I understand that the meta should never affect a player's decisions for their character. For example, if a player at the tabletop is also a DM and happens to have run the dungeon that their character is now in, they'll have detailed knowledge of things they should avoid, where the treasures is, and so on. It's standard etiquette, at least at tables I've DMed for and played at, for players like that to avoid using the meta to benefit their characters.
I know that, but I've let my meta-knowledge 100% affect decisions I've made now on my second playthrough. Case in point, knowing what I know about the ultimate end-game for Astarion, I chose the criminal background for my Dragonborn bard main for my second playthrough. I did it so I wouldn't need a dedicated rogue for picking locks and disarming traps. I also did it so I could just eliminate the threat Astarion's existence poses for the realm. I killed Astarion immediately after meeting him, knowing that I had just prevented a terrible evil from being released upon the world, one way or another.
Even worse, in my first playthrough I romanced Shadowheart. Knowing that I didn't want to do that again, and not wanting to even be bothered with her storyline, I burnt her to a crisp on the beach, which doesn't fit, at all with how I intend to morally play this character. It was a decision driven entirely by me, the player.
Am I the only one? Let's find out. To that end I've included a poll. Two choices only. Yes, you've allowed the meta to affect character choices for 2+ playthroughs; or no you haven't.
