A discussion of metagame concepts in game design

[Aldarc]

FATE is criticized for its meta mechanics, but having a fate point slide my way is just as meta, to me, as those vanishing hp, from weapon blows, fire, acid, exploding traps, that don't actually have consequences until I'm dying.

But then all rpgs have meta elements. They don't bother me, or break my immersion.

But what I appreciate about Fate in this regard is Stress and Consequences. Stress is not a traditional HP system, but is, instead, a more transparent about being a pacing mechanism representing your ability to remain in the action or scene. But you can potentially stay in the action longer if you choose to take Consequences that follow from the fiction: e.g., sprained ankle, publicly humiliated, bloodied up, etc. These are aspects that the players and GM can also then invoke against the player. "You find yourself unable to effectively pursue the thief because you have a 'Sprained Ankle' from earlier that impairs your progress." Or alternatively, the "bloodied up" aspect could be used by a blood hound-type bounty hunter who is tracking down the player. Or maybe the "bloodied up" is invoked against the player in a social scene because being bloodied-up does not create a good impression in this crucial moment. So this works into simulating the consequences and disadvantages from the narrative fiction in play.

 

[Ovinomancer]

And is this having a mechanical effect? While experiencing the searing pain of a fireball are the characters getting any disadvantages? After the sword slices through flesh, is there bleeding, which will continue to weaken the character until treated? Probably not, because fights in DnD have to be meta because of the sheer number of them. It's abstracted out of necessity. And once again, not a problem, but certainly meta. The loss of hp mean very little until they start creeping toward 0, therefore, I'm not in my character's shoes, experiencing the world through her eyes. FATE is criticized for its meta mechanics, but having a fate point slide my way is just as meta, to me, as those vanishing hp, from weapon blows, fire, acid, exploding traps, that don't actually have consequences until I'm dying.

But then all rpgs have meta elements. They don't bother me, or break my immersion.

I think you're confusing abstract with meta. Hitpoints and damage in D&D is abstracted, yes, but not metagame.

As a hane mechanic, death spirals may appeal to a sense of realism, but they aren't fun to play. Abstracting injury to hitpoints may not appeal to realism, but it's much more fun to play.

The harm levels in BitD, which [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] was coyly referring to with his posts, work better from a realism stance and fit the narrative intent of those rules, but they quickly act like a death spiral. A L2 harm is seriously imparing in a range of situations while L3 is crippling. L4 harm is pretty much one last desperate effort before being done. L5 is death (mbc fudged the levels a bit). And that's allowing for BitD's mechanics of pushing to ignore or reduce the harm for an action. I love BitD, but I'm always careful with using harm as a consequence because of it's death spiral effects. That's not much fun.

 

[Arilyn]

But what I appreciate about Fate in this regard is Stress and Consequences. Stress is not a traditional HP system, but is, instead, a more transparent about being a pacing mechanism representing your ability to remain in the action or scene. But you can potentially stay in the action longer if you choose to take Consequences that follow from the fiction: e.g., sprained ankle, publicly humiliated, bloodied up, etc. These are aspects that the players and GM can also then invoke against the player. "You find yourself unable to effectively pursue the thief because you have a 'Sprained Ankle' from earlier that impairs your progress." Or alternatively, the "bloodied up" aspect could be used by a blood hound-type bounty hunter who is tracking down the player. Or maybe the "bloodied up" is invoked against the player in a social scene because being bloodied-up does not create a good impression in this crucial moment. So this works into simulating the consequences and disadvantages from the narrative fiction in play.

Yes, this is what I love about Fate as well. Aspects and consequences work so well. I buy new games, think this is cool, but would work even better in Fate.....

And the Fate community have really great ideas for stretching the game into all kinds of genres and styles.

 

[chaochou]

I think you're confusing abstract with meta. Hitpoints and damage in D&D is abstracted, yes, but not metagame.

Abstracting injury to hitpoints may not appeal to realism, but it's much more fun to play.

'Fun to play' is a metagame consideration. The characters are not deciding whether they are 'fun to play'.

Having fun is metagame.

 

[Kobold Boots]

'Fun to play' is a metagame consideration. The characters are not deciding whether they are 'fun to play'.

Having fun is metagame.

Metagame = making decisions that affect gameplay with knowledge that would not be gleaned from gameplay.
Not Metagame = making decisions that affect gameplay with knowledge that a character could glean from gameplay.
Fun = the whole point of playing the game in the first place.

