In the Sisterhood of the Cheese Fries, we strive to create a world where characters are driven by their own knowledge, experiences, and motivations. However, as players, we possess information that our characters do not. This creates a delicate balance: how do we use our player knowledge to enhance the game without breaking the immersion for ourselves and others?
This house rule explores the concept of metagaming, distinguishing between its constructive and disruptive forms. Understanding this distinction is crucial for maintaining a believable and engaging narrative. While “good” metagaming fosters collaboration and enhances roleplay, “bad” metagaming can undermine the story and diminish enjoyment for others at the table.Â
Below, we’ll define both and outline the consequences for actions that negatively impact the game’s immersion. Our goal isn’t to stifle creativity and problem-solving, but to ensure that everyone feels invested in the world, its characters, and making choices that feel authentic and impactful.Â
Good (or Constructive) Metagaming
Good metagaming involves using your knowledge as a player to facilitate collaborative storytelling and foster an immersive experience for everyone at the table. It’s about finding ways to use your understanding of the game and its mechanics to support your fellow players and enrich the narrative without breaking character or undermining the DM’s role in the story.
Here are some examples of good metagaming:
Offering Character-Based Hints
If a fellow player is struggling to determine their character’s next actions, you can suggestions based on your understanding of their abilities and motivations. This helps keep the game flowing and encourages collaborative problem-solving. (Bonus points if you can figure out how to do this while staying in character yourself.)
Suggesting Strategic Cooperation
You can suggest strategic actions based on your knowledge of the game mechanics and other player’s abilities and skills to solve problems. For instance, if you know that your character would fail at a certain action but that someone else’s character is likely to succeed based on their ability scores, you can suggest the action to them as a way to obtain the in-game goal.Â
Adding Depth with Knowledge
You can use your knowledge of the game, monsters, or campaign setting to add depth and details to your roleplaying. This allows you to put your knowledge to work without breaking character or breaking the game.
Informing Character Choices
You can act in opposition to the way you’ve rolled if the situation reasonably calls for it. For instance, you might roll a nat 1 on a perception check, meaning you don’t see any immediate danger, but you could still act cautiously based on your understanding of the situation. So, despite not seeing anything, your character could still draw their weapon as they enter a room out of anxiety if nothing else. This allows you to keep your character consistent with their personality and the situation.
Rationalizing Out-of-Character Moments
If you want to attempt something outside of your character’s normal skill set, personality, or motivations, you can rationalize it within the context of the story and the goals in game. Just be aware that the DM may impose rolling at a disadvantage based on the situation.Â
Proactive Story Development
If you have ideas for adding a new dimension to the game, discuss them with the DM outside of the session or send the DM a message about it during the session. This allows for a collaborative approach to the storytelling without disrupting the ongoing narrative or creating conflicts with other players.
Consulting the DM
If you’re uncertain whether a particular action or suggestion might be considered disruptive metagaming, don’t hesitated to talk to the DM. You can send a message, ask to speak to the DM in private, or wait until after the session. Either way, the DM can provide guidance and help you find a way to incorporate your ideas constructively, ensuring that the game is fun for everyone and immersion isn’t broken.
Bad (or Disruptive) Metagaming
Bad (or disruptive) metagaming occurs when player knowledge is used in a way that disrupts the immersion, undermines the narrative, gives a character an unfair advantage, and otherwise ruins the game for other people at the table. It often involves disregarding character limitation and motivations, or using out-of-character knowledge to manipulate the game or other players.
Here are some examples of bad metagaming:Â
Acting on Unearned Knowledge
Your character’s actions are driven by information that they couldn’t possibly possess in-character, solely because you, as a player, are aware of it. This creates inconsistencies in the game and ruins the role playing aspect of a TTRPG.
Attempting Implausible Actions
You attempt actions that are clearly outside your character’s capabilities, disregarding their skills, abilities, and other limitations, solely because you hope to succeed based on a roll of the die. Unless your character’s personality involves them being delusional or attempting completely out-of-pocket feats, your attempts weaken the story and can deny other player’s the opportunity to role play.
Manipulating After Failed Rolls
If you attempt to coerce other players into compensating for your failed roll, rather than accepting the consequences, you undermine the integrity of the game’s mechanics and the story’s narrative.Â
Influencing with Unearned Information
You attempt to influence other players’ actions using information that your characters shouldn’t have, even if it might “solve” a problem. This disregards character limitations, undermines the narrative, and stifles player agency.
Exploiting Game knowledge
You purposefully use your knowledge of the game, campaign, or monsters to gain an unfair advantage or spoil the experience for others at the table.Â
Spiting the DM
You use your knowledge of the game, campaign, or monsters to intentionally frustrate our outsmart the DM, demonstrating a lack of respect for their role in the shared narrative.
Forcing Story Changes
You attempt to force the introduction of new game elements or story arcs during a session without approval from the DM, disrupting the flow of the game and disregarding the DM’s plans.
Consequences of Bad Metagaming
To ensure that everyone has fun at the table, it’s necessary to address instances of disruptive metagaming. While you will be given the benefit of the doubt and offered warnings, repeat offenses will lead to consequences. The severity of the consequences will depend on frequency, intent, and impact of the metagaming on others at the table.
The goal of these consequences is not to punish people for having fun and taking risks, but to reinforce the importance of collaborative storytelling and a respect for everyone at the table.
Consequences include (in order of severity):
Temporary Disadvantage
The DM will impose a disadvantage on your character’s rolls for a specified period of time.
Caracter Incapacitation
Your character will be incapacitated for a specified duration, removing them from play for a set duration.
Roll for a New Character
Your character will be killed and you will be asked to create a new one.
Session suspension
For repeated or egregious offenses, the DM will ask you to step away from the table for a designated number of sessions, allowing you the time for reflection on what being a collaborative storyteller means and if you’re committed to that ideal.
Removal from the Party
In extreme circumstances where metagaming consistently disrupts the game and undermines the group’s enjoyment, you will be asked to leave the party.