D&D (2024) The Problem with Healing Powercreep

[pemerton]

One thing I've noticed is that the people who aren't bothered by it generally can't even grasp what is being talked about.

<snip>

I think understanding it makes it objectionable. Those who don't find it objectionable generally don't understand it.

I've GMed 1000s of hours of Rolemaster. I understand the "simulationist" aesthetic in RPG design and adjudication.

My point is simply that there is no particular correlation between that aesthetic, and actual immersive experience in play.

 

[pemerton]

There’s just such a clear difference in experiencing play and analyzing play.

In much the same way that there is a clear difference between (say) writing an essay, and analysing and explaining how to write essays. Or that there is a clear difference between (say) operating a locomotive, and calculating the motion of a locomotive on a physics exam.

The experience of play is a socio-psychological process. The question of what supports or impedes immersion is an empirical question about that process, not a logical question about the design of games.

 

[Chaosmancer]

What they are calling meta, I have called plot coupon or dissociative mechanics. It is a real thing for some of us at least.

We want the abilities of the characters to be known to the characters and activated by player using the characters will and not just the players will. For example, if I have a luck point that I can use whenever I really need a good role, who is thinking about that luck point. Not the character. When the player alone makes choices that are not in world real to the character that is a plot coupon. For some people like myself it is very much a game ender.

Why can the character not think about it? I've read stories where the character had the ability to spend a limited amount of "stuff" to change fate or twist luck in their favor. Sure, it doesn't appear in Tolkien, but it appears in plenty of other authors. So why are you so certain that this is not something that CAN be done?

Examples of plot coupons: martial encounter & daily powers, luck points, fate points, hero points, inspiration, are all things that turn your PC into a pawn. Mechanics that are not plot coupons are things the character knows about in game or are methods of communicating truths he character knows to the player.

Now it is true that many people who don't mind plot coupons don't see a lot of things as in world like we do. We played the first three editions of D&D without plot coupons. There have been plot coupons ever since in D&D. That doesn't mean if you don't care about plot coupons that you didn't think of something as a plot coupon that we did not think of that way. The key is whether we could find a way to relate it to in world character decision making or not.

The world the character is in works the way you decide it does. If you want a world where people are aware of the spark of inspiration burning in their chest like a star and can choose to burn that blaze brighter for a surge of effort... it is trivial to do so.

The only problem would be, that you don't like that narrative. Not that the narrative cannot exist.

 

[pemerton]

I think the tension, though perhaps slight, might come from having to think out-of-character as to what limited (mechanical) resources to spend at that moment in the game, and to what extent to spend them.

Put another way, the character isn't thinking "Should I use two dice or three here?" but the player is, hence that bit of tension.

The character is thinking, "Will I give this my all, even though it will leave me drained!"

The notion that players worrying about exhaustion levels, or level drain, or hp loss, is "diegetic", but suddenly when it comes to drawing on a pool of points to buff a roll it's not, is bizarre.

 

[pemerton]

The world the character is in works the way you decide it does. If you want a world where people are aware of the spark of inspiration burning in their chest like a star and can choose to burn that blaze brighter for a surge of effort... it is trivial to do so.

Far more prosaically, I recently ran a half-marathon. I did about five practice runs in the month leading up, and in my training peaked at around 17 km. In the actual run, I could tell when I got past my training distance, and I had to make decisions about how hard to push at what point, how to manage the niggling pain in my left hip, etc.

The notion of spending a plot point is no less a 1:1 model of what I was doing, than is the notion of worrying about hp loss or exhaustion levels or however else D&D models effort.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

But they can memorise those spells without requiring a roll. @FrogReaver seems to be saying that's metagaming, and you "liked" the post. So I'm having trouble following.

Likewise for casting many of them (eg Fly doesn't need a roll to be successfully cast; nor does Web - the rolls for victims determine whether or not they escape the web, not whether or not it comes into being).

Being able to do something automatically was not the issue. But having a meta resource that sometimes allows you to do things automatically is different. Like people do not know that they have "I can do two things without a fail today." That's not a thing!

