DungeonCraft #24: Metagaming and What You Can do About It

[@yseson_]

“She just grew up and turned evil” that gave me a good cackling laugh

[@agvaquero8361]

I was playing a Human Cleric, in the UnderDark, who was afraid of the dark. Sometimes the party had to knock me out or physically restrain me, because I was constantly casting Light or DayLight or other such spells and or hiding under my cloak with a candle. But when DayLight was running...well he was a darn brave fella.

[@Clem68W]

I remember reading an encyclopedia of medal of honor winners (back in the 90s) going all the way back to the civil war. There was a story from wwII that stood out to me. A small group of infantrymen were in a small village together with a number of villagers who had gathered together in a small shop. Across the street was a German machinegun position and anytime someone poked their head out it would unleash a furious barrage of gunfire. Our hero was a Sgt in charge of the group and had been injured upon "discovery" of the machine gun position. His right arm was injured but he was still in the fight. The shop they were in had a loft and second story windows. The hero had the villagers find him a ladder, which he propped up on the second story window, climbed up and was going to throw a grenade across the street because he had a good throwing arm. "HAD" being the operative term. His right arm was injured and when he pulled the pin and reared back to throw his grenade, a sudden spike of agonizing pain caused him to drop the live grenade straight back and down into a large collection of completely stupified civilians (as well as his soldiers). So, given this situation, the sgt simply followed the grenade down, landing heavily on top of it just in time to absorb all of the explosive energy of that grenade. He had literal seconds to think about this decision, and made it instantly. I've tried to recreate that scenario (well, similar ones, so that the hero should be forced to choose heroism and death or survival) so many times in the last 30 years of d&d and one thing I find interesting is that nobody chooses to save the villagers. They'll argue about whether they can use inspiration or roll with advantage or in some other way game it out. No, that lightning bolt can't do that. Trying to get a character to willingly end themselves for the sake of a good story: more rare than demogorgon. Most recently my murderhobos left a village in the clutches of an aberration because they were literally afraid it was too powerful. They didn't know what it was, they were only just starting to stumble across clues I left scattered around, but OOC they were certain it was some sort of greater demon. Then they asked me if they got xp for "escaping that town".

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

I DID once have a wizard blow himself up to nuke a boss. That was impressive.

[@michaelpace9535]

The best way I've found to deal with this is to re-skin monsters or use unique monsters. Changing up how monsters work is a great way to stop metagaming.

[@godsamongmen8003]

I do that too, partly because I don't like many monsters as they are and partly because everyone has basically read all the books. And my players get plenty of warning that no monster they encounter -- even the famous, iconic ones -- will have the stat block they expect it to have.

[@johnedgar7956]

I agree...but you shouldn't HAVE to do that. Your players should be mature adults, not dopamine-seeking power gamers with zero sense of drama or immersion. Meta gamers take the fun out of role-playing games.

[@wichiewamirez5599]

@@johnedgar7956 a lot of times it’s not intentional. If you know a monster is weak to something. It’s hard to pretend to not know

[@kenvanroy8302]

@@johnedgar7956 I somewhat disagree, as a player I find few things more annoying then having to pretend not to know how to kill a troll (or another well know monster). After a few rounds I just look at my DM bored and flat out ask him if it's ok to try fire now? In my own games I usually state that characters heard through fairy tales about the more "common" monsters like trolls and vampires about their weaknesses or I just switch around some things (psychic damage instead of fire ect.) and actual boss monsters I homebrew to avoid this

[@TheyCallMeCarg]

Sometimes you just have to use a vampire though. :)

[@zeterzero4356]

Me: "VAMPIRE! SHE'S A VAMPIRE! ARCANA CHECK!" Dice: "Rolls a 2." Me: "THE GOUT! SHE'S GOT THE GOUT! WORSE CASE I'VE EVER SEEN!"

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Lol. That actually happened in one of my games and one player became FURIOUS at the physician player. The rest just laughed until they cried.

[@Nubbletech]

Wait you are not supposed to declare what kind of check you want to make. That's the job of your GM. Still good play.

[@zeterzero4356]

@@Nubbletech You can still ask your DM if you can unless they tell you not to.

[@MemphiStig]

@@zeterzero4356 Like those big pharma ads. "Ask your DM if Arkanachek is right for you. Do not take Arkanachek if you are allergic or if you are pregnant or may become pregnant."

[@silvertheelf]

@@NubbletechI allow my players to make checks based on their instincts because it’s not that big a deal and it’s fun trying to discern what info belongs to which roll.

[@Luca-wm9er]

"She grew up, became evil" and (looking at the mini) developed a massive personality. I had to lol at that mini.

[@Papamarmottin]

Beautifully suggestive, never vulgar. Love it !

[@nathanelliot6043]

i dont mean to be offtopic but does any of you know a tool to log back into an instagram account..? I was dumb lost my login password. I appreciate any tricks you can give me!

[@vivaanhoward6471]

@Nathan Elliot instablaster :)

[@grazillx964]

To stop meta-gaming, I changed the weaknesses of cliche monsters. Instead of trolls being vulnerable to fire, I've had them vulnerable to salt or vinegar. Vampires and werewolves are only affected by gold. Running a old west game with werewolves... you should have seen the players face when he found out he needed to melt down a $20 gold piece to make 4 gold werewolf-killing bullets.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Lol. Well done.

[@gnarlestongnu637]

I do something similar - every PC has heard of all the things the player knows, but they are rumors and legends. Some of them turn out to be true, others not so much, and intelligent monsters may even take advantage of their reputation or supposed "weaknesses".

[@fum716]

Grazillx but the salt and vinegar Pringle’s are really good. Why do you not let the trolls enjoy them?

[@JaNiklas]

This is the right way to handle the players having to much information and beeing able to metagame from it. just change it.

[@ArcaneCowboy]

No one will have fought a troll before? No one in that world?

[@theophrastusbombastus1359]

"Awesome Points" = "Inspiration Points" At least in my game.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

They are--almost. An awesome point can save a character's life. I came up with the idea concurrently with "inspiration."

[@steffennilsen508]

Drama points (buffy rpg) its brilliant

[@Jinx_Skeel]

I used to call them destiny points back in the day

[@abrilvonbunny6205]

The algorythm sent me two videos with Biff stories included and Im Blessed...

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Cool. I'm sending you my latest video because I put my heart and soul into it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b2bdo2Sjot1nrK8

[@lotmyle5465]

I once changed all goblinrats and worgs to rust monsters as basilisks. The stats were the same. Rust monsters just had dire rat stats and the basilisks just had worg stats. But.. the players (of 4th level characters who had never seen or heard of either monster) freaked out. They fled the battle and left the entire region to seek adventure elsewhere. Later, when they were the appropriate level to confront rust monsters and basilisks I switched them out with goblinrats with rust monster templates and worgs with basilisk templates. These were mounted by goblin wraiths. After the initial confusion, they succeed, recovered their stoned allies, mourned the lost gear, and let them find the decayed remains of the notes of the evil wizard who transformed the innate abilities of mystical monsters into mundane beasts - leaving the mundane fantastical and the mystical as simple beasts. The players were ever more suspicious, and I would ever so often switch a tradition monster template to a completely unrelated type just to keep them cautious.

