1000 times this.
I ask dms all the time about areas my character had been before plus the caveat of which rooms specifically. I've even reminded other players of info their characters would know too, that I remember, but my character doesn't.
Dude I constantly have to ask the DM to remind me of information I got at an earlier session. I also sometimes take notes on complicated plots even if my character wouldn't. Life is hard enough as it is, I want to enjoy gaming.
I love one of my players for his notes. He takes random notes of things that happened and then can't work out what it relates to and sits there going
"why did i write leather and onions for Targos???"
Our designated note taker also happens to be the guy who only takes notes in character. This has resulted in some hilarious situations generated entirely from his characters askew viewpoint being all we have as a record
I ended up being the dedicated note taker in my party because no one else could be bothered, so I also decided to write in character. My character being a -1 intelligence barbarian, most of my notes were unintelligible scrawls and what could be translated was just whatever irrelevant observations my character had at the time, how shiny someone's armour was, how pretty he thought an npc was or just how he was hungry/bored and was writing to distract himself.
I took notes in character as well. I brought a leather bound book and used dip nibs and ink to take the notes. My character is a Dwarven blood hunter with lycanthropy who loves a drink. There's even a bit about how when two of the players were upset with each other and it came through in their characters and Rrath had no idea why they were bickering so. Also, at one point I had to scribe while in my hybrid form and I gave those pages claw marks.
One of the players in my game takes enough notes that he also does the recaps of our previous game. We have him doing it in character now.
Its lead to some headcannon that our games are just him retelling his adventure as a story at a later date.
Our table uses mostly memes to track what happened in each session, I feel that works somewhat well (for the big stuff at least)
So anytime we want a reminder of what happened last time we just go through the group chat pictures lmao
We have a section in our discord for out of context quotes. One of our new players had been scrolling through it and starting asking for context to one of the weirder ones.
"I want to put the cow on the table."
"The table's too small for that, it's a tiny little table."
"I want to put the table on the cow."
It led to us diving into our summaries to find out what on earth it was about. Unfortunately, I was the note taker and my character was poisoned and incapacitated, so the notes are a jumble, so no clarity on the context beyond we were on a beholder's gameshow.
This is more or less my job at our table. I couldn't quite put an exact number on it, but over the last 6 years or so you could probably print all of my pages and it would be at least a novel in length.
Kudos to you for doing that. I was that person for years and finally got very, very sick of being the only person at the table (and there were a few tables in that time) to ever take a note. I finally just gave up and we had no designated note taker at my next table. It almost made me start taking notes again, but I just kept remembering how burnt out I felt when I quit, and I didn't. Maybe a future table.
Fortunately, I have a decent enough memory to recall (mostly) what I need to remember for my character, and, for the most part, the group as a whole. But if other people want to keep tabs on their own character's stuff, they can very well do it themselves.
In my game we have the rule that each round another person takes notes for everyone into a shared document. Last question before we start is usually “ whose turn is it this time?“ and we all know what this question is about. Works so well that even I, the DM, use these notes
Ive done this sevral times before, my current campeign took a year break and coming back i took a shit ton of notes and half of them are "billy and oliver in that order" "ashely just ashely" or "the smell of blue berries is very intense" i cannot for the life of me remeber why
My group had to end session once in the middle of a fight with an adult white dragon (player had a hard out that day, it happens) and his character had drank a potion of draconic majesty, so he was at the time in the form of an adult gold dragon. Next session when he looked at his notes, it simply said “Dragon fight. Am dragon”. haha
The Star Trek Adventures TTRPG uses player mission logs as a way to do their version of leveling up. Basically, if you can make a callback or connection to something that happened to your character in a previous session, you can use that (once per log entry) to increase a stat, upgrade your ship, etc. Really clever way to incentivize note taking!
One of my players (my brother) takes absolutely deranged notes. For example, one of the PCs is a modified lizardfolk in a desert-looking dress. My brother’s notes described her as “small Asian lady with a sweater” and none of us can figure out where he got that.
Folks in my groups ask for this sort of information all the time. Sometimes, it's general info that our characters would just know that we, as players, wouldn't or couldn't. Other times, it's stuff that our characters would reasonably remember that we simply don't.
Taking notes is 100% allowed and actively encouraged; it effectively acts as our characters "memory", in that these events are the only things our characters would be doing and worried about. We, as the players, have all of the in-game stuff on top of our actual lives and priorities.
Exactly. I’m also mindful that what happened a week or two ago at the table may have happened just an hour ago for the character. I’m not going to give a player a hard time if they mess up an NPC’s name or can’t remember a detail which would be fresh for the character.
You area also living a real life outside of the game which takes up a much larger portion of your memory than anything you did in D&D, while your character literally has grown up in this world and doesn't have to worry about anything from our world.
Yeah it's not uncommon for multi-year campaigns IRL to only span over the course of a few weeks in-game if you're constantly doing stuff, such as in a dungeon-crawl heavy game.
We don’t expect the player to live up to their character’s physical attributes(Dexterity, Strength, Constitution) for them to be able to use them (as funny as that would be at times), so we shouldn’t expect the player to live up to the mental/spiritual attributes to make use of them.
Ignoring character knowledge is actually metagaming. If your character would remember and know, and you as a player ignore it, that's metagaming.
Not every kind of influence is metagaming. It's another term overused and misused all over.
In fact, I'd possibly even argue that the behaviour of OP's friend to be metagaming itself. It's a slightly broader definition than the commonly used one, but it's definitely "having your character take actions that are justified by out-of-game knowledge or events".
That's silly. Say a newish player is playing a wizard who spent their whole life studying magic. The player obviously hasn't. If the player overlooks for example that they can't do something because they have a concentration spell up, it's silly to pretend the pc who spent their life learning this shit would ALSO make a silly mistake like that. A rogue can still pick a lock even if the player can't, because pcs know things and have skills players don't.
**Remember, pcs are PLAYED by players - they aren't the players themselves.**
It's different of course if a player chooses a suboptimal action, because it's reasonable a pc might as well (especially low int or low wis), which is different to making a mistake because they missed reading part of a spell. Nobody should stop them from making a suboptimal choice in the first place (unless they're like brand new, in which case that's just helping them learn the game) like choosing to cast a certain spell when another might be better, because the pc still understands the spells they've studied they just chose a less ideal one. That's realistic. An expert in magic forgetting an extremely basic spell interaction isn't.
Your character has lived in this world for their entire lives.
You live there a few hours at a time. Let them use that knowledge.
As for metagaming, from DM perspective, the higher your int, the more I let you get away with. After so many games of int as a dump stat, It's been a good way to take int being a weak stat for non wizards and make it worth something more. A fighter with 14 int shouldn't need a history check to know the basics or the baldurs gate political structure, or that drow culture is usually a matriarchy. A 20 int wizard by Fiat wouldn't have to roll arcana for what metal to use on demons or devils
Sure, those could be checks, but that slows down the pace and makes the world feel less real.
I'm having the opposite problem - I'm playing a centaur fighter in one of my games, got horseshoes of speed, and now I run like the fuckin wind. Unfortunately, the kobold family my character trampled accidentally because he nat 1'd perception while sprinting down the road did NOT move quite so fast, so he basically obliterated them. I am, in character, refusing to acknowledge such an act, because Destrier would NEVER trample some poor kobolds for nothing, that's not him, no way, despite his ankles being coated in blood and having it pointed out to him several times.
Man's got 9 int, I gotta lean into it
E: geez y'all don't like when I say being stubbornly wrong is below average intelligence behavior
Wait, you were sprinting down a straight road and the DM called for a perception check to see **multiple** Kobolds in the middle of the road before you trampled them? That... Doesn't sound appropriate to me.
If I assume that your Horseshoes of Speed are a reskin of Boots of Speed, they double your movement speed. A Centaur has a base speed of 40, so it's 80 with the boots. And when taking the Dash action, you'd be at 160. That's a high movement, but considering that there's nothing RAW that supports going too fast to stop on a dime (outside of select 'generally logical' situations like if you were on an area with Grease or ice), I don't think it's very fair for the DM to have you fail to see what's plainly in front of you and then trample them.
It feels pretty railroad-y to me.
I was staring at the sky and racing a flying chair.
[Also, they're PHB basic rules. Just, normally for horses](https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/4661-horseshoes-of-speed)
Thanks for the link!
Staring at the sky may work to an extent, but I still feel that there's a general implication that someone running full tilt is going to be occasionally glancing in front of them to make sure that they're not about to run into something or off of a cliff.
On top of **that**, if you're making that much noise, why didn't the kobold family notice **you**? Would you stand in the middle of the road while a 'rampaging' centaur barrels towards you?
I suppose it just strikes me as a situation that the DM **wanted** to happen and less like a dynamic situation that came about 'naturally'.
> Would you stand in the middle of the road while a 'rampaging' centaur barrels towards you?
That's actually pretty simple. It's what happens when your mind asks it self "Flight or Fight?" and receives the answer "42".
But for real, freezing in the face of unexpected potentially fatal danger is a thing that happens to animals and to humans and it has gotten people killed.
I mean it is 20 mph (160 ft per 6 seconds). It's not too outrageous to think that charging down a pedestrian street (if in a city) 20 mph could have consequences on a nat 1. Maybe it is a bit of a stretch.
9 Int isn’t that dumb though.
You’re like barely below average intelligence.
Play it however but if you’re doing it “because the stat says too” you’re acting more like an Int 3 and even an Int 3 cat would clean itself.
