I am an old time D&D player coming back to the game.  Working with my son to build his own campaign as a first time DM, I shared a few of my thoughts here and learned that in this community I was believed to be Railroading the Players.  I've read several posts about the player's agency.

But I also hear about Meta Gaming and how it must be avoided.  I would like to understand the limit of meta gaming that may be acceptable.

If a DM describes a textbook lair of an animal and one player says, "Get a Fireball Spell Ready …" to defeat the enemy because he believes he knows what the foe is, is that meta gaming?  Is it meta gaming to tell your party to use blunt weapons because you are facing skeletons?

I imagine that characters get some tutelage in adventuring before they take that first bold step.  In that experience I would think they are instructed about many run-of-the-mill monsters; how to fight them and their weaknesses and strengths.  "Remember lad, don't stick a torch in a dark hole if you think there might be brown mold in there."

So how much knowledge from the monster manual may be used in game before you face a monster?

My basic standard is to not give verbal advice about what I think we are getting ready to face.  I may state clearly, "I draw my sword and place my torch in my off-hand." But I don't say, "Hey, I bet we're going to be fighting zombies or other undead in a second."  After a few rounds I might ask, "What's the best way to kill a troll?"  But I wouldn't offer that thought before we had seen a troll.  What do you think defines the limit of meta gaming?

Quote from MusicScout >>

I am an old time D&D player coming back to the game.  Working with my son to build his own campaign as a first time DM, I shared a few of my thoughts here and learned that in this community I was believed to be Railroading the Players.  I've read several posts about the player's agency.

But I also hear about Meta Gaming and how it must be avoided.  I would like to understand the limit of meta gaming that may be acceptable.

If a DM describes a textbook lair of an animal and one player says, "Get a Fireball Spell Ready …" to defeat the enemy because he believes he knows what the foe is, is that meta gaming?  Is it meta gaming to tell your party to use blunt weapons because you are facing skeletons?

I imagine that characters get some tutelage in adventuring before they take that first bold step.  In that experience I would think they are instructed about many run-of-the-mill monsters; how to fight them and their weaknesses and strengths.  "Remember lad, don't stick a torch in a dark hole if you think there might be brown mold in there."

So how much knowledge from the monster manual may be used in game before you face a monster?

My basic standard is to not give verbal advice about what I think we are getting ready to face.  I may state clearly, "I draw my sword and place my torch in my off-hand." But I don't say, "Hey, I bet we're going to be fighting zombies or other undead in a second."  After a few rounds I might ask, "What's the best way to kill a troll?"  But I wouldn't offer that thought before we had seen a troll.  What do you think defines the limit of meta gaming?

 
1. would it be unreasonable for the character, based off of age, background, race, proficiencies, and what they have already seen to know it?

2. are they using info they wouldn’t really know: example- “that’s a red dragon. It has 178 hp and can multi attack and has 3 lair actions”

3. Trying. To get away without rolling to begin Doing something their character clearly wouldn’t know how to do. 

4. coordinating with the players out of character of how to handle an upcoming thing because they played this campaign before and the others didn’t (spoilers)

I can keep going. But you can probably get the gist of it from here yes?

Now. To your scenario about the “before adventuring they would...”

apply that logic to real life and see if it works.

does everyone know how to cook their own food or do their own laundry before living on their own?

does everyone know how to do the job they apply for before going to work?

etc.

remember. A level 1 adventurer. Is only different from an NPC “commoner” in that their stat block isn’t 10s in everything and 5 hp. But it’s X hp with Whatever stats they have instead of 10s.

but otherwise they are the same level as commoners

It is hard to avoid Meta Gaming unless you have a whole group of first time players. You cannot remove the knowledge from a  persons head.

What I am doing in my campaign is I am only using a monster one time.  Even my seasoned players are encountering creatures they have never encountered before but have only seen as a name in the book.

