OK so lets get this straight. Metagaming.......

1. Every single person in DR metagames unless they arent apart of any chats, don't read forums, don't read GM announcements, don't log onto elanthipedia, pretty much the only way you can't metagame in DR is if you log into the game and have zero outside contact with anyone or any source of info pertaining to the game. Which I seriously doubt anyone in the DR community does that so pretty much everyone metagames.

2. In reference to say for instance two open people out of game are arguing in a chat and say opne person say you can't kill me come try and the other person comes kills him in game how is that bullying. It was an agreed oput of game consent between two open peopl. OPEN meaning you don't have to have a reason to begin with etc.

3. I would like to stop seeing people use that word because most the people who use it use it to try and downgrade another and at the same time by posting on forums about metagaming they are meta gaming because they are posting on forums the hypocrisy just baffles me on this subject.

" Its like when I'm right I'm right, when I'm wrong I could been right, so I'm still right cause I coulda been wrong, you know, and I'm sorry cause I could be wrong right now, I could be wrong, but if I'm right... "

Heard meta gaming in regards to table top/ pen and paper games, the person using it as some kind of insult is confused.

>>Jtizel4sho: Every single person in DR metagames unless they arent apart of any chats, don't read forums, don't read GM announcements, don't log onto elanthipedia, pretty much the only way you can't metagame in DR is if you log into the game and have zero outside contact with anyone or any source of info pertaining to the game.

Strictly speaking, metagaming means more than reading or chatting about the game outside of the game. It is allowing your character to act on knowledge he shouldn't have. Basically, it's the insider trading of role-playing.

When it comes to game mechanics (what to hunt, what spell to choose, how to train stats), metagaming is seen as a necessary evil, and people don't care about it. Similarly, most people don't care if you reach out via OOC channels to request a raise after dying.

The type of metagaming that primarily bothers role-players is when you bring outside knowledge into character vs. character RP. For example, Isharon is a member of the Inquisition. If I rolled a Necromancer to find out who other Necromancers are, and then I had Isharon act on that knowledge, that would be metagaming, and people would rightly assume I was not role-playing in good faith.


>>Jtizel4sho: 2. In reference to say for instance two open people out of game are arguing in a chat and say opne person say you can't kill me come try and the other person comes kills him in game how is that bullying. It was an agreed oput of game consent between two open peopl. OPEN meaning you don't have to have a reason to begin with etc.

Arguing with someone out of the game should have no bearing on in-game conflict, at least not for someone who claims to "mostly try to keep stuff IC."

However, that isn't metagaming; that's just being OOC (and giving role-players a reason not to be PvP open).

---

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!

Paladin new player guide: https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Paladin_new_player_guide

armor and shields: https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Armor_and_shield_player_guide

<I hate to ever agree with Tarlof

<Still agreeing with me thanks for elaborating.


Careful guys I would hate to see both Fahijeck and Isharon considered my alts.

<Dude, you didnt make it a dozen posts without reminding everyone you needed to be the center of attention.

CONCORDANTLY


https://i.imgflip.com/1onfi3.jpg

>I mean, only for an extremely narrow definition of "agreed" that requires ignoring almost everything Isharon wrote?<

How is that not agreeing metagiming is metagaming is metagaming. Your basically saying it's okay to steal from wal-mart but it's not ok to to steal from a mom and pop shop. stealing is stealing. metagaming is metagaming the accususation or context in how it is put is the same. To use that to negatively define someone at the same time metagaming yourself you are even worse to me than the person you are accusing the whole thing is ridiculous just stop.

" Its like when I'm right I'm right, when I'm wrong I could been right, so I'm still right cause I coulda been wrong, you know, and I'm sorry cause I could be wrong right now, I could be wrong, but if I'm right... "

You are not the Hero that DR deserves but what it needs right now Tarlof. Keep strong and keep posting.

>You are not the Hero that DR deserves but what it needs right now Tarlof. Keep strong and keep posting. <

dunna dunna dunna dunna BATMAN!

" Its like when I'm right I'm right, when I'm wrong I could been right, so I'm still right cause I coulda been wrong, you know, and I'm sorry cause I could be wrong right now, I could be wrong, but if I'm right... "

>That's some hate from old times, bringing up the name of someone that was essentially harassed and abused right out of the game.

Eh. I had some gonif-hate, but she mostly ended up bringing it on herself by being selfish, self centered, and not very intelligent. Played plat for a while, where she camped out (with alts), and people would always try to be nice to her, but within a few weeks would really dislike her.

I'm still not entirely sure why, it was like a super power.

>>You basically agreed with me. Any info taken from a website or a chat or anything and is used in game including maps for geni is metagaming.

Yeah, if you ignore all the nuance it's basically the same thing.

>>Any info taken from a website or a chat or anything and is used in game including maps for geni is metagaming.