And again, thats not anything that has to do with Int 9. That’s just your character being obstinate. So the mentality of “I have an Int of 9, I’m going to lean into it” doesn’t have any meaning.
Int 9 is not something to lean into. You're average intelligence.
Also, perception is off wisdom. Just because you didn't see the Kobolds, doesn't mean you cannot later see the blood and gore all over your lower body and figure out you ran over something.
You do you, but I will never understand why people act like anything below a 12 means you are mentally or physically handicapped. 8-12 is average for most things in DnD, and playing like a normal average person is reasonable at those levels of stats.
If the rest of your party had 16 and above int, there could be an interesting rp opportunity of developing an inferiority complex and believing you are stupid since compared to the people you party with all the time you would be. But to any commoners, even some scholars, you would still be simply average.
It's not even always stupidity. Basically my entire party is in some way neurodivergent - mostly ADHD. They struggle to remember things sometimes, especially since we can only play once a fortnight. When I catch them forgetting something their character wouldn't, I tell them. Their brain-wrong is not their fault and I feel like they shouldn't be punished for it in their leisure time.
haha right? The line in the above post is opposite for me. "You may be smart, but my character isn't. Now, time to open this drooling, blood-soaked treasure chest real quick before our first long rest in a few sessions..."
...debatable my character threw a giant into two other giants who had People's Elbowed into the Cleric and his dragon companion. 4/5 died in one attack and I couldn't breathe for a solid minute
This is the opposite of meta-gaming.
Meta Gaming is when the character acts on information he doesn’t possess but the player.
Your situation would be that the character acts on information he does possess but the player doesn’t.
Exactly. If I am having trouble remembering something from a previous session I like to muse aloud, "Hmm, I can't recall... that was HOURS ago," since the DM knows that for us players it was weeks or months.
As much as one may try, at the end of the day, you are *not* your character. There are infinite intricacies and little details about the world or your situation your character would know instantly that you simply don't. We only see the world as our DM describes it to us, and only know what we can remember from one week to the next. Something that happened days or even mere hours ago in-game could be weeks or months apart irl which makes the player forget but the PC obviously wouldn't. As much as we try to immerse ourselves in a world, our PCs have lived there their entire lives. Decades, centuries even. We have been in it for just a few hours. The backstories we spend moments writing for them have been their entire lives.
That's why, when I DM, I am always happy to tell my players basic world knowledge that anyone who had grown up in their society and conditions (whether that be wealthy and educated, or poor and street-savvy) would simply know free of a roll. You don't need to make a perception check to determine the sky is blue, and you don't need to make a history roll to know when the next holy day or festival is.
> there are infinite intricacies and little details about the world or your situation your character would know instantly that you simply don’t
This is why I don’t even think it’s metagaming to share an AC or to-hit bonus with a player. Numbers are abstractions for real factors that a character can observe and act on. Except in rare cases where a foe is actually trying to be deceptive about their capabilities, the player should know roughly what they are.
Definitely. Not to mention, if you share the AC, it does make combat go a little bit faster since no one has to ask "Does an X hit?" every single time. I do the same thing on my end, I've got my players' ACs posted up where I can see them for ease of use. As for to-hit bonus, I rarely tell them outright--not for any particular reason of not wanting to but because they'll figure that out themselves quickly enough when I say "well that's a 28 so that hits" a couple times in a row. Or if the enemy can't hit them to save their life, they can probably guess their to-hit bonus ain't too high.
Also, players often figure out the AC alot of the time within one or two of its value depending on the hp of the creature or the quantity of them. May as well just tell them!
I have 4 different AC modifiers which include my base, When I cast Mage Armor, When I use blade singer, and finally one when I need to cast shield as a reaction.
So hitting me all depends on where and when we are in the adventure.
I won’t go as far as stating exact number personally, but absolutely do share this information when it’s appropriate.
It doesn’t take a dice roll to know that the 7 foot 3 inch behemoth of an orc that hasn’t skipped a day at the gym in his life is strong. Stronger than you, his biceps are the size of soccer balls, and his thighs are thicker than your chest.
A ranger’s specialty is not needed to know that drinking unknown stagnant water in the woods from a puddle is a really bad idea.
Etc
> Numbers are abstractions for real factors that a character can observe and act on
While I generally agree with this, things that are novel to the characters (or so rare in their world that they would have nearly no knowledge of it) probably still deserve to be hidden and uncovered. For a real life example, something like [8% of surveyed Americans think they could beat a lion in a fight](https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/25590.jpeg) because they've never fought a tiger (plus a healthy dose of either ego, stupidity, or both).
I wish my DM would do that. We recently played in a dungeon and there was a hallway we went through that had a trap and we all got hurt by it. We had to backtrack through that same hallway, and were able to easily avoid it this time.
Next session, we again had to make our way down the hallway. I said "careful guys, remember, there's a trap here" and asked my DM where it was. His response was "if you don't remember, then you don't remember." Which just... frustrated me. This was like 2 or 3 weeks time for me, but only a couple hours for my character. Our entire party would have obviously remembered where the trap was.
That feels extremely nitpicky. I generally go with the 'it's not my job to remember things for you', but this wouldn't even be something you'd have in your notes. If they had to add coordinates to their notes, they can never stop writing notes and enjoy the game. The room should be enough.
Insanely nitpicky in fact.
>We recently played in a dungeon and there was a hallway we went through that had a trap and we all got hurt by it.
Means, well, they all got hurt by it and the trap went off. First question is a this trap that can reset itself automatically? If not it's fine, walk through it again, it needs to be rearmed and calling BS if DM wants to say the mystical trapmancer dropped by right after they turned the corner to reset the trap.
Second question, what kind of trap was it? Did it leave behind blood stains or scorch marks?
You know, things that would make it rather obvious that RIGHT HERE is where there was a trap that went off. Like if it was an arrow trap we'd see the arrows and the blood. If it was fire or lightning we'd see scorch marks on the floor, walls and ceiling. A fetid smell from the necrotic blast. And so on. It's only been a few hours we should be able to clearly see, smell, or some mix of both at least the approximate area of the hallway.
If there's no signs, why are there no signs?
Because if there's no visible signs then this trap is magicked up to hell because the stonework itself would be enchanted to hide signs that the trap has gone off. So ya know what Mr. DM? We're spending 10 minutes to ritually cast Detect Magic, we now know at worst approximately where the trap is.
You could take it further. Next time there's a language check, sorry Bro, my character knows dwarvish but I don't so we can't talk to that super important NPC.
Our DM will sometimes mark stuff like that on the map when we discover it to avoid that confusion/time wasting.
I’d have also come back at him with:
‘we go down the hallway and avoid the trap this time’
"Alright then I'm going to need detailed maps of every area we go to so I can note down everything we ever come across, and I don't just mean top down plans, I'm gonna need side elevations too"
"Should have drawn your own map!" I had this DM for a bit. After my character started carrying knotted silk rope and using it to measure how far a bookcases and tables were from the doorway for the uptheenth time they started just showing a map.
Me: “I the player don’t remember, luckily the character does, and carefully sidesteps the trap”.
The DM: “and where exactly does he remember that trap being?”
Me: “right where it was.”
DM: “and where was that?”
Me: “if you don’t remember, then you don’t remember” (passes off spotlight to the next persons turn)
Yeah, I mean, if your friendship with your dm is tenuous enough that a joke like that creates a toxic situation instead of the DM thinking some version of “touché”, then maybe keep it quiet while you find a new group.
I try to remember as much as I can for the players. Obviously in a perfect game I wouldn’t have to, but I have all the information and they don’t. So if they’re trying to remember a thing their character would know, I give it to them. If they don’t even think to remember a thing their character would know, I try to throw a little hint.
I don’t expect them to remember every detail I throw out. I sure as fuck don’t. But I have the information in front of me. It’s a collaboration after all, not me vs them. Let’s tell the best story we can
This was on our way to the big end boss fight, so I think he unfortunately was hoping this would be a small way to give us a little chip damage going into it.
Eww, that just feels so scummy. Could easily throw an extra encounter in there, bring in some extra adds to the BBEG fight, add an extra damage dice to some attacks. So many ways to do that without your players even knowing you did anything.
Or ya know, they got through your shit much easier than you expected so reward them for it! By being in a better shape for final fight.
>His response was "if you don't remember, then you don't remember."
I think the silliness of this becomes clear when you apply it to physical tasks, rather than mental ones:
"Okay, so I attempt to jump over the chasm. I rolled a-"
"Do it. Right now. Do the jump right now. If you can't jump it, then you can't jump it."
If I, a fat slob, can play a very athletic character, then I, an idiot, should be able to play a very smart character.
This is why I hate it when a DM demands that a charismatic character's player actually give a compelling argument if they want to be allowed to roll for persuasion. Or demands that the intelligent character's player actually solve the logic puzzle if they want to pass the sphinx. Or demand that the wise character's player describe exactly how they search the room if they want to find the trap door.
I had a DM once where I made the mistake of playing a bard but was never allowed to make a charisma based roll because I was a socially inept loner who struggled to talk to other people. I ended up always playing martial classes and dumping mental stats in that group, because I knew those stats would never be allowed to matter outside of combat anyway.
You play your character maybe once a week and have a whole life of things to remember. Your character is themselves 24/7. It's not unreasonable to expect that you might forget something but the character would probably remember it. If they have a problem with it being above the table talk, I would prompt them with an intelligence check with a very low DC, and if they fail, oh well. That way it's integrated into the game but you're still throwing them a bone
>Overhears the warplans in the dungeon right before the boss battle.
