Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xamnam" data-source="post: 8826871" data-attributes="member: 7037765">So choosing to not be as effective as possible when you have that knowledge is metagaming.But the wizard's not taking comprehend languages because he knows that's this bard's whole thing, and he doesn't want to step on that player's fun.But the game is more fun when they don't rest constantly, so they don't do the cautious safe thing as if they're actually concerned about their lives.No, obviously not. But the player who knows who Zhentarim are explicitly leaning into the fact that they will likely be betrayed because that's fun and interesting is.But choosing to do so because he's who the module is about when we agreed to play this one, is, even if you justify it in fiction after the fact.If you're portraying someone who is abjectly selfish and amoral, and tried to steal from the party, but retconned your actions the second the another player said they don't want to play that sort of game, it is. So, I disagree. All of these can have considerations that come from non in-game knowledge. I've seen these choices play out because the players are concerned with what makes the game the best form of it, and I thoroughly appreciate that metagaming.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xamnam, post: 8826871, member: 7037765"] So choosing to not be as effective as possible when you have that knowledge is metagaming. But the wizard's not taking comprehend languages because he knows that's this bard's whole thing, and he doesn't want to step on that player's fun. But the game is more fun when they don't rest constantly, so they don't do the cautious safe thing as if they're actually concerned about their lives. No, obviously not. But the player who knows who Zhentarim are explicitly leaning into the fact that they will likely be betrayed because that's fun and interesting is. But choosing to do so because he's who the module is about when we agreed to play this one, is, even if you justify it in fiction after the fact. If you're portraying someone who is abjectly selfish and amoral, and tried to steal from the party, but retconned your actions the second the another player said they don't want to play that sort of game, it is. So, I disagree. All of these [I]can [/I]have considerations that come from non in-game knowledge. I've seen these choices play out because the players are concerned with what makes the game the best form of it, and I thoroughly appreciate that metagaming. [/QUOTE]

Verification