Let's Talk About Metacurrency

[Gorgon Zee]

Not a fan.

I want the player and character decision spaces to be aligned, I want the decisions to be made in-character. Metacurrencies obviously go against that.

I think it depends how you think of them. You could think of them as spending extra effort. As a real-world example, when I would fight in martial arts, I'd have a generally sustainable level of effort that I could use for a match, but every now and again I'd want to exceed that and "spend effort" to try something different. I think that is modelled well by a meta-currency.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Problem: Superhero universes do not generally operate under consistent physical principles to simulate. Comics, as a form of modern mythology, operate as they do because certain narrative conceits are applied - simulating such a universe would generally call for including mechanics related to those narrative conceits.

In superhero RPGs it's the giant, bubble-lettered onomatopoeia that keeps popping up over my head..."BLAM!" "POW!"...that always yanks me out of my simulationist immersion.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is not even remotely true....like not even close. From series to series, sometimes even from comic to comic, we see the Hulk or Wolverine vary in what they can accomplish or suffer. Some vary quite a bit more, like Shadowcat or Gambit... its messy, and MHR mirrors that perfectly.

But in truth that statement is missing the entire point of supers games, terribly so!

The way that MHR works is to do what do other system can - allow Spiderman to fight the Hulk or Wolverine to fight Galactus. It handles the way comics work - narrative IS the driving force 100% of the time, not any sort of real work physics. I can explain Cortex for folks if they are unfamiliar....



Depends on the character. The metacurreny is same game regardless, for ease of player reference. But for Wolverine its willpower, for Dr. Strange is sorcery energy, for Cable its bullets/gadgets etc.

The meta in meta currency means we are not making every page use a different word. But the function is purposeful within context the setting, as I pointed out above.

For one thing, this post is absolutely full of subjective opinion presented as objective fact. I don't take anything you say here as more than what you, personally think of the subject.

Beyond that, if what you're saying is true and narrative is all that matters, why have stats? Why have numbers at all? Things are ranked in most superhero games, including MHR, so there can be an objective scale of comparison. Look at FASERIP (the original Marvel RPG). There are stats all over the place, measuring physical and mental attributes, ranks of various powers, speed, defense, even popularity, and so on. Look at Mutants and Masterminds. Stats and math measuring actual things in the setting all over it. In both cases, if a character tries to exceed their limits, there's rules for that, and those rules are measured in a way that doesn't rely purely on narrative.

Now tell me again how none of that is important, because a superhero RPG is 100% narrative as a "driving force", whatever that means.

 

[Desdichado]

Something like action points is really the only one that I've ever really been on board with. I don't like the concept of metacurrency very much, because it's anti-immersive.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think we had this conversation quite recently, but a lot of metacurrencies are not things outside the setting. They are things within it such as willpower, luck, magic, or force points. I accept that the representation of those things may not be fully simulative though - the character doesn't have the knowledge or control over it in-setting that the player does in-play.

To my mind, willpower and luck are not real things that can explicitly affect the world, or at least are represented by stats for the character (although I've never been comfortable with luck as any kind of explicit mechanic, as I feel the dice handle that). Magic/force, on the other hand, are real (albeit supernatural) things in the setting, and so don't fall into the category of meta-currency to me. IMO what matters is what a mechanic is supposed to represent and how well it does so. If what it represents isn't a real thing in the setting, it's meta.

 

[Reynard]

Something like action points is really the only one that I've ever really been on board with. I don't like the concept of metacurrency very much, because it's anti-immersive.

What are "action points" in this regard, that aren't metacurrency?

 

[Gorgon Zee]

Metacurrency as a mechanical resource
This is the use of a currency as a resource; used to modify a mechanical effect. Like burning extra effort, a re-roll, an auto-success or a modification to a resolution technique. I'm generally a fan of this -- it gives a player a chance to signal when things are important to them and to grab some spotlight time when things go well. An example from real-world is the "hot streak" in sports, where the belief is that a player has a streak where they are performing better than they usually do -- without a strong reason why they are doing better.

Metacurrency as a creative resource
During a session, both players and GM will be creating stuff all the time. If absolutely no creation is happening at the table, then all the players are doing is choosing from a set of pre-defined options, and that seems antithetical to the base concept of roleplaying games. Now a lot of in-game creativity is fairly light -- the player looks for a way into the house, and the GM invents a second-story window. Also the GM is very typically the final arbiter of the game, so a player might suggest something creative that gets vetoed ("I go buy a crowbar"; "sorry, no such shop exists in this village"). But in the games I enjoy, players create more than just trivial stuff, and the GM encourages player creativity. Honestly, it seems a bit egoistical to think that the GM is the only group member who can create anything important.

