that I had already told P1 what had happened, but apparantly, she wanted to hear it from the players. Fine, I thought. After about ten minutes, I told them they needed to rejoin the group upstairs. Any further explanation could be conducted in front of eveyone. I was concerned that instead of telling her the facts of the encounter, they would explain to her P2's rationale for his actions and thus remove the surprise and suspense created by P2's unannounced crossbow bolt to the NPC's kidneys. </p><p></p><p>C. The NPC is a Doppleganger. I have rolled each character's sense motive rolls secretly and the NPC is effectively disguising itself. The only clue the characters have to go on is that the NPC, disguised as an Elven Ranger/Druid has no scent. (My DM rule for dopplegangers, one of my characters has the scent ability from the Monster Manual) and that they are having difficulty tracking her (Boots of Shaundakul/Pass without trace - Forgotten Realms).</p><p></p><p>D. There have been posters put up around the PC's town placing a bounty on the head of P4, the party's Cat-Person. The Bounty Poster explains that the Cat-Man is a terrible beast and solicits bounty hunters to capture or kill P4. P4 has had to move and live in secrecy because of his appearance and this bounty. The party is currently traveling to the hamlet that this bounty is from so they can try to deal with the mayor, who placed the bounty on P4. When the NPC meets the party, the NPC is hunting what appeared to be a "Were-Boar". The NPC tracks and kills the "were-boar" in front of the party. The Were-Boar was a transformed creature, similar to P4. The one clue the party never picked up on is that the NPC used normal weapons to kill the "were-boar".(Think "Island of Dr. Moreau" - they don't know this)</p><p></p><p>E. So, in this case, I have a character L, who has a tendency to metagame. I am running an NPC that the party has met for the first time (two minutes, tops) who's actions should seem innocent in and of themselves. One character, P2 decides to shoot NPC in the back while the group walks through the woods with her. When P2 does this, L and P1 are off in the woods. They didn't see the shooting happen. Session A ends on that cliffhanger. Session B opens up and the players retire to the basement to discuss the previous session with a character who was not there. I tell them I need their discussion to be at the gaming table because I do not want them to meta-game. If they begin to discuss information that their character could not have known, I want to limit it so the story's suspense is maintained. </p><p></p><p>F. In sum, when I have my next session, I will explain to the party what I mean by Meta-Gaming and why I want it to stop. I see that I have a complex interaction between simple rules-laywering (allowable, if not annoying) and actual Meta-Gaming. Usually, I use the basement to conduct discussions with players on events that only their characters experience. I do that to prevent others from overhearing what they should not know. I don't want it used as a tool to discuss out of session information. My goal is to maintain the sense of mystery and suspense in session.</p><p></p><p>Thanks,</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Occhronustinrist, post: 2243943, member: 22215"] [b]Follow Up Thoughts[/b] Thank you all for the replies. The basic situation is this. I have a player who, like many out there, takes the time to know the rules. What I have called Meta-Gaming may be more accurately described as simple rules-lawyering, which I can handle. The crux is that I have told him that his actions are meta-gaming and that he needs to cut it out. His response is that he is not and he finds it offensive that I make that accusation. So first, I needed to determine if I was using the term "Meta-Gaming" with any accuracy. General Examples: 1. The Rules Laywer (L) complains in-game that the encounter used is far too high for the party (A treant vs Party Level 3-4, 6 characters) and that "If I were the DM, I would never send such an encounter against the party. (insert pout here)" 2. L using out-of-character discussions to develop group tactical strategy or to get information from player's characters are not in the same room as his character. 3. I am not running a Ravenloft campaign. I am running a campaign in the Forgotten Realms with a Gothic Horror/HP Lovecraftian theme. Yet, L insists that I need to reconsider the calls I am making in the game because "In Ravenloft, the rules work this way..." "Oh, I see the DM has The Ravenloft Monster Manual, get ready guys!..." He is understandably confused even though I have told him that I am not running a ravenloft campaign. Specific Example: A. One of my players (P1) missed a campaign session that ended right in the middle of combat at a cliffhanger. Another player (P2) had unexplainedly shot an NPC in the back that was suspected of trying to assasinate a third player (P3). The session ended with the group turning tail and running in one direction, and the NPC running in the other. The following gaming session, P1 returned to the table. I explained to P1 everything that her character would have seen happen prior to the session. B. The next session opens, and three of my players, P1, P4, and L move down into my basement to explain to P1 what had happened in the previous game. I felt that I had already told P1 what had happened, but apparantly, she wanted to hear it from the players. Fine, I thought. After about ten minutes, I told them they needed to rejoin the group upstairs. Any further explanation could be conducted in front of eveyone. I was concerned that instead of telling her the facts of the encounter, they would explain to her P2's rationale for his actions and thus remove the surprise and suspense created by P2's unannounced crossbow bolt to the NPC's kidneys. C. The NPC is a Doppleganger. I have rolled each character's sense motive rolls secretly and the NPC is effectively disguising itself. The only clue the characters have to go on is that the NPC, disguised as an Elven Ranger/Druid has no scent. (My DM rule for dopplegangers, one of my characters has the scent ability from the Monster Manual) and that they are having difficulty tracking her (Boots of Shaundakul/Pass without trace - Forgotten Realms). D. There have been posters put up around the PC's town placing a bounty on the head of P4, the party's Cat-Person. The Bounty Poster explains that the Cat-Man is a terrible beast and solicits bounty hunters to capture or kill P4. P4 has had to move and live in secrecy because of his appearance and this bounty. The party is currently traveling to the hamlet that this bounty is from so they can try to deal with the mayor, who placed the bounty on P4. When the NPC meets the party, the NPC is hunting what appeared to be a "Were-Boar". The NPC tracks and kills the "were-boar" in front of the party. The Were-Boar was a transformed creature, similar to P4. The one clue the party never picked up on is that the NPC used normal weapons to kill the "were-boar".(Think "Island of Dr. Moreau" - they don't know this) E. So, in this case, I have a character L, who has a tendency to metagame. I am running an NPC that the party has met for the first time (two minutes, tops) who's actions should seem innocent in and of themselves. One character, P2 decides to shoot NPC in the back while the group walks through the woods with her. When P2 does this, L and P1 are off in the woods. They didn't see the shooting happen. Session A ends on that cliffhanger. Session B opens up and the players retire to the basement to discuss the previous session with a character who was not there. I tell them I need their discussion to be at the gaming table because I do not want them to meta-game. If they begin to discuss information that their character could not have known, I want to limit it so the story's suspense is maintained. F. In sum, when I have my next session, I will explain to the party what I mean by Meta-Gaming and why I want it to stop. I see that I have a complex interaction between simple rules-laywering (allowable, if not annoying) and actual Meta-Gaming. Usually, I use the basement to conduct discussions with players on events that only their characters experience. I do that to prevent others from overhearing what they should not know. I don't want it used as a tool to discuss out of session information. My goal is to maintain the sense of mystery and suspense in session. Thanks, [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Meta-Gaming: Definition
Top