[@chrisandlizsizemore8172]

I think there's something to be said about roleplaying to the detriment of the rest of the party. In your Gen Con example (which was fantastic roleplay, btw) it sounded like the other players, DM included, enjoyed it just as much as you did. There are, however, players that won't - and I think observing and gauging the behavior of your fellow party as they react to your detrimental RP antics is super important in knowing whether or not you should metagame. Remember D&D and other roleplaying games are a social gathering where everyone is taking a chunk of their time to be together and have fun! Actively hurting the party's tactical chances can take away their enjoyment of the game, which they deserve just as much as you do. So what's the solution? As with everything in life, great communication is key. If a metagame/RP compromise can be made, that's awesome! You worked it out. If not - and if this is a constant thorn in someone's side - well, maybe it's time for one of you to find a new table. No hard feelings.

[@teeprice7499]

Well said... if in CoC that character was in my group and started trying to disarm me, I'd assume he was with the enemy and shoot him.

[@westprog2012]

I think we all know that "It's What My Character Would Do" player.

[@RylanStorm]

I have a gold D20. When a player does something amazing, or displays fairness, I give them the dice. The player can roll that dice at any point having failed a roll. Then the dice comes back to me

[@sirmclovin9184]

Sounds like inspiration to me.

[@markc.7984]

I like the idea of Awesome Points being actual ice cream coupons or pizza credits or something that will bring the player pleasure IRL - that would incentivize great RP on a level deeper than intellectual "I know this will help me re-roll a low roll." And anyway, bad rolls are part of the story, which the players are role playing in - no reason to change them! With failure/disaster comes great opportunity for drama!

[@jokertim777]

Ruthless berating and belittling of the players isn't the only way to solve meta-gaming issues? Good to know :P

[@Papamarmottin]

Loved the examples ! I've been dungeon mastering for somewhat over 40 years now, and I can't remember one situation when my players haven't, to some extent, felt the urge to meta. Even when - rarely - I play a character, I'm finding myself in a situation when I forcibly have to forget some of my outside knowledge. And right you are, once again. When a player does sacrifice his meta to the gaming experience, he should be rewarded. Depending, on the game, the reward differs, but on a long campaign (my last and best lasted from 1991 to 2019) on Rolemaster, with fantasy kids being taken over by the real life ones, I'd made such a good example of lighthandedly rewarding the good play and punishing the bad that it just disappeared altogether - unless we had a few irl ales too many and then... Well, let's just say I can't remember what happened then. Anyhow, cheers from France and Britanny !

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Hello, France! Thanks for watching!

[@fum716]

I made a character who never learned how to read or read magic but he tries to hide it, so it became a joke to hand my character a wizards spell book or something magical and have him “Read” it after the rest found this out, so I would go to the players hand book and look at the language and just say what some of the shapes look like. Whenever we came to a fork in the road and there was a sign (for this purpose only pretty much) someone would ask Fum which word was which because he knew how to talk and he knew cities but whenever they asked I would just break the sign and ask “ What words?”

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Fum sounds interesting. I may mention him in an upcoming video about character weaknesses.

[@fum716]

DUNGEON CRAFT go ahead man, love the painting tutorials.

[@nickmoniker]

Thanks, Professor! Excellent explanation. Now I don't have to just pretend to understand when other people mention metagaming.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Glad to be of help.

[@gendor5199]

Between the stories of Bif and Koenig, I always return to them, Professor is so damn good at playing to the role! The amateur theater truly lost a great one.

[@irtehdar2446]

I just made my own setting with homebrewed monsters. So the only way a player knows how a given creature is going to act or what kind of stats/skills its packing is if the character knows.

[@CyrusB1]

it seems alot of people have a, "Mistakes bad" premise drilled into them. "Mistakes good"; you learn the actual rules for how a system works instead of just what you've been told (assuming you live through the mistake, see: Nietzsche) . To me, asking "what would my character do?" is the most fun aspect of role-playing. It can lead to story you didn't even know was there, but there's a depth, empathy and insight required of a DM to reward it. Thank you, not only for the video, but giving a framework to articulate ideas against.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thanks, Steve. I agree, The best way to learn to DM is to make mistakes. Come to think of it....that's probably a good topic for an episode of DungeonCraft!

[@CyrusB1]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Like any good actor, I imagine a big dungeon master's rule, if not the biggest rule, is: never let them see you sweat. You flub a line onstage, the only way the audience knows that wasn't planned is if you tell them. And you've just broken the 4th wall... Ack!

[@MemphiStig]

About the coin thing... One DM I knew would hand out poker chips for good play (ideas, rp, whatever) moments. They came in 3 colors, hence 3 tiers of good/better/best play. When it came time to get xp, each chip was worth a certain amount of extra xp. It was really satisfying to earn those chips and encouraged player engagement and contribution. I do like the idea of making them worth in-game bonuses tho. PDM: always bringing the goods!

[@DTDdeathmas]

In the example given, I think they should know that it is vampires. Assuming a standard D&D setting, stories of famous monster types are probably pretty common. If that is not the reaction you want from your players it is probably better to create a monster that that has its now original signs instead of having this awkward time around the table until the players can stop pretending that they have never heard of vampires before.

[@galactick3816]

Exactly, if it is common monsters or well known weakness of rare monsters then it would make sense that group of monster hunters essentially would know about that.

[@michaelmurtaugh370]

Best solution to meta gaming I seen so far. Keep being the awesome professor DM you are and keep rolling 20 🐉🐉🐉🐉🐉

[@utopia2112]

Please consider (if you haven't already in another video) expanding on how to get your players to RP. The Awesome Points are part of it but were "grafted" onto a video about Metagaming. I think you have a lot of great ideas to share that will enhance gaming. Thanks and keep up the good work.

[@toonvanboxstael254]

Similar to awesome points, Luke Crane-inspired games often have great ways to encourage good role playing. Examples are the Beliefs and Intents System from Burning wheel, or Aspirations from Storyteller. The concept is very simple to adapt and execute. In our games, I always let the players write down three personality "traits", usually a positive, a negative and a quirky one; and three "motivations", things the character wants or likes. When the character acts according to their traits and motivations, they get something akin to an awesome point. This has two huge advantages: 1. as a DM, you can really 'build' your campaign atop of the character's motivations; it helps you predict how they will behave, and what kind of stories/challenges they will like. 2. It rewards good roleplaying in a more structured manner than just handing out awesome points, which can be a bit subjective and cause discontent between players. It also avoids the opposite problem: players overdoing the 'role playing' in order to get as many awesome points as possible, dragging the pace down and impeding the players from achieving anything.

[@samchafin4623]

Subvert expectations, change the rules, and reward the kind of play you want to see. Got it!

[@krtodd1]

I use something very similar to the awesome coins. I give out gold, silver and bronze coins that players can use to purchase re rolls, bonuses to skill checks, etc. They buy gemstones that represent whichever benefit they bought and they can keep in their bags until they use them in game. I like that it gives the sense that they've attained "loot" as well!

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Cool!

[@agroves72]

Great content again. My contribution to the metagaming problem is that if you're in a long term game, the DM needs to pick his players, and vice versa. Not to discount your excellent advice, but IMHO, in the long term it's less work to find the right group where people understand roleplaying, then let the group's culture train any new players.

[@kevinhallett608]

I'll be using this on Sunday! Thank you

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Excellent!

[@speakupriseup4549]

When I D.M games I encourage people keeping in "character" by offering what I call bonus points, which is what I award the individual players as the game progresses. I make each bonus point the individual player gets awarded worth an additional 10% exp for the days play. It really encourages enthusiastic roleplaying and makes some of the game encounters hilarious while others turn out even more seriously, which is great.