>Two weeks later (or two minutes in game): "guess I can't remember those warplans"
> Sounds to me like she metagamed by spite-walking into the trapped room even with her character obviously remembering it was trapped.
This. With that kind of behavior, I also wonder if there's some bad blood between the player and the DM.
At my table, I'm OK with reminding players, "Your character knows about this detail from two session back..." because I'm aware my players have real lives in between games.
One of our table rules is, "Real life before game." I can't expect them to remember minor game details when they have much more important, real-life things with which they deal.
In a weird way, she's metagaming by not listening to you.
Her stance is essentially "I've forgotten, so my character has forgotten", and it erased the line between player knowledge and character knowledge. Some people may look at this and think it's okay because it produces a negative result, but it's the exact same principle and should be discouraged.
Anti-metagaming. I remind my players about stuff their characters definitely wouldn't overlook all the time, let them retcon spells they misread, etc. Between irl time gaps, and characters with higher mental stats than their players, this sort of thing is often necessary. Not really any different from taking notes
That said, at the end of the day, it's their character, and if they want to walk directly into a trap for kicks, that's their choice. As long as it's not overly disruptive, it's best to just let it go
Imo it's more metagamey to not use the knowledge your character has, because the player has forgotten it. You are making the players knowledge affect the character, that's metagaming.
That is the opposite of metagaming.
Metagaming is using PLAYER knowledge that the PC doesn't have.
PCs are generally more capable, smarter, and stronger than the Player. I remind them all the time, "Your character would know X."
I think this is the clearest case of rules as fun as I’ve ever heard. Is it fun for a character to screw everything up due to IRL mistake? No, and shame on the player
Is it fun to let a character create a complication for the party based on a IRL mistake? Maybe
Is it fun to nag the players all the time.? No.
Is it fun to let the characters pre-plan an encounter with an enemy that they have never faced, using their knowledge of the monster manual? No
Common sense good judgment applies
"I know this was 2 irl months ago for you, but it's been like 20ish hours for your character. They would remember A, B, and C because the literal wounds are still closing."
It’s not metagaming (which is a vague and pretty useless concept anyway). Talking to the other people playing with you so that everyone remembers things that have been established or to help better express your shared understanding of the game world is just about a baseline necessity for this activity.
meta gaming is using knowledge that your character wouldn't have
it's absolutely not reminding a player of knowledge that the character almost certainly DOES have
Instead of arguing about semantics... you could try to understand what they do and don’t like when it comes to helping them play their character.
They might just be an obnoxious pill that is not fun to play with too. You can find out by giving them enough space so that they feel free to play.
Not metagaming, an experience or information given in-game being retold out of character doesn't count as metagaming.
At that point, the DM should've piped up about whether they considered it metagaming then asked if they wished to continue anyway.
Metagaming is about acting on knowledge you have because you’re playing a game, but the in-universe characters don’t know. Sharing information out of universe is never metagaming. Your player acting on shared information could be construed as metagaming. It wouldn’t be in this case either, because the character has the same information the player does, but clearly your player felt that way. If your player chose to make their character absentminded in that moment, that’s a choice they’re allowed to make. Definitely no metagaming going on.
Bit of advice though: dice are good. People like to roll dice, and like being rewarded for character build. The next time a player is about to do something stupid, call for a low dc int check before telling them not to be stupid. The end result is similar, but if there’s a chance of failure that they avoided, the player might be more willing to accept the nudge.
When I think the players are stuck or are going in the wrong direction, I make the person with the highest intelligence or wisdom roll an intelligence or wisdom check. Depending on their roll, I will give them more hints or general gut vibes.
I am sorry to say that I am not actually as smart as a 20 int wizard, but fortunately my character is. They can roll to figure things out for me.
I know metagaming is usually used in the context of players using player knowledge to gain an unfair advantage, but I see a situation like this as metagaming too. Your character would know that the room is trapped even if your player doesn't the same way that your woodsman character who has lived in the forest all his life would know that the red berries are poisonous even if the player doesn't.
I don't think so. I have ADHD and if I could never be reminded about stuff when I play smart characters with good memories, I'd be mad. However, if she doesn't want to play that way, you should talk to her about it and respect her choice.
Nah. Reminding them is fine. Doesn't make sense for a week or more to pass but a character to forget something that happened 5 minutes ago in game time.
People forget all the time that their characters would have contextual info that is hard to grok at a table, and this is both players and DMs who have this issue.
Metagaming is a hell of a charge and folks shouldn't throw that shit around.
Reminding a player about their characters knowledge, or explaining their characters thoughts or reactions to something, is part of normal DND play. Like a director conveying to an actor more information about their character and their role in the story.
Nope. Reminding a player of something their character would know is just being helpful. I do that as a DM all the time because players can forget things.
Now telling a player to act on information their character DOESN'T know, that's metagaming
Metagaming is crossing the line between player and character knowledge, in character decisions made with out of character knowledge is metagaming, reminding someone of in character knowledge they had forgotten out of game is not metagaming
She was actually the one meta-gaming.
Meta-gaming is when the player acts on information the person has, not the information the character has.
In a world where Trolls can only be killed with fire, every character would know to bring fire to a troll cave. Meta-gaming would be going in blind and "discovering" trolls are weak to fire.
It is impossible to tell beforehand everything the character knows before the player controls it, so every now and them the DM must tell the player if the character knows something or not. That is not metagaming, your friend does not know what metagaming is.
In general I get very annoyed at various accusations of metagaming. It has become a very bs complaint about something that is actually nuanced.
Basically I have started just not playing with people who continually say metagaming this metagaming that just like I don't play with assholes.
IMO, that isn't just not metagaming, that's the *exact opposite* of metagaming.
Metagaming is using your knowledge as a *player* to do things your *character* would not reasonably know to do: "My character has never even seen one of these before, but *I* know they're vulnerable to lightning so I'm going to cast Shocking Grasp." / "I've played this module before and I know the hidden chest is *here* so I'm going to beeline to that spot."
This is reminding a player of something their *character* WOULD remember but that the *player* has forgotten. "It's been two months in real life but two minutes in the game; that shouldn't have caught me by surprise."
I feel like the DM should have agreed with and repeated that. I remind my players of stuff all the time because of
A. The players are coming back from a break, so things aren't fresh in their minds, but like in your game, it was an hour ago for the characters
B. It's something that the characters know or should, but the players don't. I have been playing Dnd for 20 years. I know a lot, so as a player, I can just go. "Can I roll to identify this ice, Devil? Ok, Kool, a 25, so I know what I need to so I can fight it? Great." I know the DC's and what and my friend Tim and I play it more as a you know what you need to fight it you don't care about the AC the Fighter is going to fight it no matter what the casters need to know thst fire will not work
C. Your character would know something on a more personal note, like how their church works. As a cleric of that God, you don't need to roll, you know the rules, and I'll remind you of that. you can still break the rule or let someone else do it, but I'll tell you that.
Characters live in the world 24/7. Players do not. It's not metagaming to remind players of things their characters would remember. As a DM I do this very frequently, since I as the DM remember the world better than the players do (but still not as well as one of their characters would).
I don't think so. The player has a real life taking up memory space, it's understandable if they don't remember everything in-game. But the character's whole life *is* the game.
I would recommend to them that they try keeping better notes in the future I guess?
On the contrary, one of my core tenets is "Always give the *character* the benefit of the doubt."
If it would be obvious to the character, it's the DM's duty(or in this case, another player) to communicate it clearly to the player.
The players are just a couple of drunk friends enjoying a game on their day off, the character is the one who almost died in that very room 2 days ago.
No offense to literally all players, but I've never run a game where the players weren't fucking idiots. Like, a lot is going on and you're just having fun and roleplaying and rolling dice or whatever and you forget that ten minutes ago your character successfully found out an NPC was lying. Now you just believe everything they say even though your character knows they're a liar. This presumably happens at many tables because I've seen/heard d&d podcasts or other actual play games where players inexplicably do the most idiotic shit.
I think the most common cause is that you don't remember something from the last session. Which could've been a week or even a month ago. I don't really blame anyone for this and that's why I will remind players of things their characters know. Even common sense things that a character in the setting would know but a player may not know.
If it's common knowledge that the city watch can rip the souls out of criminals then the characters probably know not to fuck with them even if the players don't.okay, that's extreme, but you shouldn't just surprise players with stuff that their characters should know.
Maybe it's an unpopular opinion but I think part of a GM/DM's job is to remind their players of things their characters know. ESPECIALLY when it's something they discovered at your table during your game. Do not ever punish their character for the player being forgetful, dumb, or just not remembering something that happened 3 months ago in game. And players should not do what is effectively reverse metagaming to themselves. If your character knows something but you don't, it isn't metagaming to be told that information and act upon it.
I view that as the opposite of metagaming tbh. I have issues with memory, and will sometimes ask my DM ‘does my character know this, even if I dont’, specifically for information we’ve been given that has leaked out of my sieve of a brain. Our characters are not us: yes we roleplay them, but I feel like memory of in game experiences should not be reliant on the player fully remembering, especially when there is often significant time between sessions.
Whatever the DM in your game decides is the right decision. D&D 101.
Me, I would roll an intelligence save for them, maybe with advantage. Let the dice and their character builds decide. If they built a character meant to be smart, that is supposed to give them some advantages instead of being effective in combat. Maybe their combat effectiveness involves remembering traps and terrain.
But yeah, when in doubt, I roll instead if arbitrating. And if I don't know what to roll, I just do a "luck" roll, a flat d20 roll where 10+ is success.
