![]() ![]() ![]() Like if you have a group of 5 people and 4 are optimized to the max and the last one isn't then that person may feel like the weak link. When it comes to the GM wanting people to optimize their characters they may be expecting it or have other reasons. A sorcerer has limited known spells so not all of them are going to know haste and teleport even if they are 2 of the more powerful spells. For example, the oracle who didn't take flame strike? Sounds like a character decision to me. Again, how much is too much varies from group to group and player to player. Having fun is the whole point of RPGs and metagaming is no different.Īs far as optimizing characters, normally I would not consider that metagaming. Metagaming should be done to make the game more fun for the group. So if you are in a newer group then I'd lean towards minimizing your metagaming until you see how the group handles things. But what each group considers good or bad metagaming varies. ![]() ALL groups metagame to one extent or another. Metagaming in and of itself is not good or bad. Looking up monsters you encounter is usually bad form meta-gaming unless you make a knowledge check AND the GM gives you permission to look it up. Don't do yourself a disservice by prelearning, enjoy the ride. And that's not counting the twists a DM might bring to a beastie. Pathfinder (1e) goblins are very different from the ones I fought throughout my years in AD&D (1st thru 3rd editions). Older gamers, who recognize an orc from multiple times running into one, actively set aside player knowledge to enjoy the experience as the poor newb character that has never faced the tusked green skins before! Why deny yourself the fun of learning a creature by encountering it for the first time?Īnd just because it is written one way, does not mean that is how it will always be. You want to know more about the world and/or the creatures in it? Take the appropriate knowledge skills, traits and feats, and ask your DM for what information you are allowed to peruse. Every gamer/group/DM is going to be different.īut, having said that, you are metagaming when your DM expressly asks you not to do something and you choose to do it anyway. Metagaming is one of those slippery concepts with no hard and fast definition. So where's the line you guys draw between acceptable and disruptive metagaming? It seems on the surface people would agree metagaming isn't healthy for game sessions, but in practice there's exceptions they're willing to make depending on how much it benefits them. Another case was insisting I take Haste and Teleport with my sorcerer, despite those not being spells he would care about with his back story. Other comments have been made about how players build their characters, but these seem to encourage metagaming like asking the Oracle who's character focus is to build constructs and has pretty much solely played a support, "why didn't you take Flame Strike, it's much better than the spell you chose?" It's not something the character would do, but because the players know how helpful the spell can be that should be overlooked, and metagaming is supported in this case. I get that issues could come up if I was actively using the information to gain advantages in combat, but that's never been the case and I play encounters out based on what my character knows. This doesn't make any sense to me because if a player already knows what the creature is they have all the same information I just learned, but somehow they aren't considered to be metagaming.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |