Meta-game activities

[Fox1]

Re: Meta-game activities

 

How do you guys handle these meta-game thinking/acting problems?

 

1. Speaking 'in character' and then claiming that the insult or joke or challenge just uttered was 'out of character' when there is some foreshadowing that it was not well received;

 

3. Interspering joking around (always welcome at my table) with formulating a plan for minutes and minutes (not welcome in a surprise situation).

 

4. Using personal knowledge not defined as knowledge in possession of the character (either from personal background or information that is generally known to PLAYERS ina campaign or scenario, but not their CHARACTERS). (For example: GM: You get a cell phone call from your brother to come over to his house right away. Player: Ok, Im going to get a suitcase and put all of the knifes in the kitchen drawer in there, and Im going to go out to the garage and bring the chainsaw, as well. And my handgun...").

 

I am interested in how others deal with this stuff. I usually just disallow it by explaining metagame activities...

 

Any of the above would result in a exchange of ideas about the concept of playing a character in a rpg and what type of out of game information is suitable for the campaign I'm running or running in.

 

If the exchange didn't result in a change of behavior, someone would be looking for a new game.

 

Point 3 has to be rather extreme for it to be problem as I don't run my in-game actions in real time.

 

 

Rather simple.

 

 

 

2. When using minis to map out complex combat, using 'bird's eye view' to decide what actions to take, rather than relying on actual character perception. WHile this is allowable in a war game, in an RPG or 'real life' no one can take in a whole mass melee as if one were a casual observer...

 

I don't consider this a problem in the least.

 

The primary reason is that my players are normally running highly skilled combatants- professional warriors and adventures. In actual fact they are doctors, lawyers, engineers and the like- they are in no way professional warriors.

 

Thus extra time and OOC discussions used to determine combat actions are to my mind a completely fair way of making up for a lack of instintive and trained player knowledge. The final results are also far more suited towards the heroic adventure styles my games seek to model.

 

So for the most part- let it rock.

 

Two exceptions:

 

If there is something on the map that I'm of the opinion they wouldn't be aware of yet- I don't place it on the map.

 

If there is something on the map that only some of the team members can see and others can't (and there is no communication method between team members) - I may ask for proper in-game behavior reflecting that fact. I have never had a player refuse, not one that remained in the game.