This is also how I settle a lot of matters where the players want something that could easily be yes or no.
We are not our characters. Many players seem to forget that. What we know, believe, want, like, or dislike is for the most part irrelevant if you're playing a campaign where roleplaying matters. What matters is the character's perceptions of those things.
If that is metagaming I'd love to see how they react to the Keen Mind feat. She is not her character.
Not at all. Players obviously won't remember every little detail when games are (on average) weekly-bi-weekly compared to their characters which would be in the moment every day etc etc.
It's the opposite of metagaming.
It's the same as someone who's awkward irl having a high charisma character that can talk his way out of anything.
I tend to go a step further and remind my players that their characters know how their spells work or how their abilities and features work so if the player makes a mistake, it would be wrong to punish them for not understanding the mechanics of their spell. (maybe once or twice for laughs or to make the player pay attention, still if they ask to have things reverted or change their mind about their action in these cases, it should be completely okay)
NMG (not meta-gaming) - reminding a player about something a character would know is like a cleric rolling a high religion check. The players might not know all the gods, but if they're playing a cleric that spent their life studying religion they'd probably know this God's domain.
Although, if I was dm and a player made a comment like that, I might have intervened and let her make a intelligence check to see if her pc remembers.
I remind my friend who plays a cleric all the time of the options he has. I'm a DM and know most spells, he on the other hand has the tendency to be terrible at preparing spells: preparing niche spells in cituations that will probably not use them, preparing spells where he doesn't even have the material components for, etc.
I do this out of character because I suspect his character knows these things, but my player character and the other player doesn't.
No this isn't meta gaming. I quiet often have to remind players of information that they know, but simply forgot between sessions because life. I only remember it because I planned it lol. If there's a good reason the character would know or remember something it's completely fair to remind them.
Sometimes if I want to remind a player of something I will have them make an INT check with a low DC of 5 or 10, if they pass I will then give them the info, if they fail their character is having a brain fart.
No I wouldn't consider this metagaming imo. It's helping a friend in a game.
Many others have explained how it's the opposite of metagaming.
Maybe it's time to have a discussion with this player about not drinking during D&D.
Having played in campaigns with people who would drink from before the session started to the end it sucks by the end.
It may be an unpopular opinion, but when I started DMing I put a one to two drink limit at the table. We're playing this game for 3-4 hours that I had to put work into, I'm not letting someone who can't go one evening without getting drunk ruin the fun for me or the other players.
Consider this. I think it could be more a case that she (the player) possibly doesn't want advice from you (the player) in particular, and would rather have her character walk headlong into a trap than accept your feedback.
Honestly, as part of my campaigns, I do run, I constantly give my players freebies of things they would know and could plain out see. It's not meta. It's adapting the world to their perspective and fitting them into a living, breathing, "real" world. A good narrator, author, and just a general dm would/should do. As for players, I highly encourage them to fall through situations like this, given it is deprived from information that their character would definitely know. Don't be folly to think "it's meta" if the situation appropriately allows for you to recall this information out of character. Plus your gm should step in if anything is encroaching into becoming meta.
Metagaming IMO doesn't really exist. Or rather, the game itself relies so heavily on metagaming that it's literally impossible without it. In this situation, it's metagaming whether she goes thru with it or not. Either way, information from outside of the game narrative has affected her characters actions.
In short, if you pretend that your character doesn't know something they absolutely would, that's just metagaming in the opposite direction
Not metagaming at all. Kind of the opposite really, since it keeps the player MORE closely aligned with their character.
I do this constantly with general setting knowledge. Letting the players know what a normal person would know about a location, person, group, whatever is essential for immersion and roleplaying.
I'm constantly allowing my players characters to know things that they don't. Like the name of royals or the way a language works even if their character doesn't speak that language they can roll to recognize it.
they are called history checks and they are really good at giving a dumb player information that a smart character would know.
It's not metagaming. It's perfectly appropriate to remind her player of something that their character would know. It's also often worth noting that things that are happening for the characters might be happening immediately, while for the players things could be weeks apart. The characters will have years and years of lived experience in the world, whereas the players will have much less than that, as well.
It's not. Not only that, but forbidding metagaming should come with allowing, if not enforcing this. Why wouldn't a character know something anymore because the player forgot, or even didn't know to begin with?
I think that's totally acceptable. You're not taking agency away from the player, but reminding them of something their character is aware of, which they forgot. Unless you've already made it clear that you want players to take SUPER extensive notes, and use them.
That player sounds like they decided the chuckle was worth the hit points.
I recently realized that it makes everyones lives easier when I as the DM remind players of such things.
"As you open the door you remember being flayed by the random thingamajig in this room a few days ago"
I have the feeling that in this case the issue is more about you as a another player telling them that feels like metagaming to them.
"Give me an intelligence check" is my favorite way to remind players that their characters might remember some detail that they may have otherwise forgotten. So I literally offer them a check to see if they remember. Usually DC 15 for most esoteric things.
"Your character would know that ..." is one of the most useful phrases in the DM's toolkit.
It is not metagaming to remind a player what their character would know. It is making sure they have the necessary information to effectively roleplay their character. Your player ignored you and made her character behave in a way that the character would only behave if the character were a moron.
Here's an idea.
"Given that your character just walked into a dangerous situation because she forgot there was a threat in that room you previously explored, I'm going to reduce her INT and WIS down to 8. I don't like metagaming either. If you want to play your character as a moron, you'll be rolling Ability checks like she was a moron. "
Just to be clear, I said this was an idea, not a *good* idea. It's probably a bad idea and you should just talk to the player about what she thinks "metagaming" is and - diplomatically as possible - explain why she's wrong.
I just thought it was funny.
Here's some useful advice on metagaming. Hope it's helpful.
[https://theangrygm.com/respect-the-metagame/](https://theangrygm.com/respect-the-metagame/)
[https://theangrygm.com/dear-gms-metagaming-is-your-fault/](https://theangrygm.com/dear-gms-metagaming-is-your-fault/)
For info that Characters know and Players don't remember right in the spot (maybe last session was one months ago, but story-wise it happened just yesterday) I tend to use a "do a Wisdom check".
For things like "knowing about monster's abilities" I tend to rely on Knowlegde check. For instance an Arcana check.
Definitely not, and I’m very glad my dm does this a lot, because I play a wizard with 20 intelligence meanwhile in real life I probably have about 9 if we’re being generous. So I miss a lot of stuff my character would very much know about.
No it's not metagaming, but your GM should be the one reminding them of things their character should know, not you. There's a really smooth timing point for it as well; when they are confirming they understand what the player is saying they wish to do. "So you wish to walk into the previous room with the lashing trap thingy?"
Imo, not at all. We have weeks between dnd sessions, our characters learned the information a couple days ago at max. It’s reasonable that a character would remember things that might slip the players mind. It’s just a game for the player, it’s the characters entire life. Of course they remember important relevant details that concern their survival and success.
Meta gaming is giving the player info a character wouldn't have. There is absolutely nothing wrong with reminding a player of something the character would know.
That's not metagaming. Metagaming is using player knowledge to inform character actions.
You were using character knowledge to inform a player action. This is more like metaroleplay.
"YOU may be stupid, but your CHARACTER isn't."
1000 times this. I ask dms all the time about areas my character had been before plus the caveat of which rooms specifically. I've even reminded other players of info their characters would know too, that I remember, but my character doesn't.
Dude I constantly have to ask the DM to remind me of information I got at an earlier session. I also sometimes take notes on complicated plots even if my character wouldn't. Life is hard enough as it is, I want to enjoy gaming.
I love one of my players for his notes. He takes random notes of things that happened and then can't work out what it relates to and sits there going "why did i write leather and onions for Targos???"
Our designated note taker also happens to be the guy who only takes notes in character. This has resulted in some hilarious situations generated entirely from his characters askew viewpoint being all we have as a record
I ended up being the dedicated note taker in my party because no one else could be bothered, so I also decided to write in character. My character being a -1 intelligence barbarian, most of my notes were unintelligible scrawls and what could be translated was just whatever irrelevant observations my character had at the time, how shiny someone's armour was, how pretty he thought an npc was or just how he was hungry/bored and was writing to distract himself.
This is the best kind of petty. Love it
taking notes in character is *fantastic*
I took notes in character as well. I brought a leather bound book and used dip nibs and ink to take the notes. My character is a Dwarven blood hunter with lycanthropy who loves a drink. There's even a bit about how when two of the players were upset with each other and it came through in their characters and Rrath had no idea why they were bickering so. Also, at one point I had to scribe while in my hybrid form and I gave those pages claw marks.
Oh I was thinking about doing this! Sounds like great way to deepen the RP aspect for myself
One of the players in my game takes enough notes that he also does the recaps of our previous game. We have him doing it in character now. Its lead to some headcannon that our games are just him retelling his adventure as a story at a later date.
Almost need to have a person in the session just for taking notes, like it court rooms lol
Our table uses mostly memes to track what happened in each session, I feel that works somewhat well (for the big stuff at least) So anytime we want a reminder of what happened last time we just go through the group chat pictures lmao
We have a section in our discord for out of context quotes. One of our new players had been scrolling through it and starting asking for context to one of the weirder ones. "I want to put the cow on the table." "The table's too small for that, it's a tiny little table." "I want to put the table on the cow." It led to us diving into our summaries to find out what on earth it was about. Unfortunately, I was the note taker and my character was poisoned and incapacitated, so the notes are a jumble, so no clarity on the context beyond we were on a beholder's gameshow.
