-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Meta-gaming
- Thread starter was
- Start date
There's metagming, and then there's metagaming.
In the Deadlands game I run, there's a pretty clear line between character knowledge and player knowledge.
In a Star Wars game I play in, it is sometimes a bit more of an issue - a couple of the players are rather steeped in Star Wars mythology, and tend to assume that their characters know whatever they do, regardless of their skills. This is an issue in that one of the players is *not* steeped in the mythology much at all. She saw the original trilogy once, when she was a kid. So, the difference becomes readily apparent.
There's also the not-evil form of metagaming, in which the players use not the detailed rules knowledge, but the knowledge that they are people at a table, and they're playing a game of a particular genre, so that other players and genre-appropriateness feed into their decisions. This is common in my Deadlands game, and less common in the SW game.
In the Deadlands game I run, there's a pretty clear line between character knowledge and player knowledge.
In a Star Wars game I play in, it is sometimes a bit more of an issue - a couple of the players are rather steeped in Star Wars mythology, and tend to assume that their characters know whatever they do, regardless of their skills. This is an issue in that one of the players is *not* steeped in the mythology much at all. She saw the original trilogy once, when she was a kid. So, the difference becomes readily apparent.
There's also the not-evil form of metagaming, in which the players use not the detailed rules knowledge, but the knowledge that they are people at a table, and they're playing a game of a particular genre, so that other players and genre-appropriateness feed into their decisions. This is common in my Deadlands game, and less common in the SW game.
howandwhy99
Adventurer
My current players just expect everyone must know everything, but there is still some private conversation. It's normally shared immediately, but I've did just have a private in-game meeting for one character one on on last session. Of course we played that in the open. But as a player I really like have private information, which brings the game back to its roots as a personal experience.
Olaf the Stout
Hero
Meta-gaming can be good for a game sometimes. In my game, when the players have occasionally gotten too far off track I'll simply say to them out-of-game, "Guys, you're barking up the wrong tree here. This widget/NPC/random plot point you're spending so much time on has nothing to do with your the plot. So let's move on. Maybe look into X."
Now, obviously I don't do this all the time. It would be no fun for them if I was constantly leading them around by the nose. However, when they've spent 30+ minutes on a random NPC you know has nothing to do with anything (and it isn't easy to retroactively change things so that random NPC does actually have something to do with the main plot), it can be better to put them back on the right path than leave them mindlessly flailing around, getting more and more frustrated.
Of course, you want to generally want to avoid "bad" meta-gaming, such as players with good knowledge of monster abilities using that information to make fights easier when their PC would not have that knowledge.
Now, obviously I don't do this all the time. It would be no fun for them if I was constantly leading them around by the nose. However, when they've spent 30+ minutes on a random NPC you know has nothing to do with anything (and it isn't easy to retroactively change things so that random NPC does actually have something to do with the main plot), it can be better to put them back on the right path than leave them mindlessly flailing around, getting more and more frustrated.
Of course, you want to generally want to avoid "bad" meta-gaming, such as players with good knowledge of monster abilities using that information to make fights easier when their PC would not have that knowledge.
Campbell
Relaxed Intensity
I don't think the concept of meta gaming as a discrete thing is helpful outside of one particular perspective - deep immersion method acting. I find it problematic because it ignores the richness and diversity of the hobby. When playing Gygaxian D&D fireballing a group of trolls or Greyhawking a dungeon isn't meta gaming - it's gaming. If I'm playing Fate working another PC's aspects into my decisions isn't metagaming. It's gaming. Likewise considering the other players and GM before declaring a certain action isn't metagaming. It's just gaming.
JamesonCourage
Adventurer
There's a deep divide between character knowledge and player knowledge, and all the players (and myself, as GM) pipe in if we feel like metagaming is an issue (though this is rare).
Michael Silverbane
Adventurer
In my experience, there is usually a line. But it is not always clear, or consistent between players, or groups or different days.
For some players / groups / sessions, the players take great care to be true to their characters despite whatever the players might know. For other players / groups / sessions, not so much.
I don't really have much of a problem with it either way. Sometimes it is fun for the troll to get up and try to kill you some more because you didn't set it on fire, and sometimes it is fun to murder the magistrate in his sleep because you know that he's the bad guy...
For some players / groups / sessions, the players take great care to be true to their characters despite whatever the players might know. For other players / groups / sessions, not so much.
I don't really have much of a problem with it either way. Sometimes it is fun for the troll to get up and try to kill you some more because you didn't set it on fire, and sometimes it is fun to murder the magistrate in his sleep because you know that he's the bad guy...
I generally assume that character knowledge is separate from player knowledge, but player knowledge may (and sometimes should) affect the actions taken in character.
For example, we often roleplay secret meetings and similar matters at the table, with other players listening. If there are fun secrets in play, players should be allowed to enjoy them, not get bored waiting. Also, when they know about the secret, they can push play towards situations where it will become meaningful.
Nearly all conflicts between PCs need positive metagaming to play well - that is, considering what it means for the other player and sometimes even asking them OOC what they find acceptable. This way, it is possible to have conflict and tension between characters without ruining eachothers' fun.
For example, we often roleplay secret meetings and similar matters at the table, with other players listening. If there are fun secrets in play, players should be allowed to enjoy them, not get bored waiting. Also, when they know about the secret, they can push play towards situations where it will become meaningful.
Nearly all conflicts between PCs need positive metagaming to play well - that is, considering what it means for the other player and sometimes even asking them OOC what they find acceptable. This way, it is possible to have conflict and tension between characters without ruining eachothers' fun.
I appreciate it when players try to remain true to their characters and it usually makes for fun conversations after the game.
I once had a group where one of the players, a really smart guy, was playing a low intelligence character. It was so amusing watching him struggle to bite his tongue when he figured something out that his character would have not have. Usually just after the game he would explode with a list of things that he wished his character could have acted on. That said he always preferred being true to the character than try to meta.
It also got other people talking about what they would have done differently if their character was different.
I once had a group where one of the players, a really smart guy, was playing a low intelligence character. It was so amusing watching him struggle to bite his tongue when he figured something out that his character would have not have. Usually just after the game he would explode with a list of things that he wished his character could have acted on. That said he always preferred being true to the character than try to meta.
It also got other people talking about what they would have done differently if their character was different.
Similar Threads