[@dougmartin2007]

I found flipping the script is often a good way to handle this. Instead of the woman getting sick because of a vampire, make it a pack of ghouls, or an assassin using a "vampire blade". Giving enemy wizards access to spells the players have not heard of is good too. This will keep things fresh for the players who have seen it all, and makes them distrust their own meta gaming.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Good ideas. Thanks for commenting!

[@ndowroccus4168]

We ALWAYS get experience for role playing within our characters trope. Not only that, as a GM I make sure the group knows and I interrupt the game to state “You have earned “?#?” Experience bonus for “yadda yadda...Very cool, very well done” - the the other players try to mimic what that player did. I have even given the player sashes that when wrapped around something gives a +1 bonus to armor/to hit/dmg etc...and have even had the sash ripped and lose its ability when I feel the reward was taken as the gift it was.

[@craigevans013]

I agree 100% with rewarding for role playing. I like to treat social encounters with the same zeal and rewards that can be gained in combat. I also like to give XP for solving problems, good character RP, and just anything that moves me as a DM, no rules for it, just anything I feel like. The secret is, the players have no idea what they are getting XP for or how much. Why should they? I feel this is leading the players and encouraging meta gaming in that they begin to play differently just for the rewards. Have you ever had a teacher or professor where you figured out their quirks and catered to them for that A? I tell them we are using the milestone advancement method. Actually, I am tracking all their XP on my own. The first issue with this was that one player inevitably advances before the others. Players play at different levels themselves and everyone plays and values different aspects of the game, perhaps not what I value. I certainly don’t want to show favoritism or insist the game be played my way, so once one player reaches a level, the entire party levels up. The second issue I ran into and see occurring in games is the lull. When is the next XP drop? We have been level 8 forever! I want the game to be realistic but fun, so when I get a sense for this, I find a good epic moment and just say, “Ok, now you have some down time to train and do as you wish. Everyone level-up.” Great videos. Keep being different and sharing your thoughts. They are appreciated.

[@nsideddice]

This is the best video I have ever watched on metagaming. I liked how you went over different types of metagaming.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thanks!

[@RealWabled]

i was actually quite impressed that when i ran for a group of half new players, that when an arrakrokra went to sleep in a tree instead of an inn like the rest of the party and he got kidnapped be goblins that the rest of the party didn't go straight into the forest to look for him, and instead decided to look around the town first

[@Uther1313]

We use milestones for levelling up - this can be accomplished in a variety of ways. Progressing the story, killing monsters, completing quests that NPC's have given to the party in any way that makes sense. As for monster knowledge that the players know, I constantly modify the stats of the monsters to keep the players guessing. Last session the party encountered an Orc Ambush of 5 orcs and they were relatively easy to defeat. Immediately in the next encounter - they encountered some Orc raiders - a Spellcaster and his two beefy bodyguards - the party charged in thinking that 3 Orc would be much easier to defeat than the last 5 Orcs - NOPE. They were almost TPK'ed and one character actually died in the fight. Everyone loved it as it was fun, challenging and unexpected. As the characters do live in the game world and are trained in battle, I often think that they do know a lot about certain common monsters as they've grown up hearing stories about Troll, Goblins, Ogres etc. their whole lives, so I don't get too bothered by that kind of meta-gaming and it usually doesn't help them too much as I mix up the stats a fair bit. Cheers! I'm enjoying the channel, just discovered it this past week

[@elizabethdefazio6065]

Can’t believe I’m just seeing this video now. This will be really useful for my game group

[@RudivanderWalt]

We played a game a while back, and my wife's barbarian was charmed by the boss (who's taken damage already) - so her barb gave the boss, who is now in her eyes a friendly acquaintance, one of the party's very few healing potions. Still look back fondly at that moment hehehe

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

That's the kind of weird thing that makes TTRPGs so fun. Thanks for commenting!

[@RudivanderWalt]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 I really love your channel! It's upped my DM'ing a lot, and our game runs so much smoother thanks to your tips and advice. Big thumbs up from me :)

[@taragnor]

Honestly I've never bought into the idea that characters would be ignorant of monsters in their world. I mean, there are bards that go around telling stories, and epic stories of people fighting the medusa or the vampire are exactly the kinds of things that would get told time and time again. It's very likely that your character probably was interested in those heroic tales (he did become an adventurer after all). Given the real world had all kinds of tales told about heroes fighting monsters, it's very reasonable to assume that real heroes fighting real monsters would also be tales in a fantasy world. Unless this is quite literally the first vampire ever encountered in this region, it's pretty likely there's going to be stories. I really never understood why some DMs want to assume that adventurers are totally ignorant. I mean hell, we know about vampires in the modern age and they're totally made up. Not knowing what a troll is in a fantasy world is akin to never having heard of bears or wolves in the real world. I find it a lot easier to just assume that player knowledge in that respect can translate into character knowledge where they just heard this through various bard's tales. And if you want to be devious as a DM you can always change things up and say that the common tales were mistaken, though I feel that should probably be done sparingly.

[@augustoluis6888]

A lot of arguments can be made against that. Normally, if a player has a character that has had a chance of previously encountering a creature, I make him roll a check; If the target has been met previously in another session, it's Intelligence; If the player read or heard about it, it's Nature. Creatures like trolls and hydras are known by basically everyone, but not everyone knows that fire and acid cut off their massive healing abilities. The more famous a creature is to the public, more ridiculous folklore it has attached to it, and it may cause the characters to be misled by false information. In my world, for example, garlic and holy symbols are completely useless against vampires, but ask a farmer how to kill one and he will hardly give an answer without these two items. That being said, I like the idea of specialized knowledge, such as the Favourite Targets of a Ranger. If a ranger encounters a Target, he automaticaly knows how to fight it properly. Like you said, the characters are not stupid nor blind, but they do not know how to fight every single creature, especially the legendary ones.

[@galactick3816]

Some metagaming I don't have issues with. Trolls being weak to fire would likely be common enough knowledge in a world where trolls are causing trouble, weakness to acid would be specialist knowledge though. Clerics/Paladins would likely be familiar with symptoms of vampire bites. "Would my character know about X" or similar question are good to ask the DM before doing stuff that could be considered metagaming

[@BrazenBard]

"Oh, you think she's been bitten by a vampire, and you're hanging up lots of garlic in the windows? Eh, okay. That sounds about right for what you know." Because it's the *flowers* of garlic, not the bulbs, that repels vampires... ;) Or, y'know, it could be chrysanthemums in your setting, just 'cause the characters aren't supposed to know.

[@evilgogol]

I totally disagree with the first example! To the contrary i would say that the player is totally in character and not metagaming! In a standard setting (not even talking about Ravenloft...) it would be of popular knowledge or at least a strongly present in the some culture that garlic, holy crosses and sharp stakes are the only thing that will save the day! To me metagaming would be if the player answer back: ''i will make sure that as much people as possible get silver weapons because it bypass the vampire damage reduction/ resistance and also i will make sure to wear that magic amulet of whatever resistance because i will get advantage on any save vs charm from the vampire!'' That to me is metagaming!

[@NefariousKoel]

In that instance, I would call for some kind of knowledge roll to see if the player's character knew that folklore. Then you have some fun with failure on that test by changing the weaknesses and/or abilities of the vampire so that they still believe all those presumptions, but some or all of them are incorrect in this case.