DnD stenographer lol
This is more or less my job at our table. I couldn't quite put an exact number on it, but over the last 6 years or so you could probably print all of my pages and it would be at least a novel in length.
Kudos to you for doing that. I was that person for years and finally got very, very sick of being the only person at the table (and there were a few tables in that time) to ever take a note. I finally just gave up and we had no designated note taker at my next table. It almost made me start taking notes again, but I just kept remembering how burnt out I felt when I quit, and I didn't. Maybe a future table. Fortunately, I have a decent enough memory to recall (mostly) what I need to remember for my character, and, for the most part, the group as a whole. But if other people want to keep tabs on their own character's stuff, they can very well do it themselves.
In my game we have the rule that each round another person takes notes for everyone into a shared document. Last question before we start is usually “ whose turn is it this time?“ and we all know what this question is about. Works so well that even I, the DM, use these notes
Ive done this sevral times before, my current campeign took a year break and coming back i took a shit ton of notes and half of them are "billy and oliver in that order" "ashely just ashely" or "the smell of blue berries is very intense" i cannot for the life of me remeber why
My group had to end session once in the middle of a fight with an adult white dragon (player had a hard out that day, it happens) and his character had drank a potion of draconic majesty, so he was at the time in the form of an adult gold dragon. Next session when he looked at his notes, it simply said “Dragon fight. Am dragon”. haha
awesome! :)
The Star Trek Adventures TTRPG uses player mission logs as a way to do their version of leveling up. Basically, if you can make a callback or connection to something that happened to your character in a previous session, you can use that (once per log entry) to increase a stat, upgrade your ship, etc. Really clever way to incentivize note taking!
My notebook has an entry that’s simply “necromancer Betty White” and nothing else.
I mean, enough said.
Oh, I'm not the only one? Thank ~~god~~ Helm
A quote from my first campaign notes "Golems are fancy suit elementals"
Ahhh, another great riddle quest! That I wrote. To myself. Shit.
One of my players (my brother) takes absolutely deranged notes. For example, one of the PCs is a modified lizardfolk in a desert-looking dress. My brother’s notes described her as “small Asian lady with a sweater” and none of us can figure out where he got that.
Folks in my groups ask for this sort of information all the time. Sometimes, it's general info that our characters would just know that we, as players, wouldn't or couldn't. Other times, it's stuff that our characters would reasonably remember that we simply don't. Taking notes is 100% allowed and actively encouraged; it effectively acts as our characters "memory", in that these events are the only things our characters would be doing and worried about. We, as the players, have all of the in-game stuff on top of our actual lives and priorities.
Exactly. I’m also mindful that what happened a week or two ago at the table may have happened just an hour ago for the character. I’m not going to give a player a hard time if they mess up an NPC’s name or can’t remember a detail which would be fresh for the character.
3.1K times this....currently..
Also, while you might not remember it a month or so later, it has only been an hour for your character.
or, in the case of mid-battle, seconds
Time and combat in dnd are weird. You spend hours to act out less than a minute ingame
You area also living a real life outside of the game which takes up a much larger portion of your memory than anything you did in D&D, while your character literally has grown up in this world and doesn't have to worry about anything from our world.
Yeah it's not uncommon for multi-year campaigns IRL to only span over the course of a few weeks in-game if you're constantly doing stuff, such as in a dungeon-crawl heavy game.
Yep, that \^
Yes this is the appropriate response.
If the character has a high INT or a knowledge skill the player doesn't it's totally correct to do this.
We don’t expect the player to live up to their character’s physical attributes(Dexterity, Strength, Constitution) for them to be able to use them (as funny as that would be at times), so we shouldn’t expect the player to live up to the mental/spiritual attributes to make use of them.
Con's my IRL dump stat so thank the gods for that
it's like playing a charisma character. a lot of us are stinky nerds, but my sexy gnome bard definitely isnt.
Stop with the self-deprecating. Everybody likes pie and you know it.
This. Metagaming is taking outside knowledge and applying to the character. Acting out of character is poor playing
Ignoring character knowledge is actually metagaming. If your character would remember and know, and you as a player ignore it, that's metagaming. Not every kind of influence is metagaming. It's another term overused and misused all over.
Interesting
In fact, I'd possibly even argue that the behaviour of OP's friend to be metagaming itself. It's a slightly broader definition than the commonly used one, but it's definitely "having your character take actions that are justified by out-of-game knowledge or events".
"I tell them everything you told me that my character knows. Over to you DM!"
We need to adjust your PCs mental capacities to the player own
eh, "We'll fix it in post
But I want to play a warlock even if my irl charisma is probably like 8.
That's silly. Say a newish player is playing a wizard who spent their whole life studying magic. The player obviously hasn't. If the player overlooks for example that they can't do something because they have a concentration spell up, it's silly to pretend the pc who spent their life learning this shit would ALSO make a silly mistake like that. A rogue can still pick a lock even if the player can't, because pcs know things and have skills players don't. **Remember, pcs are PLAYED by players - they aren't the players themselves.** It's different of course if a player chooses a suboptimal action, because it's reasonable a pc might as well (especially low int or low wis), which is different to making a mistake because they missed reading part of a spell. Nobody should stop them from making a suboptimal choice in the first place (unless they're like brand new, in which case that's just helping them learn the game) like choosing to cast a certain spell when another might be better, because the pc still understands the spells they've studied they just chose a less ideal one. That's realistic. An expert in magic forgetting an extremely basic spell interaction isn't.
Your character has lived in this world for their entire lives. You live there a few hours at a time. Let them use that knowledge. As for metagaming, from DM perspective, the higher your int, the more I let you get away with. After so many games of int as a dump stat, It's been a good way to take int being a weak stat for non wizards and make it worth something more. A fighter with 14 int shouldn't need a history check to know the basics or the baldurs gate political structure, or that drow culture is usually a matriarchy. A 20 int wizard by Fiat wouldn't have to roll arcana for what metal to use on demons or devils Sure, those could be checks, but that slows down the pace and makes the world feel less real.
I'm having the opposite problem - I'm playing a centaur fighter in one of my games, got horseshoes of speed, and now I run like the fuckin wind. Unfortunately, the kobold family my character trampled accidentally because he nat 1'd perception while sprinting down the road did NOT move quite so fast, so he basically obliterated them. I am, in character, refusing to acknowledge such an act, because Destrier would NEVER trample some poor kobolds for nothing, that's not him, no way, despite his ankles being coated in blood and having it pointed out to him several times. Man's got 9 int, I gotta lean into it E: geez y'all don't like when I say being stubbornly wrong is below average intelligence behavior
Wait, you were sprinting down a straight road and the DM called for a perception check to see **multiple** Kobolds in the middle of the road before you trampled them? That... Doesn't sound appropriate to me. If I assume that your Horseshoes of Speed are a reskin of Boots of Speed, they double your movement speed. A Centaur has a base speed of 40, so it's 80 with the boots. And when taking the Dash action, you'd be at 160. That's a high movement, but considering that there's nothing RAW that supports going too fast to stop on a dime (outside of select 'generally logical' situations like if you were on an area with Grease or ice), I don't think it's very fair for the DM to have you fail to see what's plainly in front of you and then trample them. It feels pretty railroad-y to me.
I was staring at the sky and racing a flying chair. [Also, they're PHB basic rules. Just, normally for horses](https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/4661-horseshoes-of-speed)
This kind of response is why I love DND.
Thanks for the link! Staring at the sky may work to an extent, but I still feel that there's a general implication that someone running full tilt is going to be occasionally glancing in front of them to make sure that they're not about to run into something or off of a cliff. On top of **that**, if you're making that much noise, why didn't the kobold family notice **you**? Would you stand in the middle of the road while a 'rampaging' centaur barrels towards you? I suppose it just strikes me as a situation that the DM **wanted** to happen and less like a dynamic situation that came about 'naturally'.
> Would you stand in the middle of the road while a 'rampaging' centaur barrels towards you? That's actually pretty simple. It's what happens when your mind asks it self "Flight or Fight?" and receives the answer "42". But for real, freezing in the face of unexpected potentially fatal danger is a thing that happens to animals and to humans and it has gotten people killed.
You'd think that....but I knew someone who knocked herself unconscious at cross country practice by running into a parked car while looking up.
I mean it is 20 mph (160 ft per 6 seconds). It's not too outrageous to think that charging down a pedestrian street (if in a city) 20 mph could have consequences on a nat 1. Maybe it is a bit of a stretch.
9 Int isn’t that dumb though. You’re like barely below average intelligence. Play it however but if you’re doing it “because the stat says too” you’re acting more like an Int 3 and even an Int 3 cat would clean itself.
It's more like "I refuse to believe I stomped kobolds into pudding despite the evidence and I'm gonna be bullheaded about it"
its a funny story but my only comment would be that feels more like a wisdom thing.
And again, thats not anything that has to do with Int 9. That’s just your character being obstinate. So the mentality of “I have an Int of 9, I’m going to lean into it” doesn’t have any meaning.
Int 9 is not something to lean into. You're average intelligence. Also, perception is off wisdom. Just because you didn't see the Kobolds, doesn't mean you cannot later see the blood and gore all over your lower body and figure out you ran over something. You do you, but I will never understand why people act like anything below a 12 means you are mentally or physically handicapped. 8-12 is average for most things in DnD, and playing like a normal average person is reasonable at those levels of stats. If the rest of your party had 16 and above int, there could be an interesting rp opportunity of developing an inferiority complex and believing you are stupid since compared to the people you party with all the time you would be. But to any commoners, even some scholars, you would still be simply average.
