Why do you hate meta-gaming? (And what does it mean to you?)

[iserith]

There are smart people in this day and age that have difficulties working a computer properly.

And there are less smart people who don't have difficulties. RPGs require some imagination. The possibilities are endless and reasonable justifications for anything abound. If you can accept the premise of time-travelers showing the Tudors a smart watch, then I fail to see why it's hard to accept the premise of Henry VIII figuring the thing out. The whole "selectively imaginative" aspect of the anti-metagaming argument has always fallen short of being convincing to me when these discussions come up.

 

[iserith]

It really isn't a matter of more or less immersive, it's just different, and for some people your way is immersion breaking. It would be impossible for me to stay immersed in a game like yours. I could have fun, but not as much fun as with a game like mine. My immersion would be constantly broken by those sorts of things.

I would suggest that "immersion" is a skill - the ability to focus on a feeling and stay in that moment - and that with improvement in that skill it is impossible for someone to "break your immersion." If "immersion" is a thing you value, it may well be worth working on that as it is in your control. How other people play isn't in your control (though you could choose not to play with them, naturally).

 

[Pickles III]

Which of these is better in your opinion:

1. A challenge where the players have information that could give them an edge and they are expected not to use it because it is established the characters do not have said information; or,

2. A challenge where the players don't have information that could give them an edge in the first place.

2. by a mile. The first involves painful mental contortions trying not to accidentally make use of something I'm supposed not to know.

1. Is bearable & could even be fun if you are playing eg a doomed hero like Hamlet but not for long periods as a default.

 

[Maxperson]

And there are less smart people who don't have difficulties. RPGs require some imagination. The possibilities are endless and reasonable justifications for anything abound. If you can accept the premise of time-travelers showing the Tudors a smart watch, then I fail to see why it's hard to accept the premise of Henry VIII figuring the thing out. The whole "selectively imaginative" aspect of the anti-metagaming argument has always fallen short of being convincing to me when these discussions come up.

That's because you're fine with absurd coincidence after absurd coincidence coming up in your games. Other people aren't.

 

[iserith]

That's because you're fine with absurd coincidence after absurd coincidence coming up in your games. Other people aren't.

No, I wouldn't offer fiction that wasn't reasonable given the context. The issue as I see it is with some people being selectively imaginative. Fine with time-travelers in Tudor England, but not fine with Henry VIII figuring out how to work a voice-activated smartwatch by accident? Riiiiight.

(Replace this example with anything where someone like yourself argues what "should" or "would" be rather than what "might" or "could" be.)

 

[Maxperson]

I would suggest that "immersion" is a skill - the ability to focus on a feeling and stay in that moment - and that with improvement in that skill it is impossible for someone to "break your immersion." If "immersion" is a thing you value, it may well be worth working on that as it is in your control. How other people play isn't in your control (though you could choose not to play with them, naturally).

Immersion is not in any way a skill. It's a perspective based on a person's outlook on RPGs. For people who want the game to make sense and be more realistic, your playstyle just doesn't work.

 

[Maxperson]

2. by a mile. The first involves painful mental contortions trying not to accidentally make use of something I'm supposed not to know.

1. Is bearable & could even be fun if you are playing eg a doomed hero like Hamlet but not for long periods as a default.

I've never once gone though even a single painful mental contortion, and I use 1 all the time. So no, number 1 does not involve painful mental contortions. You might involve painful mental contortions, which causes you to be incompatible with that playstyle, but the actual playstyle does not.

 

[iserith]

Immersion is not in any way a skill. It's a perspective based on a person's outlook on RPGs. For people who want the game to make sense and be more realistic, your playstyle just doesn't work.

Identifying emotionally with one's character, staying focused on the moment, projecting oneself into the fictional world - all skills involving concentration, awareness, knowledge of genre and characterization, and focus. Method actors do this and it's something you can learn and improve.

We're also not dealing with reality in these games. We're dealing with fiction. And while said fiction may have some basis in what one might expect in the real world to happen, the fiction is highly mutable and completely under our control. It is realistic that Henry VIII figures out how to use the smartwatch by accident. It is also realistic that he doesn't. Whichever one serves our purposes in the game at the moment it comes up is the one we choose.

 

[Maxperson]

Identifying emotionally with one's character, staying focused on the moment, projecting oneself into the fictional world - all skills involving concentration, awareness, knowledge of genre and characterization, and focus. Method actors do this and it's something you can learn and improve.

It's more than that. It's also staying there and when something as jarring as a 18 wheeler comes flying at you, it's going to knock you out. There's no skill that's going to let a human stand up to an 18 wheeler. He just gets flattened. For you, since your perspective is different, the kind of stuff you do is not an 18 wheeler, but rather a cute fluffy bunny or something. For me, it will never be anything other than an 18 wheeler and no amount of skill getting immersed is going to change that.

We're also not dealing with reality in these games. We're dealing with fiction. And while said fiction may have some basis in what one might expect in the real world to happen, the fiction is highly mutable and completely under our control. It is realistic that Henry VIII figures out how to use the smartwatch by accident. It is also realistic that he doesn't. Whichever one serves our purposes in the game at the moment it comes up is the one we choose.

This is wrong. For many of us, that fiction involves a level of reality that is far greater than you have in your games, so yes, reality is dealt with in the game. Since the level of realism in your games is so much lower, your game has a far greater range of what is realistic than ours.

 

[iserith]

It's more than that. It's also staying there and when something as jarring as a 18 wheeler comes flying at you, it's going to knock you out. There's no skill that's going to let a human stand up to an 18 wheeler. He just gets flattened. For you, since your perspective is different, the kind of stuff you do is not an 18 wheeler, but rather a cute fluffy bunny or something. For me, it will never be anything other than an 18 wheeler and no amount of skill getting immersed is going to change that.

You concede it's a skill then. Progress!

This is wrong. For many of us, that fiction involves a level of reality that is far greater than you have in your games, so yes, reality is dealt with in the game. Since the level of realism in your games is so much lower, your game has a far greater range of what is realistic than ours.

Nothing about what I said is untrue. Both scenarios are realistic within the bounds of a game involving time-travel, Henry VIII, and smartwatches. You are just being selectively imaginative - would/should versus might/could. You can imagine playing said game, but the king figuring out a smartwatch by accident? No way, that's just unrealistic!