[@shallendor]

A knowledge roll might know the answer, and if they also have medicine, i would lower the dc of the roll!

[@bretts7072]

@@NefariousKoel yep love this strategy and it is what I use. I also usually give lower or higher DC for such checks based onplayer background (I.e. the druid who lived 30 years in a swamp would be more likely to know about Will O'Wisp than the city slicker Fighter)

[@ConservativeVanguard]

Well you're wrong, cause both cases are meta gaming. One, the later, is just a more sinister and outlandish example. They are both examples intended to ruin the gaming experience out of laziness and disinterest in the world building to feed a simple minded low self esteemed ego. At the expense of everyone else's enjoyment of course.

[@isthisajojoreference]

100% agree

[@westprog2012]

Before I start I would say a) The Professor is clearly a very good DM, and a fount of good advice. If I disagree with him, it is from a position of respect. b) In any example of a game of D&D, if someone is playing in a particular way and it works, and everyone is having fun, then they're doing it right. No exceptions. Any advice we give is to help the people whose campaign _isn't_ working as well as they wish, and to provide options for them. So if I seem to imply that Professor DM has got it all wrong, I do so with the proviso that he's a vastly better DM than I am, and even if he weren't, if it works for him, then fine. So to begin with, a fairly fundamental question - what is the purpose of roleplaying games? We can watch Lord Of The RIngs, say, and see incredible special effects and exciting fight scenes - but it's not quite the same excitement we get moving a few bits of plastic around and rolling dice. Why is this? It's because we watch, and even identify with Frodo and Sam, but we _are_ Spork the ex-gladiator negotiating the shaky rope bridge. So if that's the case, what's the job of the DM? Fundamentally, to allow the player and the character to _be_ the same person. So, in that case, what should the character know, and what should the player know? They should know exactly the same thing. If they diverge, that breaks the illusion, and that's the DM's fault. The player _only_ knows what the DM tells them. If the DM tells them something, then that should seamlessly pass to the character, who knows the same things. So how do we handle the vampire problem? The way I would do it is that the characters know about vampires. It's not implausible that in a world where vampires are real, and dangerous, that people would know about them. Think of all the things we know about in our world - airlines and sports teams and tv schedules and symbols to indicate bathrooms. The people in our fantasy worlds are as smart as us, and they will know a great deal, and the things they will be most interested in are the things that will kill them. But you want to use a vampire, and you don't want your characters to know about vampires. So why tell the players "Hey! It's a vampire! But you know but you don't! Keep this separate from your character." This is immediately making the character and the player different. Instead of being in the house by the graveyard, the player is watching their character blunder around. It's breaking what roleplaying is. The player who wants to drape garlic around the girl is immersed in the game, he wants to protect her - and suddenly he's told he can't, that he's metagaming. That's the DM's fault. Why make a big thing about the bite marks, the graveyard, the anemia? If you want the vampire to be a surprise, don't tell them these things. They don't notice the bite marks, they just mention that the girl is upstairs asleep, and the DM points out a lot of other detail which is actually extraneous. If you want the vampire to be a surprise, make it a surprise for the characters _and_ the players. If the physician doesn't diagnose the plague, don't tell the player about the symptoms! Indeed, that's why I don't let characters roll their own detect dice. If a player rolls a 1, they don't _notice_ the symptoms. Just tell the physician that the soldier seems fine. And have the players do a number of other irrelevant rolls that don't matter. When plague erupts, then the other players _and_ the other characters complain to the physician, then you can smirk and say "Sorry, rolled a one, never noticed the pustules under the arm." I know that some DM's will say "But I need the gothic atmosphere for the vampire, I need to set up the pustules in advance of the plague..." - no. The players shouldn't be feeling a sense of dread about the vampire if the characters don't feel it. If the characters aren't anticipating an outbreak of plague, then the players shouldn't be either. Don't have your cake and eat it. In summary, if the DM is complaining about meta-gaming, it's the DM's fault. And to reiterate what I said at the start - this is just _my_ view on how I would run _my_ campaign. If you do things differently, and like it, then you are 100% correct.

[@westprog2012]

A side issue related to Call Of Cthulhu. This is a difficult one because Lovecraft characters aren't like heroic fantasy characters. They think that they're in one world, and gradually come to realise that they're in another. It doesn't make sense that Biff would suspect that the young woman he meets in the grounds of the old mansion has actually swapped brains with her evil grandfather, or that the old book collection would drive him insane if he read it. The approach I would take would be to not _tell_ the players that they were playing Call Of Cthulhu. I would get one of those Murder Mystery kits, assign everyone a character and tell them they were solving a crime. They would ignore all the indications of unspeakable horrors because they would think they were in an Agatha Christie story, not an H.P. Lovecraft one. Nothing would seem to make sense at first, and the horrors lurking beneath would be a genuine surprise. Not only Biff, but all the characters would be coming up with rational explanations, with an expectation of a Scooby-Doo ending. But I accept that this is not something that could be done every time.

[@westprog2012]

As an aside - how do you cope with a character with a low intelligence score, who keeps coming up with clever plans and ideas, because his player is experienced and resourceful? Shouldn't he keep doing foolish and dangerous things? OK, in that case, what do you do with the character with 18 intelligence who has a dumb player? He has no useful suggestions, and keeps doing daft things. How do you make a dumb person smart? The solution is very easy. Intelligence isn't intelligence. The character's intelligence score is just their book smarts. There will be things they can do better because they have certain knowledge and skill, but they can still be naive and foolish. All six characteristics reflect different kinds of intelligence. Strength isn't just what the character can lift - it reflects skill at hitting things. Dexterity is a reflection of quick reactions, which is a mark of brain power. The cricketer Jimmy Anderson is ranked #1 bowler* in the world at the age of 40. That's a high constitution score, but it's the result of being smart, making clever choices. Oh, but if I can't roleplay my characteristics, how can my character have a personality? Your six ability scores are the least important thing about your character. What makes the personality is what the character _wants_. That's what defines a character in a novel, and that's what defines a good D&D character. It's something the player and the DM work out together, and a successful character will have interesting choices to make to achieve their goals.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

For the first part, I'll RP play a dumb barbarian like this. Answer to the doors of Moria. "Dang. I wish I knew how to say "friend in Elvish."

[@n0ledge]

What if the players would make a list of preferred attacks and spells for their characters? Like a wizard who really likes fire so he always attacks with it first when fighting something new to him. He could roll a d6 with his d20, on a 1 he use the second favorite spell first. Unless there is obvious clues about weaknesses and resistances or chances of friendly fire. Not a rule, but something the players chose to do.

[@4saken404]

I about snorted my coffee after hearing the fate of the apprentice!

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

I had to go back and watch the video to recall what you were talking about. By the way--you can watch me paint the evil apprentice in an upcoming episode. Thanks for watching!

[@wanderinghistorian]

I have a very lassiez-faire relationship with metagaming. If I put Count Dracula in my game, I don't throw a fit when the characters put on garlic and crosses. I mean isn't that my lack of imagination at fault? And sometimes I do put in a Dracula - and let the players feel smart and clever. And sometimes I put in stuff from the Monster Manual 4b (the revenge!) and sometimes I make up monsters. And sometimes I make monsters who look an awful lot like regular monsters, but aren't. Then they can't metagame, or the metagaming bites them in the butt. And sometimes I don't do that.