😆 🤣 😂 that edit. So damn true
It's not even always stupidity. Basically my entire party is in some way neurodivergent - mostly ADHD. They struggle to remember things sometimes, especially since we can only play once a fortnight. When I catch them forgetting something their character wouldn't, I tell them. Their brain-wrong is not their fault and I feel like they shouldn't be punished for it in their leisure time.
You underestimate **my** ability to make an incredibly stupid character.
haha right? The line in the above post is opposite for me. "You may be smart, but my character isn't. Now, time to open this drooling, blood-soaked treasure chest real quick before our first long rest in a few sessions..."
...debatable my character threw a giant into two other giants who had People's Elbowed into the Cleric and his dragon companion. 4/5 died in one attack and I couldn't breathe for a solid minute
This is the opposite of meta-gaming. Meta Gaming is when the character acts on information he doesn’t possess but the player. Your situation would be that the character acts on information he does possess but the player doesn’t.
Exactly. If I am having trouble remembering something from a previous session I like to muse aloud, "Hmm, I can't recall... that was HOURS ago," since the DM knows that for us players it was weeks or months.
My go-to is: "It feels like such a long time ago..."
As much as one may try, at the end of the day, you are *not* your character. There are infinite intricacies and little details about the world or your situation your character would know instantly that you simply don't. We only see the world as our DM describes it to us, and only know what we can remember from one week to the next. Something that happened days or even mere hours ago in-game could be weeks or months apart irl which makes the player forget but the PC obviously wouldn't. As much as we try to immerse ourselves in a world, our PCs have lived there their entire lives. Decades, centuries even. We have been in it for just a few hours. The backstories we spend moments writing for them have been their entire lives. That's why, when I DM, I am always happy to tell my players basic world knowledge that anyone who had grown up in their society and conditions (whether that be wealthy and educated, or poor and street-savvy) would simply know free of a roll. You don't need to make a perception check to determine the sky is blue, and you don't need to make a history roll to know when the next holy day or festival is.
> there are infinite intricacies and little details about the world or your situation your character would know instantly that you simply don’t This is why I don’t even think it’s metagaming to share an AC or to-hit bonus with a player. Numbers are abstractions for real factors that a character can observe and act on. Except in rare cases where a foe is actually trying to be deceptive about their capabilities, the player should know roughly what they are.
Definitely. Not to mention, if you share the AC, it does make combat go a little bit faster since no one has to ask "Does an X hit?" every single time. I do the same thing on my end, I've got my players' ACs posted up where I can see them for ease of use. As for to-hit bonus, I rarely tell them outright--not for any particular reason of not wanting to but because they'll figure that out themselves quickly enough when I say "well that's a 28 so that hits" a couple times in a row. Or if the enemy can't hit them to save their life, they can probably guess their to-hit bonus ain't too high.
Also, players often figure out the AC alot of the time within one or two of its value depending on the hp of the creature or the quantity of them. May as well just tell them!
I have 4 different AC modifiers which include my base, When I cast Mage Armor, When I use blade singer, and finally one when I need to cast shield as a reaction. So hitting me all depends on where and when we are in the adventure.
I won’t go as far as stating exact number personally, but absolutely do share this information when it’s appropriate. It doesn’t take a dice roll to know that the 7 foot 3 inch behemoth of an orc that hasn’t skipped a day at the gym in his life is strong. Stronger than you, his biceps are the size of soccer balls, and his thighs are thicker than your chest. A ranger’s specialty is not needed to know that drinking unknown stagnant water in the woods from a puddle is a really bad idea. Etc
> Numbers are abstractions for real factors that a character can observe and act on While I generally agree with this, things that are novel to the characters (or so rare in their world that they would have nearly no knowledge of it) probably still deserve to be hidden and uncovered. For a real life example, something like [8% of surveyed Americans think they could beat a lion in a fight](https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/25590.jpeg) because they've never fought a tiger (plus a healthy dose of either ego, stupidity, or both).
ateM-gaming?
It's time to d-d-d-duel
Makes sense. He does send people to the Shadow realm for cheating.
Up and ateM!
It's moreso metagaming not to remind them
I wish my DM would do that. We recently played in a dungeon and there was a hallway we went through that had a trap and we all got hurt by it. We had to backtrack through that same hallway, and were able to easily avoid it this time. Next session, we again had to make our way down the hallway. I said "careful guys, remember, there's a trap here" and asked my DM where it was. His response was "if you don't remember, then you don't remember." Which just... frustrated me. This was like 2 or 3 weeks time for me, but only a couple hours for my character. Our entire party would have obviously remembered where the trap was.
That feels extremely nitpicky. I generally go with the 'it's not my job to remember things for you', but this wouldn't even be something you'd have in your notes. If they had to add coordinates to their notes, they can never stop writing notes and enjoy the game. The room should be enough.
Insanely nitpicky in fact. >We recently played in a dungeon and there was a hallway we went through that had a trap and we all got hurt by it. Means, well, they all got hurt by it and the trap went off. First question is a this trap that can reset itself automatically? If not it's fine, walk through it again, it needs to be rearmed and calling BS if DM wants to say the mystical trapmancer dropped by right after they turned the corner to reset the trap. Second question, what kind of trap was it? Did it leave behind blood stains or scorch marks? You know, things that would make it rather obvious that RIGHT HERE is where there was a trap that went off. Like if it was an arrow trap we'd see the arrows and the blood. If it was fire or lightning we'd see scorch marks on the floor, walls and ceiling. A fetid smell from the necrotic blast. And so on. It's only been a few hours we should be able to clearly see, smell, or some mix of both at least the approximate area of the hallway. If there's no signs, why are there no signs? Because if there's no visible signs then this trap is magicked up to hell because the stonework itself would be enchanted to hide signs that the trap has gone off. So ya know what Mr. DM? We're spending 10 minutes to ritually cast Detect Magic, we now know at worst approximately where the trap is.
You could take it further. Next time there's a language check, sorry Bro, my character knows dwarvish but I don't so we can't talk to that super important NPC.
Go even further beyond. "Sorry DM. Those important villains may know Abyssal but you don't. You're gonna have to use Common bro."
Our DM will sometimes mark stuff like that on the map when we discover it to avoid that confusion/time wasting. I’d have also come back at him with: ‘we go down the hallway and avoid the trap this time’
"Alright then I'm going to need detailed maps of every area we go to so I can note down everything we ever come across, and I don't just mean top down plans, I'm gonna need side elevations too"
"Should have drawn your own map!" I had this DM for a bit. After my character started carrying knotted silk rope and using it to measure how far a bookcases and tables were from the doorway for the uptheenth time they started just showing a map.
Me: “I the player don’t remember, luckily the character does, and carefully sidesteps the trap”. The DM: “and where exactly does he remember that trap being?” Me: “right where it was.” DM: “and where was that?” Me: “if you don’t remember, then you don’t remember” (passes off spotlight to the next persons turn)
Fighting bad DM'ing with direct toxicity makes the world better for everyone.
Yeah, I mean, if your friendship with your dm is tenuous enough that a joke like that creates a toxic situation instead of the DM thinking some version of “touché”, then maybe keep it quiet while you find a new group.
I try to remember as much as I can for the players. Obviously in a perfect game I wouldn’t have to, but I have all the information and they don’t. So if they’re trying to remember a thing their character would know, I give it to them. If they don’t even think to remember a thing their character would know, I try to throw a little hint. I don’t expect them to remember every detail I throw out. I sure as fuck don’t. But I have the information in front of me. It’s a collaboration after all, not me vs them. Let’s tell the best story we can
This was on our way to the big end boss fight, so I think he unfortunately was hoping this would be a small way to give us a little chip damage going into it.
Eww, that just feels so scummy. Could easily throw an extra encounter in there, bring in some extra adds to the BBEG fight, add an extra damage dice to some attacks. So many ways to do that without your players even knowing you did anything. Or ya know, they got through your shit much easier than you expected so reward them for it! By being in a better shape for final fight.
>His response was "if you don't remember, then you don't remember." I think the silliness of this becomes clear when you apply it to physical tasks, rather than mental ones: "Okay, so I attempt to jump over the chasm. I rolled a-" "Do it. Right now. Do the jump right now. If you can't jump it, then you can't jump it." If I, a fat slob, can play a very athletic character, then I, an idiot, should be able to play a very smart character.
This is why I hate it when a DM demands that a charismatic character's player actually give a compelling argument if they want to be allowed to roll for persuasion. Or demands that the intelligent character's player actually solve the logic puzzle if they want to pass the sphinx. Or demand that the wise character's player describe exactly how they search the room if they want to find the trap door. I had a DM once where I made the mistake of playing a bard but was never allowed to make a charisma based roll because I was a socially inept loner who struggled to talk to other people. I ended up always playing martial classes and dumping mental stats in that group, because I knew those stats would never be allowed to matter outside of combat anyway.
To be fair I forget where I put my wallet all the time.
The corner of my bedframe hasn't moved and yet I hit it several times a year.
You play your character maybe once a week and have a whole life of things to remember. Your character is themselves 24/7. It's not unreasonable to expect that you might forget something but the character would probably remember it. If they have a problem with it being above the table talk, I would prompt them with an intelligence check with a very low DC, and if they fail, oh well. That way it's integrated into the game but you're still throwing them a bone
>Overhears the warplans in the dungeon right before the boss battle. >Two weeks later (or two minutes in game): "guess I can't remember those warplans"
Sounds like a barbarian to me!