How is spending a spell slot to cast different from spending a "plot point" to climb?

Because the wizard knows they have spell slots and intentionally uses them.

The character might feel tired. Exhausted. Spent.

Why is it not called "stamina" or something like that then? If you are tired for reasons other than spending plot points (or is that not possible?) can you still use plot points?

Much like a D&D character who has only a handful of hp left.

They are badly hurt.

Or who has spent all but their last 1st level spell slot.

They literally know that they have power to cast one first circle spell, and that's it, and can tell as much to their allies.

I don't see how it's any more silly than a group of D&D players planning around how many levels of exhaustion each of them can take before their PCs are unconscious or dead or whatever.

Are exhaustion levels now metagame too?

No. They represent what they say the represent. Acquirement of them also is often quite random, so you cannot plan around them that way. Also they don't give you autosuccesses in the tasks, so that part of the planning cannot happen either.

My point is that there is no 1:1 correlation between suffering an injury and keeping a tally on a bit of paper. So the latter is not "diegetic".

But it can be seen as a mechanical representation of a thing that is diegetic. At least under my interpretation the characters roughly know how badly they've been beaten which corresponds to the player knowledge of the HP.

And in play, the whole resolution by spending a "plot point" - for those familiar with the game - is just one smooth and quick thing. Which is my point: you asserted that it must mean more time spent thinking about rules than being my character. But there's no actual reason to think it must.

Look. I am not saying that using plot points is cumbersome. But it is meta, and some people don't like that. When I said "more time thinking about mechanics" I meant thinking mechanics that do not correspond to the character knowledge of capacity, ie. thinking solely mechanics as mechanics as opposed to thinking them as a representation of character knowledge. I don't get why you need to argue that there is no difference, when there clearly is. I am not attacking your preferences, I just wish we could agree that these things are different and that there are different preferences.

 

[pemerton]

Being able to do something automatically was not the issue.

It was for FrogReaver:

In your latest description of the mechanic there was a scenario where the player could just succeed by spending a resource. The character trying really hard cannot fictionally guarantee success. That’s the disconnect.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Far more prosaically, I recently ran a half-marathon. I did about five practice runs in the month leading up, and in my training peaked at around 17 km. In the actual run, I could tell when I got past my training distance, and I had to make decisions about how hard to push at what point, how to manage the niggling pain in my left hip, etc.

The notion of spending a plot point is no less a 1:1 model of what I was doing, than is the notion of worrying about hp loss or exhaustion levels or however else D&D models effort.

I tend to agree that they are representing the same thing. I think the main objection is "thinking about how hard to push" is different than "thinking about how much to spend" in the same way that thinking about the clock is different than thinking about the test in front of you.

But, as I said, both are fine to represent mechanically, because you cannot perfectly replicate a character's mental state regardless. No matter what the rules say or you try to do, you aren't currently bleeding from a chest wound and staring down six orcs, so you can only emulate that headspace.

 

[pemerton]

Like people do not know that they have "I can do two things without a fail today." That's not a thing!

<snip>

They represent what they say the represent. Acquirement of them also is often quite random, so you cannot plan around them that way. Also they don't give you autosuccesses in the tasks, so that part of the planning cannot happen either.

So, here is a rule for starvation in 5e D&D:

A character can go without food for a number of days equal to 3 + his or her Constitution modifier (minimum 1). At the end of each day beyond that limit, a character automatically suffers one level of exhaustion. A normal day of eating resets the count of days without food to zero.​

So a character knows exactly how long they can go without eating, and exactly what the consequence will be, and can pace their rations around that knowledge.

How is that "diegetic" in a way the example that I gave is not?

 

[Chaosmancer]

Being able to do something automatically was not the issue. But having a meta resource that sometimes allows you to do things automatically is different. Like people do not know that they have "I can do two things without a fail today." That's not a thing!

Neither is mana. Unless you write the story to include that as a thing. So why can't you write that into the narrative?

Because the wizard knows they have spell slots and intentionally uses them.

But spell slots are not a thing! No person on this earth has ever had a spell slot. So now what?