[@ChristnThms]

I think positive motivations are almost always stronger than negative motivations. People will work far harder to achieve a reward than to avoid a penalty... Especially if they still get what they were after, in spite of the penalty (character gets the fancy reward, while other players and DM are unhappy with the player). I like your concept of "awesome points." But I'd go a step further, rewarding xp separately for kills and combat versus roleplaying. If an encounter is worth 500xp total, split it between the 2 types. Some encounters might be combat heavy, so a 450/50 split is fair. Others may have far more roleplay potential, so the split goes the other way 100/400. If they just fight, they short themselves 80% of the xp. Make sure, after it's over, that they learn that they just shorted themselves. That will, ironically, make the metagame ABOUT the roleplay. Now, the power gamer will be focused on finding all of those roleplay opportunities to optimize his character's rewards. You can't stop metagaming. But you can steer the goal of the metagamer to be more in line with the rest of the game.

[@mikeelarsen1964]

I like the idea of combat vs RP experience rewards. Something to play around with I think.

[@ForeverYoungKickboxer]

EGG ZACHARY

[@RylanStorm]

Interestingly enough, I watched a clip from Critical Role earlier. In it, Travis Willingham's character Grog tries to convince Ashley Johnson's Cleric, Pike, to take a card from The Deck of Many Things. Grog has pulled a number of cards from the deck and they've all been good. Since he's not too bright, he's totally convinced this means the deck can only grant positive things. He convinces Pike, who has never seen the deck, to take a card. Ashley knows the deck is dangerous but Pike only has Grog's word. She's totally in character and it's great. As Grog hands the deck over the DM asks Ashley to take an Arcana check. She rolls a natural 20 and Matt Mercer, the DM, explains that Pike has heard rumours of a dangerous deck of cards that can alter reality. Pike decides to leave it to chance and toss a coin to see if they pull a card. At this point Liam O'Brian tells Ashley not to pull a card since it's dangerous. The thing is, Liam's character Vax isn't even present for this exchange. Ashley nails it. She remains in character throughout the session, only acting upon what her character knows. Liam metagames and uses his own knowledge to interact with something he isn't party to. Ashley win. Liam fail. I'd have pulled him for it.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Great story. Can you put a link here?

[@lm7012]

Dungeon Craft kzbin.info/www/bejne/naGWpnuAirabq9U. loving your work btw awesome channel

[@RylanStorm]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/naGWpnuAirabq9U

[@xxbrkdwnxx]

this is why it's important to not use super cliche tropes such as puncture wounds on the neck in regards to vampires. maybe the vampires in your campaign setting have different ways us siphoning the life from their host. if your monsters/npcs/villains/etc follow extreeeeemely well known tropes from other forms of fiction and pop culture, people are going to catch it quick, and even if they try not to metagame, the excitement will never be there.

[@hornbeam7131]

I think there's a certain level of knowledge among adventurers particularly about dangerous creatures they might encounter. If vampires are known to exist in your world then stories about how to deal with them will be circulating, particularly among the adventuring folk. These stories may or may not be true but characters will be aware of some of them. It all depends how much world knowledge the character might be expected to have. I once argued that my character as an experienced adventurer would have heard that a particular monster was vulnerable to fire from other adventurers he had spoken to in bars etc. The DM allowed it. However I rolled very poorly and played the rest of the encounter as though convinced that those old drinking buddies were idiots and this thing was actually resistant to fire, and I yelled to the rest of the party alerting them to this 'fact'. Also if the DM says "A large troll is charging towards you." Then the players should not be expected to pretend they didn't hear that. By saying 'Troll' he has implied they have recognised it from descriptions they have heard or drawings they have seen. The meta gaming that bugs me most is using knowledge of the mechanics and dice rolls. The rogue failed his 'detect traps' roll and is certain there are no traps, so the bard decides to detect traps as well and the fighter moves to a safe distance although they never usually do that when the rogue succeeds.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

That's a great point. Vampires were the first thing that popped into my mind, but in retrospect I might have chosen something different, or at least added, "Let say, for example, that in your world the average person does not know vampires exist...."

[@dwightgrosso5481]

Excellent overview of the problem of metagaming, and wonderful solutions as well. I wish i could have seen that CoC game with Biff!

[@darthremy1802]

When I was much younger I played with all experienced players, I remember me a fighter and the cleric got split from the party and we ended up in a Manor with a evil nobleman and his evil servant. I picked up on the shifty nature and was told to roll a check to see if my character noticed, I rolled very poorly and when the npc's tried to split us up and murder us I went along with the ride. Small sidenote this was my 3rd character and everyone had made complaints that I was a power gamer not a roleplayer, this character was my attempt to become a better roleplayer. So I agreed to split up and once attacked I was able to defeat my attacker and rush into the other room and rescue the cleric. Everyone fussed at me out of character for being dense and treated me like I was stupid, when I pointed out that I had failed my role one of the same players who called me a power gamer said "that when you fail a role that should have tipped me off that something was wrong" sadly they started treating me as if I was unwanted and stopped inviting me to the games a year or so later.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

That stinks. That's a problem Wirth RPGs--a group and DM make for a great game. A bad group and DM make it a terrible experience. Hope you found better people to play with.

[@darthremy1802]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 eventually I found better groups, I feel all the bad experiences just fuel me to become a better DM for others.

[@kevingooley9628]

Glad you found a group you fit with. Personally, if you "picked up" on the NPCs shifty nature, by noticing something that I the DM had placed into the NPCs character, I would have let you tell me what you saw, and not called for a roll. If I am playing an NPC a certain way, and my players pick up on that, I feel that should carry through to their character. If I'm not intentionally playing my NPC as a villain, and you call for a sense motive roll, then that's where the roll should go. IMO.

[@tomyoung9834]

Great advice! I will be showing this to my players next week!

[@DyrianLightbringer]

Thankfully, I have a couple of players who roleplay well, and when they realize something really bad is about to happen, they grin and bear it and stay in character, often letting their character make a poor decision or walk into danger. Sadly, I have one player who thinks he can just do everything because he has some of the highest attributes in the party and has spells that can cover a variety of problems, and frequently lone-wolfs parts of the adventure, stealing things before the rogue can, scouting without the ranger, going into fights without the barbarian, etc. I've just decided that's how he wants to portray his character's personality and I continue to let him. One time his antics led to the rogue breaking into a place he had already looted. One time it got half the party locked up. I have tried to drop subtle hints that that even though he might accomplish his short-term goals, things don't work out for him in the long run. Most recently, he asked a master dwarf smith to craft armor from a legendary creature's hide, a material that proved difficult to work with. While visiting another group of dwarves, he ended up destroying what appeared to be an inconsequential object. Turns out it was a part for a machine that the smith had asked the neighboring dwarves to send him, and without it, the smith would need another year or longer to craft the legendary armor. Next time it might land him in a situation he can't handle.

[@JaysArtistics]

Nice Elizabeth Bathory influence. I, too, have one similar to this.

[@johnr7279]

Some metagaming is okay. D&D was deliberately designed by grabbing every sort of lore, legend, monster, etc. pretty much ever known. For me, I ask myself if it's something that a character would already know about. For the signs of a vampire, very much depends on the world, of course, but if I were to intro one via clues, I'd take it into account that the PCs have heard of these before. What you said about awarding XP for things like roleplaying was spot on. It's one way that the DM can reinforce the good things that the players do. Acts of sacrifice, evacuating someone with 0 HP out of a kill zone, saving another PC, and sometimes not doing the most advantageous thing because of what a PC would really do (like letting some prisoners go rather than killing them). All examples of superior play that deserve XP or "awesome" points. Then you hope that your less experienced players catch on to those good habits.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thanks so much for tuning in and taking the time to post!