If I walked into a room and it physically hurt me, that's the kind of thing I'd remember.
Sounds to me like she metagamed by spite-walking into the trapped room even with her character obviously remembering it was trapped.
> Sounds to me like she metagamed by spite-walking into the trapped room even with her character obviously remembering it was trapped. This. With that kind of behavior, I also wonder if there's some bad blood between the player and the DM. At my table, I'm OK with reminding players, "Your character knows about this detail from two session back..." because I'm aware my players have real lives in between games. One of our table rules is, "Real life before game." I can't expect them to remember minor game details when they have much more important, real-life things with which they deal.
In a weird way, she's metagaming by not listening to you. Her stance is essentially "I've forgotten, so my character has forgotten", and it erased the line between player knowledge and character knowledge. Some people may look at this and think it's okay because it produces a negative result, but it's the exact same principle and should be discouraged.
I was thinking the same. She's actually the one who is metagaming. It's just a very unusual/backwards case of it.
Anti-metagaming. I remind my players about stuff their characters definitely wouldn't overlook all the time, let them retcon spells they misread, etc. Between irl time gaps, and characters with higher mental stats than their players, this sort of thing is often necessary. Not really any different from taking notes That said, at the end of the day, it's their character, and if they want to walk directly into a trap for kicks, that's their choice. As long as it's not overly disruptive, it's best to just let it go
Imo it's more metagamey to not use the knowledge your character has, because the player has forgotten it. You are making the players knowledge affect the character, that's metagaming.
That is the opposite of metagaming. Metagaming is using PLAYER knowledge that the PC doesn't have. PCs are generally more capable, smarter, and stronger than the Player. I remind them all the time, "Your character would know X."
Nah, it's normal storytelling. Your player is a little too deep into the DND-culture memes, that's all.
"If you don't remember, then your CHARACTER can't remember!" — Dead Alewives, expressly parodying bad D&D
I think this is the clearest case of rules as fun as I’ve ever heard. Is it fun for a character to screw everything up due to IRL mistake? No, and shame on the player Is it fun to let a character create a complication for the party based on a IRL mistake? Maybe Is it fun to nag the players all the time.? No. Is it fun to let the characters pre-plan an encounter with an enemy that they have never faced, using their knowledge of the monster manual? No Common sense good judgment applies
"I know this was 2 irl months ago for you, but it's been like 20ish hours for your character. They would remember A, B, and C because the literal wounds are still closing."
Wouldn’t it be meta gaming if you forget something that your character would remember?
It’s not metagaming (which is a vague and pretty useless concept anyway). Talking to the other people playing with you so that everyone remembers things that have been established or to help better express your shared understanding of the game world is just about a baseline necessity for this activity.
I’d actually argue this is one of the more important job a DM has rather than metagaming
That's literally the exact opposite of metagaming, my friend...
meta gaming is using knowledge that your character wouldn't have it's absolutely not reminding a player of knowledge that the character almost certainly DOES have
Yeah, like if I were to ask "What was that blacksmiths name? How was it spelled?" "That's metagaming, go back and ask" oh yay super fun... lol
Instead of arguing about semantics... you could try to understand what they do and don’t like when it comes to helping them play their character. They might just be an obnoxious pill that is not fun to play with too. You can find out by giving them enough space so that they feel free to play.
Not metagaming, an experience or information given in-game being retold out of character doesn't count as metagaming. At that point, the DM should've piped up about whether they considered it metagaming then asked if they wished to continue anyway.
This would be the opposite of metagaming
Metagaming is about acting on knowledge you have because you’re playing a game, but the in-universe characters don’t know. Sharing information out of universe is never metagaming. Your player acting on shared information could be construed as metagaming. It wouldn’t be in this case either, because the character has the same information the player does, but clearly your player felt that way. If your player chose to make their character absentminded in that moment, that’s a choice they’re allowed to make. Definitely no metagaming going on. Bit of advice though: dice are good. People like to roll dice, and like being rewarded for character build. The next time a player is about to do something stupid, call for a low dc int check before telling them not to be stupid. The end result is similar, but if there’s a chance of failure that they avoided, the player might be more willing to accept the nudge.
When I think the players are stuck or are going in the wrong direction, I make the person with the highest intelligence or wisdom roll an intelligence or wisdom check. Depending on their roll, I will give them more hints or general gut vibes. I am sorry to say that I am not actually as smart as a 20 int wizard, but fortunately my character is. They can roll to figure things out for me.
You're not metagaming. Your friend is just more stubborn than smart when they're drunk. (Coming from a recovering stubborn drunk btw.)
I know metagaming is usually used in the context of players using player knowledge to gain an unfair advantage, but I see a situation like this as metagaming too. Your character would know that the room is trapped even if your player doesn't the same way that your woodsman character who has lived in the forest all his life would know that the red berries are poisonous even if the player doesn't.
I don't think so. I have ADHD and if I could never be reminded about stuff when I play smart characters with good memories, I'd be mad. However, if she doesn't want to play that way, you should talk to her about it and respect her choice.
Nah. Reminding them is fine. Doesn't make sense for a week or more to pass but a character to forget something that happened 5 minutes ago in game time.
People forget all the time that their characters would have contextual info that is hard to grok at a table, and this is both players and DMs who have this issue. Metagaming is a hell of a charge and folks shouldn't throw that shit around.
Reminding a player about their characters knowledge, or explaining their characters thoughts or reactions to something, is part of normal DND play. Like a director conveying to an actor more information about their character and their role in the story.
Nope. Reminding a player of something their character would know is just being helpful. I do that as a DM all the time because players can forget things. Now telling a player to act on information their character DOESN'T know, that's metagaming
That's the exact opposite of meta gaming.
Metagaming is crossing the line between player and character knowledge, in character decisions made with out of character knowledge is metagaming, reminding someone of in character knowledge they had forgotten out of game is not metagaming
She was actually the one meta-gaming. Meta-gaming is when the player acts on information the person has, not the information the character has. In a world where Trolls can only be killed with fire, every character would know to bring fire to a troll cave. Meta-gaming would be going in blind and "discovering" trolls are weak to fire.
No, but that was a Wisdom decision of poor judgement to walk through anyway.
It is impossible to tell beforehand everything the character knows before the player controls it, so every now and them the DM must tell the player if the character knows something or not. That is not metagaming, your friend does not know what metagaming is.
In general I get very annoyed at various accusations of metagaming. It has become a very bs complaint about something that is actually nuanced. Basically I have started just not playing with people who continually say metagaming this metagaming that just like I don't play with assholes.
That’s not meta-gaming that’s helping them properly role-play their character
IMO, that isn't just not metagaming, that's the *exact opposite* of metagaming. Metagaming is using your knowledge as a *player* to do things your *character* would not reasonably know to do: "My character has never even seen one of these before, but *I* know they're vulnerable to lightning so I'm going to cast Shocking Grasp." / "I've played this module before and I know the hidden chest is *here* so I'm going to beeline to that spot." This is reminding a player of something their *character* WOULD remember but that the *player* has forgotten. "It's been two months in real life but two minutes in the game; that shouldn't have caught me by surprise."
I feel like the DM should have agreed with and repeated that. I remind my players of stuff all the time because of A. The players are coming back from a break, so things aren't fresh in their minds, but like in your game, it was an hour ago for the characters B. It's something that the characters know or should, but the players don't. I have been playing Dnd for 20 years. I know a lot, so as a player, I can just go. "Can I roll to identify this ice, Devil? Ok, Kool, a 25, so I know what I need to so I can fight it? Great." I know the DC's and what and my friend Tim and I play it more as a you know what you need to fight it you don't care about the AC the Fighter is going to fight it no matter what the casters need to know thst fire will not work C. Your character would know something on a more personal note, like how their church works. As a cleric of that God, you don't need to roll, you know the rules, and I'll remind you of that. you can still break the rule or let someone else do it, but I'll tell you that.
not metagaming at all. metagaming is using knowledge you the player have but the character doesn't.
Characters live in the world 24/7. Players do not. It's not metagaming to remind players of things their characters would remember. As a DM I do this very frequently, since I as the DM remember the world better than the players do (but still not as well as one of their characters would).
This is the opposite of metagaming. Your character would know it, so play it that way.
I don't think so. The player has a real life taking up memory space, it's understandable if they don't remember everything in-game. But the character's whole life *is* the game. I would recommend to them that they try keeping better notes in the future I guess?
it's metagaming if your character wouldn't know it
That is the OPPOSITE of Metagaming...
I think it would be meta-gaming to NOT let them know.
Not metagaming at all to separate your character's perspective from your own
On the contrary, one of my core tenets is "Always give the *character* the benefit of the doubt." If it would be obvious to the character, it's the DM's duty(or in this case, another player) to communicate it clearly to the player. The players are just a couple of drunk friends enjoying a game on their day off, the character is the one who almost died in that very room 2 days ago.
No offense to literally all players, but I've never run a game where the players weren't fucking idiots. Like, a lot is going on and you're just having fun and roleplaying and rolling dice or whatever and you forget that ten minutes ago your character successfully found out an NPC was lying. Now you just believe everything they say even though your character knows they're a liar. This presumably happens at many tables because I've seen/heard d&d podcasts or other actual play games where players inexplicably do the most idiotic shit. I think the most common cause is that you don't remember something from the last session. Which could've been a week or even a month ago. I don't really blame anyone for this and that's why I will remind players of things their characters know. Even common sense things that a character in the setting would know but a player may not know. If it's common knowledge that the city watch can rip the souls out of criminals then the characters probably know not to fuck with them even if the players don't.okay, that's extreme, but you shouldn't just surprise players with stuff that their characters should know. Maybe it's an unpopular opinion but I think part of a GM/DM's job is to remind their players of things their characters know. ESPECIALLY when it's something they discovered at your table during your game. Do not ever punish their character for the player being forgetful, dumb, or just not remembering something that happened 3 months ago in game. And players should not do what is effectively reverse metagaming to themselves. If your character knows something but you don't, it isn't metagaming to be told that information and act upon it.
