Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jenale" data-source="post: 883553" data-attributes="member: 10811">To me, meta-gaming is any use of something outside the game events to influence the behavior of the characters.One example that I can think of is the &quot;PC forehead tattoo&quot; syndrome.&nbsp; I'm sure I'm not the only person who has seen it--a new PC is being introduced to the party, and no one in the party has ever seen the PC before, the party is in a situation in which they should be deeply suspicious of anyone they meet (for example, sneaking up on a chapel converted to the production of undead), but instead greet the new PC with a &quot;hi, how do you feel about being our scout?&quot;Or the converse:&nbsp; treating important NPCs without much regard because the player knows they're NPCs.&nbsp; (Of course, as DM, there are penalties in my game for this--though it doesn't matter now since I booted the offending player for that and a multitude of other offenses.)Things like information about certain monsters' vulnerabilities--that's a little trickier.&nbsp; I think if the DM says &quot;you've never heard of this creature,&quot; and the players go on to use the info that they were told their characters didn't have, that's meta-gaming.&nbsp; But I'll also throw in a bit of misinformation sometimes &quot;during those months you hung out in taverns listening to every bit of gossip, you had heard stories about werewolves, and the need for silver and garlic to defeat them.&quot;&nbsp; So if they don't get garlic, which the player knows isn't needed, but the character thinks is--I'd have a little chat w/ them.&nbsp; (Or I just might make the garlic necessary after all.)I do think that meta-gaming detracts from the game to varying degrees, but I don't think that every instance of meta-gaming is equal.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jenale, post: 883553, member: 10811"] To me, meta-gaming is any use of something outside the game events to influence the behavior of the characters. One example that I can think of is the "PC forehead tattoo" syndrome. I'm sure I'm not the only person who has seen it--a new PC is being introduced to the party, and no one in the party has ever seen the PC before, the party is in a situation in which they should be deeply suspicious of anyone they meet (for example, sneaking up on a chapel converted to the production of undead), but instead greet the new PC with a "hi, how do you feel about being our scout?" Or the converse: treating important NPCs without much regard because the player knows they're NPCs. (Of course, as DM, there are penalties in my game for this--though it doesn't matter now since I booted the offending player for that and a multitude of other offenses.) Things like information about certain monsters' vulnerabilities--that's a little trickier. I think if the DM says "you've never heard of this creature," and the players go on to use the info that they were told their characters didn't have, that's meta-gaming. But I'll also throw in a bit of misinformation sometimes "during those months you hung out in taverns listening to every bit of gossip, you had heard stories about werewolves, and the need for silver and garlic to defeat them." So if they don't get garlic, which the player knows isn't needed, but the character thinks is--I'd have a little chat w/ them. (Or I just might make the garlic necessary after all.) I do think that meta-gaming detracts from the game to varying degrees, but I don't think that every instance of meta-gaming is equal. [/QUOTE]

Verification