Eight Pack - I believe your point #1 is consistent with my view that many run-of-the-mill monsters would be known to players.  Point #2, yea, straight up.  If a player was subtracting HP from a known value, then he has crossed the line.  But let's face it, the more experienced players do know so I guess they best keep that knowledge to themselves.  Point #3 I guess is situational.  Getting away without rolling to try and do something they shouldn't know how to do, is possibly a gray area of RP.  Point #4, is to me the biggest problem of them all.  I don't play the published campaigns so far, and I recently listened to an argument that made me think I should.  But there are a lot of folks that read the whole adventure before they play it, and that's only going to lead to trouble.  And then there are folks that will play modules more than once.  I would think that is going to lead to other problems as well such as a player that seems to always have the answer and steps up before anyone else can say "boo."

As for doing laundry and cooking, well, I knew how to both those things before I was eighteen.  I never enjoyed cooking for one, but I certainly knew how.  As for the job, I was an exceptional student, and I'm not boasting when I say that I knew my trade better than most the first day on the job.  But not everyone graduates so well …  What I didn't know was who do you need to contact to apply for this permit, or how much is the going rate for concrete delivered in March.  These are things I had to learn on the job.  So some stuff I knew and some stuff I needed to learn, and I think it would be the same for player characters.

I still think a level 1 character should be allowed a little room to know a few things.  I would guess their mentor told them about the most feared monster he ever faced, or the time they almost died and decided they would stop adventuring.  But if someone said, "Remember these 'monsters' have 21 hit points." then we're in dangerous ground.  As DM, those monsters might just have gained another 5 HP after I heard that said at the table.

Meta gaming is basically using knowledge that the player knows but the PC may not know. 

If the player peeks at the adventure notes and knows there is a room full of bad guys then fireballs it, that's meta.

If the PC has never seen or heard of a troll before, she would not know their weakness to fire. etc.

Depends on how much you think the heroes learned in hero academy.

Players just need to take themselves out of the game. They shouldn't have a single bias if they want to roleplay, unless that bias is one shared with the character.

A fun fact is that game designers will sometimes take acting classes to know how to do things with plot and characters better. They don't want bias or etc. to interfere.

Quote from MusicScout >>

Eight Pack - I believe your point #1 is consistent with my view that many run-of-the-mill monsters would be known to players.  Point #2, yea, straight up.  If a player was subtracting HP from a known value, then he has crossed the line.  But let's face it, the more experienced players do know so I guess they best keep that knowledge to themselves.  Point #3 I guess is situational.  Getting away without rolling to try and do something they shouldn't know how to do, is possibly a gray area of RP.  Point #4, is to me the biggest problem of them all.  I don't play the published campaigns so far, and I recently listened to an argument that made me think I should.  But there are a lot of folks that read the whole adventure before they play it, and that's only going to lead to trouble.  And then there are folks that will play modules more than once.  I would think that is going to lead to other problems as well such as a player that seems to always have the answer and steps up before anyone else can say "boo."

As for doing laundry and cooking, well, I knew how to both those things before I was eighteen.  I never enjoyed cooking for one, but I certainly knew how.  As for the job, I was an exceptional student, and I'm not boasting when I say that I knew my trade better than most the first day on the job.  But not everyone graduates so well …  What I didn't know was who do you need to contact to apply for this permit, or how much is the going rate for concrete delivered in March.  These are things I had to learn on the job.  So some stuff I knew and some stuff I needed to learn, and I think it would be the same for player characters.

I still think a level 1 character should be allowed a little room to know a few things.  I would guess their mentor told them about the most feared monster he ever faced, or the time they almost died and decided they would stop adventuring.  But if someone said, "Remember these 'monsters' have 21 hit points." then we're in dangerous ground.  As DM, those monsters might just have gained another 5 HP after I heard that said at the table.

 Agreed.

their mentor is essentially “you” the DM.

Just straight up tell them what they know for #1

Whoops almost forgot one:

spellcasting meta:

announce a spell is being cast. And have your players do the same.

theres a short count from that to decide counterspell or countercharm or whatever.

then announce the spell itself, once spell name is announced. In counterable.

heres the Grey area there though...

if it’s a spell they know or would have prepared kinda thing. “You might recognize the spell”  and do a more secretive manner of expressing to one another.

now: this all said. This ^ is only if you have problems with meta’ing spellcasters spells and such. 90% of campaigns you won’t need to do this.

Thanks Eight Pack.  But do I risk intruding on the player's agency if I tell them what they do or do not know, and what they can and can not do?