[@andrewhenry4827]

I like the idea of awesome points, will have to use this in a future game.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Inspiration points are pretty much the same thing--only an awesome point can save a character from certain death.

[@Xion_Toshiro]

"Awesome Points", what the D&D Handbooks call "Inspiration Points" - where the DM metes out points to Players. These Inspiration Points are used for Advantage Rolls - where you Roll the die twice, but take the better result.

[@d0natr0n47]

I'd be curious to know what your thoughts are on how to deal with DM Metagaming? For example, upon first meeting the party a Fire Genasi Warlock enemy casts a spell dealing Necrotic damage on the groups barbarian, the only type of damage they have no resistance to. They also start throwing daggers at the bard, who happens to have a curse of missile attraction on him from a cursed item they only picked up earlier that night so has a vulnerability to ranged attacks. Next turn they cast a spell with a WIS Save on the Fighter...who happens to have a -4 Wisdom modifier and no proficiency in that save... etc. etc. etc. As a player I don't mind these things, they often make the game more interesting - but the DM is a playing in-game character's too and so if someone new encounters the group but just happens to have spells and abilities that counter every strength and take advantage of every weakness the group has then the DM is as guilty, if not guiltier, of Metagaming as the players are in those type of scenarios. Of course we *need* to make allowances for that so that the DM has a fair chance at structuring a challenging encounter for the group but if that same DM wants a zero-tolerance in Metagaming at the table then they are going to have to do some amount of mental gymnastics to explain how that Warlock knew everything there was to know about the party's strength/weaknesses after only just bumping in to them in the woods...🤷🏻‍♂️

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

The DM is always meta gaming. That's the cool thing about being the DM!

[@kevingooley9628]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 while this is true, he has a point. I've played a WWI game, in an encounter where we were biplane pilots, the DM had enemy squadrons always making "random" turns towards our squadron, even where they had not made a successful observation roll to see our planes. We would have accepted it is no normal search patterns, but it happened every time. After trying to address it our of game, we eventually stopped playing with that DM. Disappointing. When a DM uses his DM knowledge to consistently play AGAINST the players, I would call that DM metagaming.

[@loadedstapler1459]

Experience. That's the best way to get rid of metagaming. Like the Prof. said, it's going to happen and you just have to gently guide them in the right direction and be patient.

[@asaskald]

Carrots work better than sticks! You get an awesome point for this video.

[@sweetielea3194]

I recently had to roleplay my cleric making the decision to destroy some dragon eggs over saving her fallen druid party member, despite knowing she could fly and that the dragon eggs were black dragon eggs that could not hatch because they were not in acid. She didn't know that, and one of the flaws on her sheet is that she forgets half the time that she can fly (she is a winged teifling), (she has an interesting backstory explain why she does.) So, our druid died, and she sucessfully destroyed the inert eggs after many attempts. (Bad rolls for the cross bow) because she felt she had no choice, despite me the player knowing she did.

[@petersattler4577]

That awesome point system reminds me of fate chips from Deadlands

[@michaelvaughn7137]

I had a monk receive acknowledgement from his deity to the next level .

[@nicocortes5145]

Great video and good ideas! Though to be honest I've gone with the opposite approach. I prefer running a game sort of like the players are playing characters in a video game with more open ended rules. In that sense, everybody brings their own personal knowledge and wisdom into the game, then in some cases, I try to subvert those expectations (eg. maybe a lady with bite marks on her neck was attacked by a red slaad instead of a vampire; leading to the players making some incorrect assumptions). That can be a fun way to play off the players' outside knowledge.

[@trouqe]

Metagaming ought to be discussed at session 0 and how it should be mitigated. Adjustments to scenarios would be a good course of redirect to help minimize known aspects of the roleplaying and combat scenarios...and when lore or clichés occur, the players have the responsibility to ask if the world knows of such things. The vampire scenario, as a typical view, could or could not be known in the perceived world. Just as you mentioned, the maturity of the player begets the roleplaying aspects of the world created as a whole...with the few exceptions of those who have played since 1e...always will have resistance. Good video on such an unfortunate topic.

[@lancestorms6752]

Using Meta I apply the process to names also. For example, say an NPC is named Conan. The players may ask themselves, is this the same Conan from the stories they've heard. Are the rumors true? Meta can be used for flavor here by using NPC names such as Vader, King Issis or Angmar.

[@dmswarmkeeper1019]

So here we have a 4 year old video with some great points. Love me some Dungeoncraft! However, I'm going to take a different point of view on metagaming that I learned from some really talented DMs in the last couple of years: metagaming is a self-created issue that can be safely ignored, saving the DM and players a lot of angst. Some might say: That's bananas! Well, think about it. In 5e, it is the player who gets to determine how their character thinks, talks, and acts. Further, the goal of play is for everyone at the table to have fun and create an exciting, memorable story together. If the players and DM are fulfilling their roles and playing in good faith, fun can be had regardless of where ideas are gleaned. The DM has enough on their plate to worry about without also policing this self-inflicted "meta-game problem". I mean, how many rounds must go by before the "new" wizard is "allowed" to use firebolt against the troll? If a player wants to play their character as being ignorant about something in the game-world, that's great. If a player wants to act on out-of-game knowledge to inform what their character does next, that is fine, too. All it takes is one troll that heals with fire and is vulnerable to cold to make players realize they ought to test their assumptions in the game world before acting. (or, as I've found, just tell the players that it can be quite unsafe for PCs for a player to act on out of world knowledge without testing said assumptions in the game). Let's avoid getting to the point where the DM has to police character actions with the dreaded "your character wouldn't do that" and just get on with the fun, shall we? A word on Inspiration: I've hear folks poo-poo this game mechanic. Those same folks are often (but not always) the same who rail against meta-gaming. Using Inspiration to reward players for playing up their flaws or perhaps even a trait that is sub-optimal to a particular situation goes hand-in-hand with some of the stories Prof DM gives us in this video. Having players award their own inspiration (once per game session per personality trait/bond/ideal/flaw) works well in that the DM doesn't have to memorize anything. Just use it! (or use awesome points from the video - those sound like fun, too) TL;DR: the only true cure for meta-gaming is: stop worrying about it!

[@alienspaceshaman]

i give out little skulls "skulligans" for good roleplaying, use them for rerolls

[@jankiwen3112]

Professor, I have a question: I really, really like your magic system and I would like to introduce it to my players. But here's the thing - I give my players luck points for good roleplaying (just like your Awesome Points, each Luck Point allow one reroll). Have you ever played with a player who would gain awesome points frequently enough that they would never crit-fail the spell (because they would reroll the natural one)?

[@jvasche75]

Your CoC story is hilarious! Did Biff survive the game?

[@dreamleaf6784]

We will never know the fate of Biff

[@mikec64]

I play Savage Worlds and it has Bennies. They're basically Awesome points, spend for rerolls or to shape the story a bit (oh, I went to the academy with that NPC).

[@agsilverradio2225]

My character does what I would do, in the character's shoes. Ausome points are allready in the game. They are called d.m. insiration dice. They don't stack, but you can allways house rule that they do.