Using a genie map isn't megataming by default, because if your character knows their way around X, the map is more helping you, the player, play the game, more than giving your character knowledge they shouldn't have. Looking up auction items on epedia isn't explicitly metagaming because you can reasonably argue that those items would be discussed and disseminated, thus becoming common knowledge.

Going "based on a forum post I know Bob's character is plotting to kill the King, so I'm going to have my character warn the King and become the hero" is metagaming.

And even if we go with the "anything can be metagaming!" route (I disagree with this route – making things easier for the player is different than making things easier for the character), as Isharon mentioned there is an acknowledged difference between "good" and "bad" metagaming, and they're pretty clear cut lines.

>>I would love to keel Tarlof everyday but I get tired of hearing bully and metagaming lame excuse for anyone to use ever.

Something like this wouldn't be metagaming as much as being an unpleasant person to engage with in the game and the core reason why Guarded exists.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

<Something like this wouldn't be metagaming as much as being an unpleasant person to engage with in the game and the core reason why Guarded exists.


My character is actually a very pleasant person to engage with in the game. Perhaps you are metagaming your opinion based on my forums posting.



The truth of the matter is everyone metagames.


Consider the recent sub plot of 5-6 players who were involved with GMNPC Lilena there were specifics of the event that they alluded to over the gweth, only the group and the GM were aware of these details.

Despite this no one accused them of being OOC or ignored them. Some may argue it was a testament to the integrity of the reputation of the player that others could rely on BUT that very reputation is metagaming in and of itself.

One participant emailed the GM requesting inclusion in the group. Metagaming.

Infact the very reason these players were chosen to be in the know by the GM who played Lilena and then had their characters sworn to secrecy was in a way.... say it with me.

Metagaming.



I dont see a problem with any of this. They had fun I think, if you aren't what is wrong with you?

TBH I'm pretty sure the number one factor that gets you included in events is being aware and responsive when a GM is trying to RP with you. If you're offered a hook but don't bite that's sort of on you.



Mazrian

<TBH I'm pretty sure the number one factor that gets you included in events is being aware and responsive when a GM is trying to RP with you. If you're offered a hook but don't bite that's sort of on you.

Script checks are always pass fail.




So each one of these 5-6 people by your opinion should be able to get the same amount of community respect interaction and GMNPC affiliations if they login on an anonymous novice.

>>Script checks are always pass fail.

You're still equating RPing with passing script checks? That's probably a big part of why you feel so left out.

<You simply play your character in the world as it exists, and if you do it well and circumstances line up, you may be brought into a plotline at any given time.


Yeah it's quality role play, not OOC afiliations.

Roger that.

So if that's true I guess we can expect some obscurely known characters to crop up in future events. Played by equally obscurely known players.

Unless...

Well......

Metagaming.

<and if you do it well and circumstances line up

Also the implication that literally hundreds of players are not playing their characters as well as a half dozen is rather insulting.

>>Also the implication that literally hundreds of players are not playing their characters as well as a half dozen is rather insulting.

Ignoring the latter half of my statement is surely a good way to take that out of context. You're pretty good at this.

>>Your statement implies elitism which is reinforced by the paradigm that was insinuated in the sub plot. An idea instilled in each of you by the GMNPC.

No, this is what you took away from it. I am implying that both being played decently and having circumstances line up are largely what get you involved in a plot in anyway.

>>Other characters had to behave in the event as if these opinions were coming from the GMNPC's themselves rather than a character.

No one is required at anytime to behave in any specific way. They choose it. The onus is on the player to determine how their character reacts to things happening in the game. If they choose to metagame the situation, that's on them.

The fact that some characters knew a few things that others didn't is not only entirely realistic, it happens in practically every event in DR (and all MUDs for that matter).

>>Infact the very reason these players were chosen to be in the know by the GM who played Lilena and then had their characters sworn to secrecy was in a way.... say it with me.

>>Metagaming.

>>Yes by all means elaborate on your inside information that will detract from my metagaming argument.

Generally I have ignored most of your posts/bait entirely. On Reddit, I even tried to toss you a line to try and help. In the depths of my insanity, I even defended you to some people saying that perhaps you really were just interested in getting involved but weren't sure how.

Now it's your turn. How about YOU tell ME about your inside knowledge that proves your metagaming argument? Because as one of "the chosen" even I don't know why I ended up part of the group. So, please, by all means, enlighten me. What do you know that people who were actually in the group do not?

>>So if that's true I guess we can expect some obscurely known characters to crop up in future events. Played by equally obscurely known players.

I consider Klines pretty obscure pre Elpalzi events. I still consider him obscure.

>> no one called you buffoons. No one questioned your sanity. No one ignored you.

You have, literally, no idea what you are talking about. Not even a little. How could you possibly know this?

>>Other characters had to behave in the event as if these opinions were coming from the GMNPC's

Entirely wrong considering that before the event was over, no one knew the group was working with Lilena for the most part.