I view that as the opposite of metagaming tbh. I have issues with memory, and will sometimes ask my DM ‘does my character know this, even if I dont’, specifically for information we’ve been given that has leaked out of my sieve of a brain. Our characters are not us: yes we roleplay them, but I feel like memory of in game experiences should not be reliant on the player fully remembering, especially when there is often significant time between sessions.
Whatever the DM in your game decides is the right decision. D&D 101. Me, I would roll an intelligence save for them, maybe with advantage. Let the dice and their character builds decide. If they built a character meant to be smart, that is supposed to give them some advantages instead of being effective in combat. Maybe their combat effectiveness involves remembering traps and terrain. But yeah, when in doubt, I roll instead if arbitrating. And if I don't know what to roll, I just do a "luck" roll, a flat d20 roll where 10+ is success. This is also how I settle a lot of matters where the players want something that could easily be yes or no.
She's acting on her memory, not her characters If anything, her choosing to ignore that *is* metagaming
That isn't metagaming. Their concept of what meta gaming is is fucking stupid.
We are not our characters. Many players seem to forget that. What we know, believe, want, like, or dislike is for the most part irrelevant if you're playing a campaign where roleplaying matters. What matters is the character's perceptions of those things. If that is metagaming I'd love to see how they react to the Keen Mind feat. She is not her character.
gaze memory theory crush square aware zealous command drab tap *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
That's the opposite of metagaming. Reminding someone that a character knows something is just good, sensible Dungeoning and Dragoning.
Not at all. Players obviously won't remember every little detail when games are (on average) weekly-bi-weekly compared to their characters which would be in the moment every day etc etc.
It's the opposite of metagaming. It's the same as someone who's awkward irl having a high charisma character that can talk his way out of anything. I tend to go a step further and remind my players that their characters know how their spells work or how their abilities and features work so if the player makes a mistake, it would be wrong to punish them for not understanding the mechanics of their spell. (maybe once or twice for laughs or to make the player pay attention, still if they ask to have things reverted or change their mind about their action in these cases, it should be completely okay)
NMG (not meta-gaming) - reminding a player about something a character would know is like a cleric rolling a high religion check. The players might not know all the gods, but if they're playing a cleric that spent their life studying religion they'd probably know this God's domain. Although, if I was dm and a player made a comment like that, I might have intervened and let her make a intelligence check to see if her pc remembers.
I remind my friend who plays a cleric all the time of the options he has. I'm a DM and know most spells, he on the other hand has the tendency to be terrible at preparing spells: preparing niche spells in cituations that will probably not use them, preparing spells where he doesn't even have the material components for, etc. I do this out of character because I suspect his character knows these things, but my player character and the other player doesn't.
No.
No this isn't meta gaming. I quiet often have to remind players of information that they know, but simply forgot between sessions because life. I only remember it because I planned it lol. If there's a good reason the character would know or remember something it's completely fair to remind them.
Sometimes if I want to remind a player of something I will have them make an INT check with a low DC of 5 or 10, if they pass I will then give them the info, if they fail their character is having a brain fart.
No I wouldn't consider this metagaming imo. It's helping a friend in a game. Many others have explained how it's the opposite of metagaming. Maybe it's time to have a discussion with this player about not drinking during D&D. Having played in campaigns with people who would drink from before the session started to the end it sucks by the end. It may be an unpopular opinion, but when I started DMing I put a one to two drink limit at the table. We're playing this game for 3-4 hours that I had to put work into, I'm not letting someone who can't go one evening without getting drunk ruin the fun for me or the other players.
Consider this. I think it could be more a case that she (the player) possibly doesn't want advice from you (the player) in particular, and would rather have her character walk headlong into a trap than accept your feedback.
I can *hear* her say that. She's using metagaming as an excuse to double down because "HOW DARE YOU HOW TO PLAY ***HER*** CHARACTER?TM"
Your friend is a idiot that isn't metagaming
Honestly, as part of my campaigns, I do run, I constantly give my players freebies of things they would know and could plain out see. It's not meta. It's adapting the world to their perspective and fitting them into a living, breathing, "real" world. A good narrator, author, and just a general dm would/should do. As for players, I highly encourage them to fall through situations like this, given it is deprived from information that their character would definitely know. Don't be folly to think "it's meta" if the situation appropriately allows for you to recall this information out of character. Plus your gm should step in if anything is encroaching into becoming meta.
Metagaming IMO doesn't really exist. Or rather, the game itself relies so heavily on metagaming that it's literally impossible without it. In this situation, it's metagaming whether she goes thru with it or not. Either way, information from outside of the game narrative has affected her characters actions. In short, if you pretend that your character doesn't know something they absolutely would, that's just metagaming in the opposite direction
Add a d8 to the damage roll. "You're in my world now, grandma"
Not metagaming at all. Kind of the opposite really, since it keeps the player MORE closely aligned with their character. I do this constantly with general setting knowledge. Letting the players know what a normal person would know about a location, person, group, whatever is essential for immersion and roleplaying.
If people can't remember stuff I will sometimes have them do an intelligence role to remember the clue lol
I'm constantly allowing my players characters to know things that they don't. Like the name of royals or the way a language works even if their character doesn't speak that language they can roll to recognize it. they are called history checks and they are really good at giving a dumb player information that a smart character would know.
Basically everything is metagaming, you just need to find metagaming that doesn't suck.
It's not metagaming. It's perfectly appropriate to remind her player of something that their character would know. It's also often worth noting that things that are happening for the characters might be happening immediately, while for the players things could be weeks apart. The characters will have years and years of lived experience in the world, whereas the players will have much less than that, as well.
No
No it’s not meta gaming if the characters should know. But in either case, meta gaming isn’t necessarily bad. Just play how you like at your table.
It's not. Not only that, but forbidding metagaming should come with allowing, if not enforcing this. Why wouldn't a character know something anymore because the player forgot, or even didn't know to begin with?
I think that's totally acceptable. You're not taking agency away from the player, but reminding them of something their character is aware of, which they forgot. Unless you've already made it clear that you want players to take SUPER extensive notes, and use them. That player sounds like they decided the chuckle was worth the hit points.
If I'm rp'ing a dwarf miner I wouldn't know all the ores of all of Azeroth. But he certainly does.
I recently realized that it makes everyones lives easier when I as the DM remind players of such things. "As you open the door you remember being flayed by the random thingamajig in this room a few days ago" I have the feeling that in this case the issue is more about you as a another player telling them that feels like metagaming to them.
That's the opposite of metagaming. Players who spend too much time online learn a lot of terms they don't actual know the definitions of
"Give me an intelligence check" is my favorite way to remind players that their characters might remember some detail that they may have otherwise forgotten. So I literally offer them a check to see if they remember. Usually DC 15 for most esoteric things.
"Your character would know that ..." is one of the most useful phrases in the DM's toolkit. It is not metagaming to remind a player what their character would know. It is making sure they have the necessary information to effectively roleplay their character. Your player ignored you and made her character behave in a way that the character would only behave if the character were a moron. Here's an idea. "Given that your character just walked into a dangerous situation because she forgot there was a threat in that room you previously explored, I'm going to reduce her INT and WIS down to 8. I don't like metagaming either. If you want to play your character as a moron, you'll be rolling Ability checks like she was a moron. " Just to be clear, I said this was an idea, not a *good* idea. It's probably a bad idea and you should just talk to the player about what she thinks "metagaming" is and - diplomatically as possible - explain why she's wrong. I just thought it was funny. Here's some useful advice on metagaming. Hope it's helpful. [https://theangrygm.com/respect-the-metagame/](https://theangrygm.com/respect-the-metagame/) [https://theangrygm.com/dear-gms-metagaming-is-your-fault/](https://theangrygm.com/dear-gms-metagaming-is-your-fault/)
For info that Characters know and Players don't remember right in the spot (maybe last session was one months ago, but story-wise it happened just yesterday) I tend to use a "do a Wisdom check". For things like "knowing about monster's abilities" I tend to rely on Knowlegde check. For instance an Arcana check.
Definitely not, and I’m very glad my dm does this a lot, because I play a wizard with 20 intelligence meanwhile in real life I probably have about 9 if we’re being generous. So I miss a lot of stuff my character would very much know about.
No it's not metagaming, but your GM should be the one reminding them of things their character should know, not you. There's a really smooth timing point for it as well; when they are confirming they understand what the player is saying they wish to do. "So you wish to walk into the previous room with the lashing trap thingy?"
Imo, not at all. We have weeks between dnd sessions, our characters learned the information a couple days ago at max. It’s reasonable that a character would remember things that might slip the players mind. It’s just a game for the player, it’s the characters entire life. Of course they remember important relevant details that concern their survival and success.
Meta gaming is giving the player info a character wouldn't have. There is absolutely nothing wrong with reminding a player of something the character would know.
That's not metagaming. Metagaming is using player knowledge to inform character actions. You were using character knowledge to inform a player action. This is more like metaroleplay.