[@Escorpius17]

B/X is my favorite for its elegant simplicity. It's the only book that accompanies my homebrew ruleset. As much as I prefer B/X, I consider Advanced the definitive edition.

[@TheVeselyp]

Awesome point made awesome result in my campaign!

[@ChadZLumenarcus]

Going over what the characters know is a first step. If a player wants to act like the character knows anything, that involves their knowledge proficiency and if they are skilled in lore, then they should know a list of things that are mixed with both accurate and misleading. For example, maybe garlic doesn't work but cilantro does, or that these creatures are actually immune to wood and the best way to kill them is by forcing them to inhale or ingest pepper. Something clues could provide. I stopped giving XP a while ago and just level the group as they wen't depending on how well they did. Everyone having a good time and the story was fun and exciting, no matter what happens, then they're rewarded. However it also depends on the players. If they want to be a bunch of murder hobo's then I set the game up differently. Once players understand that, it's really just a game and a co written story, they start branching out from just killing things and see what they can do to impact the world, develop their character or just have a good time in general.

[@gawby]

Thanks Professor. I like the Awesome Point!

[@trashpanda5869]

Really cool idea. Really fun anecdotes

[@robpetrone2459]

I'm not convinced that it's metagaming for the characters to associate neck punctures with a vampire. That seems to be an association that characters might readily make. The dungeon master would have to establish that the lore of vampires is not well known in the world.

[@LakeVermilionDreams]

What say you to people like Adam Keobel who has said in a video that in original d&d, people played with the goal to make it through the dungeons, to level the characters up, and to have one that makes it to retirement. To do so, player knowledge was rewarded, as it represents experience, note taking (because not every player would have a monster manual to study between sessions), etc. Meta gaming was celebrated.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

I think that's totally legit. This video came about because a newer player asked me what it was. Some metagming is OK. My biggest problem is when ruins a story.

[@ndowroccus4168]

It always catches us off guard when we find our group meta-gaming...not often, but sometimes we will be kind of well down that rabbit-hole too...then all of a sudden, bam! We are meta gaming...ugh It’s sucks correcting the path.

[@krispalermo8133]

Years ago we had new players in the game shop, everyone started off as 1st level characters that ended up running for our lives from a giant incest through a goblin warren. The DM describes a scene from a group of goblins' point of view then asked .. us .. goblins are doing to do ? Where by we started narrating what the goblins are doing. New player, " Wait a minute, you don't even have a map so how do you know the room has two door ways, let alone .. doors. The DM never stated that there were any door in all the rooms we went there ! It metagaming to your advantage. Old player, " As a goblin, who would know more about these caves ?" Second player, " You never asked about doors, so the doors were always there." Third guy, " What you think this is not all one big mind trip in the wizard tower ?" DM, she just evil smiles. Meta gaming can be fun.

[@caliban9347]

Thubs up for the Báthory reference! :D

[@markhill3858]

I tend rather to expect the players to know stuff, like whats supposed to work on vampires, I count it as "common folkloric knowledge" .. that can be just as good as a GM trap if thats what you wanna do ;)

[@Xion_Toshiro]

I remember this lesson from other Videos - "Player Knowledge vs Character Knowledge." *You* might have knowledge of the stuff involved, but your Character doesn't. Meta Gameplay A Roleplaying Classic. It's like watching a movie; where everyone is yelling at the TV; but clearly the character in the movie can't hear you.

[@godsamongmen8003]

I honestly have mixed feelings about the whole premise of rewarding "good roleplaying". What you really need to do is make sure you have a table of players who all want the same thing, and if they all want to play a tactical game with no real immersive roleplaying, then that's their fun and they should enjoy it. If you have a table of players that want to do the dramatic roleplaying, then you don't really need to reward them for doing what they wanted to do in the first place.

[@loganstecher2581]

If you want tactics and no immersion, play a miniatures game (Warhammer, Heroclix or literally any of the many genres out there). Leave roleplaying FOR roleplaying.

[@godsamongmen8003]

@@loganstecher2581 So their fun is wrong, huh? If a bunch of people like D&D for a tactical, non-roleplaying game, that's their business and I hope they enjoy it. You and your holier-than-thou buddies can kiss my ass.

[@loganstecher2581]

@@godsamongmen8003 Clearly you didn't read my comment.

[@jeremymullens7167]

The very first rules were tactics focused. Meta gaming was handled by the DM throwing curveballs. There were no knowledge checks. Character knowledge was player knowledge. There was one line about gun powder and assembly lines. The meta gaming line was drawn at using modern knowledge in a medieval setting. Lots of things were supposed to be kept secret but people learned quickly some players would read the monster manual. The solution was the DM didn’t have to follow the book. Artifacts were left blank and DMs were encouraged to customize them so players couldn’t buy the book and know everything. The tactical war gaming guys made the role playing game everyone plays. I find it rude to tell the types of guys who pioneered the game to go somewhere else you’re not wanted.

[@kravenbludd]

The Elizabeth Bathory character is talked about in this video.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Oh snap. Damn. I forget what's in my own videos!

[@kravenbludd]

I don't find it unlikely that characters would recognize signs of a vampire. Something more obscure on the other hand...

[@benjaminolson7206]

Exactly. If I can recognize the signs of a vampire why would someone who grew up in a world with ACTUAL vampires not have some inkling? Probably not the best example.

[@kevingooley9628]

@@benjaminolson7206 well, do vampires exist in every part of the world? Is it pre literacy, or at least pre printing press? In medieval europe, yes people "knew" the signs of a vampire, or werewolf, but had the heard of an Aswang? (Supernatural creature from the Philippines) In WHFRP, for instance, vampires are only common in Sylvania, so characters from Tiles, Estalia, or worse the northern parts of the Empire, may very well not have heard of them, or only heard the tiniest bit of stories and rumors, and.those could be very incorrect. Don't get me wrong, expecting player to act as if they know nothing is extreme, but using our world, with decades of sci fi, horror, and fantasy novels and movies, is a bad comparison.

[@linkno1]

I don't think metagaming is always a bad thing, so long as the players who are metagaming are using that knowledge to add to the story rather than to 'win' the story. An example I can think of is an oldy from a game I was in. The hunter had done something to get the 'wrong sort of attention' and during the night an assassin snuck into her room and started smothering her without alerting anybody else in the party. The hunter not being a strength based class and the player getting bad rolls on top of that, she was probably going to die. We basically accepted at this point that she was going to die. The fighter then 'suddenly woke up'. In most cases of metagaming the character will for absolutely no reason suddenly run to the room fully equipped with weapons and armour despite hearing absolutely nothing from that room, which makes absolutely no sense and is total metagaming...In this instance though due to something that happened earlier in the session he 'woke up' saying "I can't sleep, I feel bad about what I said to hunter, I'm going to go and apologise". This resulted in him walking into her room half awake with no weapon or armour and saving the hunter by attacking the armed assassin with random nearby 'room clutter'. Another example I would give is that of players having information on enemies such as weaknesses or simply what the enemy is. Instead of their character suddenly having that information too, they could instead take the route of 'how would my character gain this information that I already know'? Word of mouth? A certain type of professional? A library? A character might not know the killer was a vampire, but they may have enough knowledge to know it wasn't any human or animal they've ever seen, narrowing down where or who they might go to find out it was a vampire. The player using what they know to help their character gain that knowledge could even lead into a quest of its own. Granted, this could be done equally with a player who doesn't know this information. Obviously 'metagaming it' though would save a lot of aimless wandering around or the DM having to drop hints or basically tell the player the answer. It could also be used to shorten how long the character would realistically be looking. The library might not be the first place the character would look, but the player knowing that's the best place could say "well I want to go to the blacksmith and the library is on the way, so I'll check there first even if I think it's a bit unlikely I'll get the answer there".