I think it would be fair to ask them how they know something. If their background says their hometown got raided by goblins it would be reasonable for them to know about goblins, but that doesn’t mean they know anything about gelatinous cubes. 

And I think characters could know some things without them being meta gaming. They could know a red dragon breathes fire, but know how quickly it recharges would be a bit much. 

And I really have to disagree that the only difference between a level 1 character and a commoner is stats. A commoner can’t wield a sword effectively or cast a spell at all. A level 1 PC has undergone years of training. It seems reasonable that during that training they picked up some information about monsters. 

Quote from Xalthu >>

I think it would be fair to ask them how they know something. If their background says their hometown got raided by goblins it would be reasonable for them to know about goblins, but that doesn’t mean they know anything about gelatinous cubes. 

And I think characters could know some things without them being meta gaming. They could know a red dragon breathes fire, but know how quickly it recharges would be a bit much. 

And I really have to disagree that the only difference between a level 1 character and a commoner is stats. A commoner can’t wield a sword effectively or cast a spell at all. A level 1 PC has undergone years of training. It seems reasonable that during that training they picked up some information about monsters. 

 
a sorcerer can’t wield a sword effectively.

a fighter can’t cast a spell at all.

a commoner is proficient in clubs. As evidence by the +2 to hit when all their skill mods are a 0.

there’s not as much difference as you feel, by raw. It’s absolutely reasonable they picked up SOME information.

not ALL information.

ex: knowing which color eye of a beholder is which type of magic and which beam.

vs

ex: kobolds don’t like sun.

ex2: kobolds don’t like sun is good.

kobolds usually serve some kind of dragon, may not be as good if they have no reason to know it. (Not a ranger favoring dragons/kobolds. Or a dragonborn. Or Draconic sorcerer. Or their background maybe hermit/outlander had them living in mountains where they may have seen and ran from this)

but if your background is a city watch let’s say. Yeah. You might know quite a bit about thieves ruffians smugglers etc. but what would you know about things city watch don’t deal with like Krakens, liches, giant badgers, etc.

the DM is the one who puts the kabash down, and draws the line at reasonable. And metagaming.

edit: the weapon proficiencies and such you listed are a result of your class. Commoners are the same level 1 they just have no class. That’s it.

also.... if you don’t just give commoners the “avg” hp of their hit die. They can easily have more hp than your level 1 wizards and sorcerers.

edit2: I’d be happy to debate raw and rai semantics of commoners vs level 1 adventurers in an appropriate thread, or in PM. But for here on this thread. I’d prefer to stick to answering the OP about what is metagaming and what isn’t, and what can be used for determining where to draw a line for it. Since it’s subjective up to DMs for where they want to draw their lines.

Quote from MusicScout >>

Thanks Eight Pack.  But do I risk intruding on the player's agency if I tell them what they do or do not know, and what they can and can not do?

If you're the GM, then it is your job to tell them what they can and cannot do. They can do whatever they want within reason. "I jump up 100 feet!"  no. or actually, "You try to jump high and get about 4 feet off the ground."

So let's take an example using some of the stuff up top.

The players have been told in town that if they take the north road, they better be ready in case they are attacked by Kobolds.  Kobolds have been heard to attack caravans on the north road.  The players thank the well intended advice and state they will be leaving on the north road in the morning.

1) OOC, one character says, "Hey, that's no big deal as long as we cover the distance where the Kobolds are during the day.  We can cover 20 miles on average in a day so if the Kobolds are within that distance we'll be past them before we stop to make camp.  Kobolds don't like sunlight."

The party sets out and they make good progress on a poor quality road.  However, they begin seeing signs of previous raids where torn up carts, animal bones, arrow shafts bleached by weeks in the sun occasionally litter the side of the road.  By early evening you find a good spot to camp for the evening.  It is a wide spot on the mountain pass with a trickle of a creek you can use for water.  The mountains provide shelter from the wind but there is nothing for your mule to eat so you feed him from the rations you brought, rough oats.

2) OOC, a character says, "I'm not sure we have covered all the ground where the Kobolds are.  We might be attacked tonight."

