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
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is your way for doing Initiative?
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="Mercule" data-source="post: 7554649" data-attributes="member: 5100"><p>That'd be the start. Really, this is the sort of behavior that keeps lighter systems on my radar -- Fate, especially. I'm currently happy with 5E, but I would go insane with even one player that used metagame knowledge to that extent. Don't get me wrong, I love tactical games, especially board/war games that reward a certain level of system mastery and/or "4D chess". That's just not what I want from an RPG.</p><p></p><p>As you say, to each their own. In this case, it sounds like the metagaming actually is a problem at the table.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'd totally see it as abusive and it'd totally drive me from the game. I haven't had it as an issue for a couple of reasons:</p><p></p><p>1) I've made it extremely clear that I have no interest in running a game that's super crunchy or where PCs are cycling through ever more powerful magic items. I don't begrudge people for wanting that, I'm just not the GM for it. The end. Note: That doesn't mean I don't work with the players to make the game interesting for all, just that I have some boundaries and I'm up front about them.</p><p></p><p>2) I tend to prefer villains who are PC races. That means they're as unpredictable as PCs and have the same sorts of wildcard capabilities. Who cares if you know the math on the routine encounters when the ones that actually matter are wildcards.</p><p></p><p>3) When I do use monstrous opposition (which is common, just heavily spiced with PC races), I narrate the appearance, rather than being clear about what things are, unless the PCs would know. I don't overdo it, but I'm also more than willing to run with anything the PCs say. When running LMoP, I was describing the orcs (or was it goblins) that are all over the place, and actually called them orcs. The players kept slipping and calling them goblins (or orcs, can't remember which way, anymore). I corrected them a few times, and they even caught themselves and corrected. But, they kept doing it. After a couple sessions, I ran with it and just started calling them goblins because that's what the players had called them during a half-hour of straight planning. I've done this with other monsters and magic items (sure, it's a dragon slayer, whatever) on a number of occasions. The players know I'm doing this and are cool with it.</p><p></p><p>3) In practice, the problem with "I know I go before X" is more theoretic than realized. I was concerned, as well, mainly because I'm so strongly opposed to the aggressively crunchy game style. Even for the tactically minded and borderline char-ops players I have, I don't think I've yet seen any time it's been an issue. Whether that's because of the above or not, I couldn't say. It just hasn't been an issue.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercule, post: 7554649, member: 5100"] That'd be the start. Really, this is the sort of behavior that keeps lighter systems on my radar -- Fate, especially. I'm currently happy with 5E, but I would go insane with even one player that used metagame knowledge to that extent. Don't get me wrong, I love tactical games, especially board/war games that reward a certain level of system mastery and/or "4D chess". That's just not what I want from an RPG. As you say, to each their own. In this case, it sounds like the metagaming actually is a problem at the table. I'd totally see it as abusive and it'd totally drive me from the game. I haven't had it as an issue for a couple of reasons: 1) I've made it extremely clear that I have no interest in running a game that's super crunchy or where PCs are cycling through ever more powerful magic items. I don't begrudge people for wanting that, I'm just not the GM for it. The end. Note: That doesn't mean I don't work with the players to make the game interesting for all, just that I have some boundaries and I'm up front about them. 2) I tend to prefer villains who are PC races. That means they're as unpredictable as PCs and have the same sorts of wildcard capabilities. Who cares if you know the math on the routine encounters when the ones that actually matter are wildcards. 3) When I do use monstrous opposition (which is common, just heavily spiced with PC races), I narrate the appearance, rather than being clear about what things are, unless the PCs would know. I don't overdo it, but I'm also more than willing to run with anything the PCs say. When running LMoP, I was describing the orcs (or was it goblins) that are all over the place, and actually called them orcs. The players kept slipping and calling them goblins (or orcs, can't remember which way, anymore). I corrected them a few times, and they even caught themselves and corrected. But, they kept doing it. After a couple sessions, I ran with it and just started calling them goblins because that's what the players had called them during a half-hour of straight planning. I've done this with other monsters and magic items (sure, it's a dragon slayer, whatever) on a number of occasions. The players know I'm doing this and are cool with it. 3) In practice, the problem with "I know I go before X" is more theoretic than realized. I was concerned, as well, mainly because I'm so strongly opposed to the aggressively crunchy game style. Even for the tactically minded and borderline char-ops players I have, I don't think I've yet seen any time it's been an issue. Whether that's because of the above or not, I couldn't say. It just hasn't been an issue. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
What is your way for doing Initiative?
Top