Now, in pretty much every game I've played, players will just do this. They'll suggest there's an inn nearby, or ask the GM if the Duke has a platoon stationed nearby. Meta-currencies, I think, are a helpful resource for managing this creative process. For me, the biggest advantage is that it encourages players to contribute equally. Without a currency, it's often one or two players who create stuff and the rest might feel that they aren't great at that, so they don't try. Meta-currencies counter this trend as players hate to waste a resource so it both limits the very active creators, and also encourages the less active creators. Another advantage is that these systems also typically have rules that help define the impact of a creative effort, so it helps players and GMs come to a shared understanding of the size of the proposed effort.

 

[billd91]

I think it depends how you think of them. You could think of them as spending extra effort. As a real-world example, when I would fight in martial arts, I'd have a generally sustainable level of effort that I could use for a match, but every now and again I'd want to exceed that and "spend effort" to try something different. I think that is modelled well by a meta-currency.

Depends, in this case, is right. I might go so far as to say that if someone can deliberately spend extra effort, it's not properly a metacurrency at all. Rather, it's a currency. While there may be meta- aspects about it, as there are with virtually all abstracted game mechanics, being something the protagonist (you in a real-life contest or a PC in a game) can deliberately call on takes it out of the meta- zone.
I think of them primarily as resources the player gets to spend that would be above and beyond/outside of their PC's intentions or direct abilities. They would generally align with a PC's intentions since we're rarely spending metacurrency to make our PCs fail, but they aren't perceivable as a real resource the PCs can direct to boost their chances of success/auto-succeed/substantially alter the situation/get a clue/save their bacon.

 

[RenleyRenfield]

...

Now tell me again how none of that is important, because a superhero RPG is 100% narrative as a "driving force", whatever that means.

I think maybe there is a lot being lost here, dunno where you got any of that.

Let's recap.

You wanted an example of how metacurrency was more than mere "player wants extra power/control over game" so I gave that.
You wanted to know how MHR tied its meta currency to in-game and in-world meaning. So I gave examples.

So then you now want to know what "Diving force is"....

When a author writes a comic, they never start with a list of numerical anything. full stop.
They, as Stan Lee said, "Think of the stories." They start with "what would be a cool tale to tell here and what characters are involved.

So narrative drives the events. Whatever the author wants to tell, is what we get to see happen. And at no point do they do anything more than a gut check for power levels, world physics etc. Again, see Wolverine fight Galactus, its silly with how much it blows past reality.

Now let's consider that from ttrpg perspective. We are doing the same thing. the only difference is that we want there to be a quantitative amount of 'unknown'. We want to be half author and half reader. We want to say what we want to see take place, and then we want the unknown to tell us how it turned out.

So in MHR they do this by establishing values and mechanics based on narrative results.

Hulks D12 strength is cool, but Spiderman has only D8 strength. Just like the comics, we see that Hulk is stronger. cool.

So we then build our dice pools, we roll dice and we see what happens when Hulk attacks Spiderman. with simple roll off, the dice give us a winner, one or the other. But that is not a great story, not the story we want to tell. we want to see a movie worthy, epic, multi battle clash. Which means that strength stat is just not enough here.

And no amount of extra stats would ever be enough.

You could add Dex, and Stamina, and Wits, and a thousand skills - and still the author would think of something those rules would not cover.

So in we get meta currency.

This is is where we get how the author (player) description of what happens, can now cover a wider array of creative actions, than a thousand hard-and-fast rules can.

The meta currency has rules, it has limits its is part of the mechanics AND the fiction in-world.

So now we see the player of Spiderman using their plot points to make Hulk laugh, show him mirrors and ultimately de-angry the hulk = hulk is defeated. or maybe we see webbing used to slow Hulk down while reinforcements are called, or maybe we see the Hulk trying to smash but not kill, and maybe we see dams break and wash the battle into the bay, and soooo many other things can and do happen in comics.

Notice how at no point is the real-world values or "how many lbs can Spiderman lift" a hard limit on creativity here? because at any time, EXACTLY like the comic is this from - we see the author - the narrative - take control of events and make the situation dynamic in a way that follows "what a series of clever actions and counters and events!".
And never are we limited to = "oh he rolled a crit and has 4d6 damage its all over in one hit!"

So meta currency aids with overcoming the dice where needed. BUT it also aids in adding actions or events or elements/people where the narrative (players) deem best.

Notice also how I never said 'none of anything not important'.

It's ALL important = and its ALL driven by the narration of players.
driven means "there are tools and rules, but they are at the command of the players"

And metcurrency is one excellent way to ensure the players have the command they need to achieve the fun they desire.

 

[Fenris-77]

Something like action points is really the only one that I've ever really been on board with. I don't like the concept of metacurrency very much, because it's anti-immersive.

I think this is an easy answer, but not a very useful one. First, lots of things that people casually label 'metacurrency' don't mess with everyone's immersion, just some people. Second, immersion isn't a single 'thing' that the same for everyone or subject to the same external factors. The throw a third log onto the fire here, the term 'anti-immersive' is needlessly polarizing even taking into account my first two points.