So fun itself is outside the scope of the metagame discussion but enables the game such that the discussion could happen. By itself it is not metagame.

Thanks,
KB

 

[chaochou]

So fun itself is outside the scope of the metagame discussion but enables the game such that the discussion could happen. By itself it is not metagame.

Thanks,
KB

No it isn't.

And none of your = signs amount to an argument. It's just empty gainsaying.

Having fun playing a game is part of playing a game. it is not a decision made by a character. It is therefore both part of the game and explicitly metagame.

To say hitpoints are designed the way they are because 'it is fun' means they have been designed based on metagame considerations.

It's self-evidently true.

 

[Kobold Boots]

No it isn't.

And none of your = signs amount to an argument. It's just empty gainsaying.

Having fun playing a game is part of playing a game. it is not a decision made by a character. It is therefore both part of the game and explicitly metagame.

To say hitpoints are designed the way they are because 'it is fun' means they have been designed based on metagame considerations.

It's self-evidently true.

Abstraction = not metagaming
Your opinion = your opinion
My opinion = my opinion, so as far as I'm concerned = I'm right.

With Love
KB

 

[The Crimson Binome]

And is this having a mechanical effect? While experiencing the searing pain of a fireball are the characters getting any disadvantages? After the sword slices through flesh, is there bleeding, which will continue to weaken the character until treated? Probably not, because fights in DnD have to be meta because of the sheer number of them. It's abstracted out of necessity. And once again, not a problem, but certainly meta.

Abstracted does not mean meta. Simplified does not mean meta. It's not meta to describe HP loss as a physical injury, but not apply penalties to ability checks or track blood loss; it's just an abstract simplification.

Nothing in D&D gameplay is necessarily meta. The closest thing to meta-gaming in D&D is the suggestion that DMs contrive encounters toward what the party is capable of handling. Everything else can be handled either in-character or out-of-character, without cross-contaminating the information involved.

 

[Manbearcat]

Sorry [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] (yes, that is the sort of reply I was looking for) and @ Emerikol . I’ll get back to your guys’ responses as soon as I can. Pretty tied up.

I think you're confusing abstract with meta. Hitpoints and damage in D&D is abstracted, yes, but not metagame.

As a hane mechanic, death spirals may appeal to a sense of realism, but they aren't fun to play. Abstracting injury to hitpoints may not appeal to realism, but it's much more fun to play.

The harm levels in BitD, which [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] was coyly referring to with his posts, work better from a realism stance and fit the narrative intent of those rules, but they quickly act like a death spiral. A L2 harm is seriously imparing in a range of situations while L3 is crippling. L4 harm is pretty much one last desperate effort before being done. L5 is death (mbc fudged the levels a bit). And that's allowing for BitD's mechanics of pushing to ignore or reduce the harm for an action. I love BitD, but I'm always careful with using harm as a consequence because of it's death spiral effects. That's not much fun.

Yup, I was referring to Blades (also, I think you may have a different copy than mine because mine is H1 -H4; Lesser, Moderate, Severe, Fatal...no H5!)!

Death Spiral is certainly a concern (because it’s not fun and not genre coherent). However, I think a Harm model could pretty deftly hook into D&D’s mechanics, allowing for these looming threats, but also allowing for interesting decision-points and archetypal realization.

For instance, with 5e:

1) Imagine a Fighter’s Second Wind allowing them to shrug of H1 outright or turn H2 into H1.

2) Imagine a Cleric’s Cure line being able to grant a new Saving Throw to move (say) H2 to H1, with higher Cures able to mitigate higher Harm levels or provide Advantage to the Saving Throw.

3) Imagine Armor being a limited use active defense in that you can use it at your discretion to mitigate Harm or provide Advantage on a Saving Throw. It “recharges” once repaired (giving Fighter-types a crafting niche).

Stuff like this should alleviate the Death Spiral. You’d just have to sort out the Saving Throw DCs (that and the severity of Harm could be tailored to genre tastes).

 

[Ovinomancer]

'Fun to play' is a metagame consideration. The characters are not deciding whether they are 'fun to play'.

Having fun is metagame.

Yes, game design is, by definition, meta. The resulting design may just be an abstraction. Our decision to play a hame because we find its mechanics fun is meta. The mechanics aren't meta because of our having fun with them.