More On Moron Meta-Gaming

A not-so-wise man once said, “Meta-gaming is not just an easier way to play, it’s the smart way to play,” and he’s not just fat and stupid and ugly and has an enormous penis, he’s also me.

I said that.

Being the contemplative and intelligent sort of guy who prefers Real D&D to today’s Ersatz D&D, something about that line stuck in my old man turkey gizzard craw, and I think I know what it is.

Meta-gaming isn’t necessarily easier or harder, it’s just a shift in mind-set from “the story is the king” to “the player is the king”.  Let’s walk through this, because I’m still a little hazy on the difference.

Before we do so, let’s get some terminology down to distinguish between the pro- and anti- meta gamers.  Let’s also keep it objective by calling the DMs who approach the game from a “metagaming is teh bad” perspective, meta-DMs.  And we can call those who ascribe to the right way of playing D&D real-DMs.

Real-DMs have a harder go of things, because they have to account for the fact that player knowledge makes most traps one-and-done.  Once the players open the door that opens a pit beneath their feet, they won’t do that again.  On the other hand, it opens up all sorts of possibilities to use that against players.  Perhaps a door only opens the pit trap every other time it’s opened – via a mechanism that requires a dwarf or thief to identify.  Or, like Gygax himself did, place seven identical doors with treasure behind six and a tiger behind the seventh.  The players will come to think of the doors as “treasure doors” and be blindsided by the tiger.  In this manner, Real-DMs have a harder job ahead of them.  But then, Real-DMs do not fear challenges, but embrace them.

In like manner, players have an easier go of things, as they don’t have to run around repeating stupid tasks to gain what they already possess.  On the other hand, meta-knowledge risks making them complacent.  They won’t double-check things.  They get a little lazy.

And then they die.

Which is as it should be.  Played right, D&D should be difficult.  Characters should die early and often.  Coddling them removes the challenge and makes the game as interactive as watching Netflix videos.  It occurs to me as I type this that banning meta-knowledge is a cheap and lazy way of trying to inject a little challenge into the game – a way to replace the challenge removed by sanitizing everything.  Even those who eschew remove 1HP characters, nerf saving throw difficulties, and install death saves (shudder), recognize that the game has taken on a bland and predictable nature.  They can’t go back to the thrill of the capricious dice, though – such would be to admit they are wrong and your well-hung host is right – so they try to find other avenues that allow them the freedom to dance through the statistical raindrops while feeling like they have challenges before them.

Also – there’s an easy way to ensure player-knowledge and character-knowledge sync up.  When the party splits, kick the non-present character-players out of the room.  Player and character knowledge become one and the same.  Honestly, this isn’t that hard.  It’s a little embarrassing that I have to explain this, but such is the sad state of our once glorious ivory-tower hobby.

However you look at it, banning meta-gaming is cheap and lazy and dumb.

Don’t be a dum-dum.

Play the Gygax way or GTFO.