3) OOC, another character says, "I heard about this campaign from others and the DM attacks the party with Kobolds on this road to start a story element."

4) OOC, another character says, "Well, Kobolds have settlements where they typically worship a dragon.  Usually the dragon is present and demands tribute."

5)  OOC, the first character says, "Let's get ready by taking a short rest during dinner.  This will allow us to ready things in advance of their attack."

6) A paladin character says (in character), "I should take the last watch.  This will allow me to put my armor on when I wake up."

7) Another player says (in character), "I ready my spells.  I am going to be ready to cast an illusion so that if we are attacked by Kobolds I can make a dragon appear that will distract and confuse the Kobolds.  If that happens, remember that it will be more effective if we're not attacking.  So try to shelter and hide and lets see if that will work."

8) … more IC and OOC discussion about who takes which watch.

All of this happens (statement by statement) before the DM can say, "Hold on, wait right there."  So what does the DM say after each remark if anything?  I don't want to tell you what I would say before I hear what you think.

Pretty much the characters would know quite a bit about common creatures and places.  Ya might never been to to the North Pole, but I doubt you'd go wearing shorts, sandals, and a tee shirt.  For less common and critters which come in many types, like spiders, snakes, oozes, slimes, puddings, etc.  Would likely know general stuff, but not specific, like venomous or non-venomous for snakes outside you local area, the conformality of shape and difficultness to detect the oozes, but not what each colour does/reacts.

To answer @MusicScout's query:

1.  No problem, kobolds are well known in these parts, if the characters didn't know it the locals would, probably dropped in casual conversation.
2.  Logical deduction, most folks know how far they've gone over a certain amount of time in a travel mode they use often.
3.  Snitches get Stitches
4.  Depends on the world really.  This is borderline and really depends on what kobolds are in the DM's (or adventures) world.
5.  Not sure how this helps at all, doesn't seem like they've used any resources.  If this is/becomes their standard operating procedure, no biggie, just let's the DM know when to attack them.  (DM's DO get to Metagame without question)
6.  This will become SOP for the party most likely.  Though who is going to help the paladin?
7.  Snitches get Stitches
8.  etc.

I think after each OOC statement I might ask, "How does your character convey this thought to the party?" I don't mind at all if players talk about stuff like this OOC. But if their characters decide to say, do a forced march to avoid kobolds on the basis that Kobolds don't like sunlight, that is an IC action taken with what appears to be OOC knowledge. Why are the characters taking this action? Justify it for me, I would ask. If the player then says, "We just told you," I would ask, "And how does your character know that Kobolds avoid sunlight?" If there's an IC justification, fine. There very well might be.

Honestly, it's up to you and your table. I'm completely fine with meta-gaming as my games are also games of player skill, not just character skill. But other DMs have issues with their players knowing the attack capabilities of a Red Dragon and using that in game without some knowledge check. I personally don't bother with this as it sets up player-DM interpersonal conflict.

Metagaming: 3 (therefore 5, perhaps 4 as well although that lore might be considered common knowledge if NPCs have mentioned Kobolds)

Metagaming if happening in advance of an attack (rather than in response to an attack): 7

After 3 you should intervene, either talking to the whole party or that player about bringing knowledge from outside the campaign in. Remind players that their characters should be acting on in-game knowledge.

If a player tried 7 after that warning then I'd ensure that each 'ready' action covered 6 seconds of the rest, therefore using all their spell slots (assuming not using cantrip) and also depriving them of any rest benefits.

Ultimately EVERYONE meta games to some extent, the question of how much you are willing to allow is up to each DM themselves.

Something as simple as planning your attack while waiting in initiative is technically metagaming (your characters aren't waiting around to find out what other people do in a real fight after all), however this is one that is pretty much universally accepted as OK. As is taking a lot longer than the "six seconds" a turn uses to decide what to do once it is your turn.

If you are OK with what the players are doing that might not be "in character", then go for it. Be it displaying knowledge they might not have previously been exposed to or talking among themselves when technically that player's character isn't present for the conversation. If you're not OK with it, then talk to your players about it.  

OK, well I think it was a good conversation.  I guess we just deal with it as it comes up and develop a mutual consensus (at each table) on how much metagaming should happen.