>>Being critical of anyone from this group becomes akin to defying lore.

In reality, people who were critical of people in the group, created interesting RP for many.

>>It unfairly places responsibility-authority and by its very nature animosity of players against those who are granted it.

I don't entirely disagree with this part actually...

>>More than anything this is why we will never see an obscure player play a key role in an event.

Incorrect.

In all this, please don't forget my initial question Tarlof. "How about YOU tell ME about your inside knowledge that proves your metagaming argument? Because as one of "the chosen" even I don't know why I ended up part of the group. So, please, by all means, enlighten me. What do you know that people who were actually in the group do not?"

>The problem is, no one called you buffoons. No one questioned your sanity. No one ignored you. No one gwethsmashed you. Why? Because these characters being played have players other players knew of reputably, or knew OOCly of the information they were never supposed to know. not the characters reputation. Other characters had to behave in the event as if these opinions were coming from the GMNPC's themselves rather than a character. Especially when the words proved true and the characters had insight to lore being crafted like a soothsayer. Being critical of anyone from this group becomes akin to defying lore.

This is a bit of an academic argument, in my view.

Are you saying that critical roleplaying elements should have been selected at random? That seems risky to me, and as a little-known player and player of a little-known character I, for one, would not want that.

Not sure what feasible solution is at the other end of this point of view.

>>>I am not a troll. People want to challenge the point that there is no meta in this game. But with a very a simple glance back at the last event we can reveal all sorts of meta.

>>The people who deny these claims in the span of a few posts declare themselves in fact believers in metagaming and acknowledge it's existence.

>>If you want to be exasperated with me because I pointed out some things some consider unsavory details of the experience I would remind you that I said early on.

I characterized them as posts/bait because, frankly, after a few of your posts in this thread I have begun to once again question your intent. But, you say you are not a troll, so I will move forward operating on that assumption, fine.

While it is tangential to the point of my reply, I don't really see people challenging that metagaming happens. People are challenging what constitutes metagaming. Two distinct things.

>>If your annoyance is because you defended me, I would suggest you don't.

Let me be clear so there is no misunderstanding: My annoyance is that you are effectively calling me out by stating: "Your statement implies elitism which is reinforced by the paradigm that was insinuated in the sub plot. An idea instilled in each of you by the GMNPC" and "Infact the very reason these players were chosen to be in the know by the GM who played Lilena and then had their characters sworn to secrecy was in a way.... say it with me...metagaming."

You will not imply or state that I am elitist or say I was "chosen" for some "metagame" reason without backing it up with evidence, which you still have not, incidentally.

<You have, literally, no idea what you are talking about. Not even a little. How could you possibly know this?

>>You answer this yourself later.

<Entirely wrong considering that before the event was over, no one knew the group was working with Lilena for the most part.

First off, quoting me with emphasis is not an answer to the posed question. Second, I don't see how you could possibly have an answer to the posed question. Unless you were standing over my shoulder, or the shoulders of one of the other "chosen" you still have no idea what you are talking about here. In point of fact, many people expressed disbelief and ignored us. You have no way of knowing what interactions we had unless you were there at all times, which you were not.

And even if others did find out that a group was working with Lilena, that does nothing to address how you would know if people called us "buffoons, questioned our sanity, or ignored us."

Let's take this a step further for a moment. Using what you say later in your reply, "I don't actually think you Klines are obscure." That to me reads that you believe Klines is notable or famous in some way. Therefore, Klines, the IC character, has a reputation that might lend people to believe him even if he makes a claim that seems outrageous or without being able to given his full reasoning. He has developed, ICly, a reputation of being trustworthy. How is that not in the exact spririt of being IC and roleplaying?

>>In addition it's a generalization given my opinion of the communities reaction.

What community reaction? With what data did form your opinion? Did you poll the community? Did you read a few posts on these forums or Reddit? What data moved you to come to the "community reaction" you perceive?

>>I don't actually think you Klines are obscure. Which is a compliment.

Thanks! I've never really looked at Klines as famous though! Hiw bowler hat on the other hand...

>>I have no idea what criteria you and your fellow players were chosen for participation. I can guess given the circumstantial evidence as I have it.

I agree, you don't know what criteria (if any) caused us to be "chosen." Based on how I ended up as part of the group, my guess is random chance. I never received any contact from GMs by any medium at any point before, after, or during my involvement. No SENDs, no e-mails, no Discord, no instant message. So, it is a mystery to me! On that note, despite me writing it twice, you still have not told me what inside knowledge you have that proves your metagaming argument. At best you've referenced it as "circumstantial evidence." I eagerly await hearing what you know about why/how we were chosen.

>>And thanks for the engage man :)

We may be past this point, but sentences like that, absolutely make it hard to believe you aren't trolling. The use of confrontational language is a signature of trolling.