What Do You Think Of As "Modern TTRPG Mechanics"?

Thomas Shey said:

One also has to account for why a given player is averse to such things, too. Back in our TORG days, one of my players had no real problem with using Possibilities (which while clearly serving the function of a metacurrency, actually represent something that exists in setting and is known by some people including pretty much all PCs) but found the card play element (also strongly metamechanical) disruptive. This had nothing to do with how in-setting either process was, but simply they could spend Possibilities without disrupting their play process (which was strongly immersive) but the card play pulled them out of it. The former was not more intrusive to them than handling die rolling and other mechanics handling, but the latter was.

Click to expand...

Micah Sweet said:

For me, I simply prefer that mechanics represent something in the setting, as accurately as practically possible, as often as practically possible. If players are making meta decisions in game, outside of what their PCs should be able to do, there better be a very good reason why that's needed as far as I'm concerned.

Click to expand...

Fenris-77 said:

I think it very difficult, bordering on impossible, to account for 'immersion breakage' in any kind of definitive way. Some folks have no issues with mechanic X while others find it immensely immersion breaking. Lots of folks equate meta mechanics of various sorts with immersion issues, but not with enough fidelity across the board that I think it's useful to connect the two. Partially as well because immersion at the table isn't just about the individual player, but also the system, and all the other players at the table.

Click to expand...

Thomas Shey said:

Yes, Micah, but you're not everyone. My point was the woman I was referring to didn't care whether it was metamechanical per se or not. She played, and plays all kinds of games with metamechanics. It was a question of how much additional cognitive overhead they added.

Click to expand...

Thomas Shey said:

As I said, it doesn't require much to discuss some of it in terms of how much attention it requires though. Spending a metacurrency is quick and low-effort unless you're prone to decision paralysis; deciding how and when to play a card hand that has a bunch of cost-to-benefit stuff in it is a different story.

Click to expand...

Pedantic said:

I think those two issues are conflated routinely. The sense of "immersion" meant by "the mechanics get out of the way and I forget I'm playing a game" and the sense indicated by "I'm making decisions my character can't make" should be treated as separate concerns. It would be great if we could disentangle the words entirely, because they propose entirely different design goals and constraints.

Click to expand...

Micah Sweet said:

Are you everyone? Is the opinion of the woman you're referring to more important than other people's? Different people have different opinions about meta-mechanics. I explained mine, you explained someone else's.

Click to expand...

Pedantic said:

I think those two issues are conflated routinely. The sense of "immersion" meant by "the mechanics get out of the way and I forget I'm playing a game" and the sense indicated by "I'm making decisions my character can't make" should be treated as separate concerns. It would be great if we could disentangle the words entirely, because they propose entirely different design goals and constraints.

Click to expand...

Thomas Shey said:

I agree with you in principal, but its complicated because "making decisions only the character would make" and "forget I'm playing a game" are sequential requirements for some people. They're incapable fo the second without the first. The problem is when they assume that's a prerequisite for everyone.

Click to expand...