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thanks for your very well-reasoned post!

[@johnedgar7956]

Sigh... I have this problem in my own game. I have one player who is nothing but a meta-gamer and always ruins the dramatic tension in exactly this fashion. Unfortunately, my whole group sees him as "the cool guy" and the group's "alpha" and defer to it & don't seem to care how it irritates me. I'm trying to find a way to run a different game without him but I'll probably end up just having to find a different group.

[@claude-alexandretrudeau1830]

I award experience points for defeating encounters and not for killing encounters. And yes, there is a difference. Let's say you encounter a bear and in your spell repertoire is a damaging spell that can kill it and a charm spell that can tame it. If I awarded XP only for kills, you would take the damaging spell and never look back. But if I awarded you XP for overcoming obstacles, suddenly the charm spell becomes interesting, because not only it could remove the obstacle upon success, it could also grant you an animal companion on top of everything else. Killing is only one way of overcoming obstacles. If you wish for more creativity at the table, award XP for all the ways you can overcome obstacles.

[@johnbouras3422]

I feel that Metagaming is not necessarily bad, and that metagamers (some at least) can be a very useful tool for the game. I always tie in metagame-y knowledge behind the knowledge skills, with common monsters requiring a flat rank, while more obscure or homebrew variations requiring a skill check. If the player succeeds I flat out help them in using out of game knowledge or give them the homebrew information their character would know on the spot. I feel that, to SOME degree, they are adventurers and some things that we know as players, they would know through research, tip sharing with other adventurers, or just "standard knowledge" of their world. Ex. A moderate leveled Ranger, would know that Trolls need fire or acid to stop their regeneration even if they have not faced one before, or even read a book on them. How? Well, they are an -adventurer-, they hang out in bars and other places where -other- adventurers reside. I feel it makes sense that during their free time (downtime) they would most likely talk to other rangers about the job, since they could relate and exchange tips and hints to survive. So if trolls are not a "once in a lifetime" thing they have faced, and they are high enough level, I grant them that knowledge.

[@silvertheelf]

Here’s what I think about it: If it’s a popular myth in our world, it’s probably going to be popular in a fantasy world. Everyone knows what a vampire is, but how many people know what a Wastrilith is? If you know to use garlic to scare off a vampire? Go ahead. But if you know Wastriliths have no resistance to acid damage and know they corrupt water? Now that’s metagaming.

[@nicobuehne9489]

My first question as a player to you as a GM after the Story would be: "Is knowledge about vampires common, uncommon or rare?" As I am a player and don't have all the information that my character, who has lived and drawn breath in your setting's world. And my second question would be, if there is information about vampires out there in the world You have created: "Does [my character] know that the culprit might be an undead leech parading as a human?" If a monster has regenerative powers, would the world know about it? Would the player characters? That's what Arcana, Nature, History and Religion is for. (Personally, I would let a paladin of Bahamut roll Religion to learn about a dragon's potential regeneration or other abilities when they first lay eyes on said dragon.) Have you tried handing out levels when the party achieves milestones instead of XP?

[@strygian192]

What is the book with the wizards face on it behind you?

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Dungeon Crawl Classics. I talk about it in the new video, to air 6pm tonight. Check it out!

[@strygian192]

Thank you PDM!

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

You're welcome!@@strygian192

[@dougsundseth6904]

Your definition assumes that all "monsters" are unknown to the average peasant in your world. With the observed population density of monsters in most F20* worlds, this seems unlikely to me. By analogy, in our world: "You hear a 'ruff, ruff' sound in the middle of the night." Would it be metagaming for a character to say, "There might be a dog barking nearby. I hear they run in packs"? The real question, then, is what would constitute common knowledge. Some games have knowledge skills or backgrounds that could affect this, but most seem to be very CR (or equivalent) dependent. In my game, common monsters (or commonly known monsters) require no particular knowledge check, so goblins are identified as such on sight, as are dragons. Now, as to details? Well, common knowledge is sometimes very wrong indeed. See, for instance, the medieval heraldic camelopard, which is based on descriptions of an actual giraffe but would be hard to identify based on its picture. Less common monsters will get a description but no name unless identified, and no traits without a skill roll. Oh, and while identifying a dragon _as a dragon_ is easy, identifying a dragon as a _red_ dragon is rather harder. For an example from our world, see the "white elephant", which is definitely an elephant but not notably white. So, in some worlds, the existence of vampires might be well known, as are their characteristics. In others, the name might be known as well as the signs of their presence, but the defenses all wrong. And in a third, vampires might be unheard of. And there's no way for the players to know what your world is like unless you tell them, preferably before the issue arises. * Ken Hite/Robin Laws term for D&D and its descendants.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Certainly. For tips on how to info dump about your world without boring players, check out tomorrow's campaign update!

[@youvegotmailed]

I thought he was going to say that the cleric just cast a heal spell and told her to get a long rest #fullHP=goodhealth

[@agsilverradio2225]

Why would vampires not be common knowledge, in a mid-high fanticy setting?!

[@XanderCottrell]

yea honestly i would say anything that a random that hasnt played dnd would know about, the characters would know, troll are afraid of fire (maybe they dont know theyre weak to fire, but afraid at least) the vampire one is also pretty common knowledge, rumours and myths of vampires have existed for ages, although they may not have THE answer, most people will have AN answer, most people also know a gorgon will turn you to stone (even though theyre thinking of medusa who was a gorgon in myth, but in dnd gorgon is a different creature with petrifying breath instead of a stone gaze type thing)

[@nicjobro_4653]

It depents. I would say roll for lore (or how ever your game calls it) if you dont know if the charater knows.

[@skiphoffenflaven8004]

Man, we have a hard-core meta gamer in our group. Great guy, but dang!! Nearly everything any player has their character do, that guy “argues”, using chronology of the DnD universe, previous games he’s played (sometimes over 15 years ago!), and real-world facts, about everything the player suggests its character will do.

[@ArcaneCowboy]

There would be no legend about vampires in world?

[@jessecapra2350]

Ive thought about that too but I choose to see it in the same vein as horror movie universes. Clearly in horror movie universes they don't have horror movies. If they did they'd know not to open the god damn door. Or even IRL. If you heard about a murder on the news where they had two pin pricks in their neck and had a large amount of blood drained would you immediately think "holy shit vampires are real!" Id imagine not.

[@RabidHobbit]

Agreed, but his point still stands, even if his example doesn't apply to your campaigns.

[@mr7oclock346]

I have actually created a character based around the concept around metagaming, but I used the game rules. Basically, I loaded him up with Divination spells, and spells that gave him proficiency or expertise in skills. To top it off, I based the character around the idea that it was a character that realized he was in a simulation, kind of like Elon Musk's theory. So, he was "metagaming" but not really, because he was doing it within the rules of the game. I have sense came up with the idea that occasionally a pc or npc might randomly have the belief that they are in a simulation despite that campaign setting they are in, where they are from, etc. That is kind of based around the fact that it doesn't matter what time period or culture you study, people randomly turn to atheism