Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7708261" data-attributes="member: 42582">On metagame mechanics in generalThe function of metagame mechanics like "doom pools", hit points, etc, is to make it more likely that playing the game will produce something that is recognisably a story, rather than a mere sequence of events (eg it has rising action and a climax).That's the whole point of metagame mechanics - to avoid the need to fudge to achieve something that is recogniably a story.Eg Gygax liked the idea of combats that had a sort of "back-and-forth" flow of momentum towards victory, of the sort he saw in Errol Flynn fencing movies; and didn't like the idea of combats with lots of blood and one-shot kills and the like; so D&D used hit points - a metagame mechanic (as Gygax explains in his DMG) that produces this sort of story.(You won't get the same thing out of RQ, or RM - both of which are very simulationist in their combat mechanics - without fudging.)He also didn't like the idea that the hero chained to the rock face being breathed on by the dragon had no chance of survival - a bad story! So the saving throw rules give the chance - and as Gygax explains in his DMG, these are a metagame mechanic - eg the successful saving throw means that the chains unexpectedly broke, or the fighter found a crevice in the rock to duck into, or something similar.Huh?5e still uses hp, which still serve the same metagame function that Gygax described. It drops classic metagame saving throws for 3E-style simulationist ones, but it introduces a new metagame mechanic, namely, Inspiration.It also still uses non-simulations experience points (tied only to combat, rather than to gold as well), and I think for much the same metagame reason as Gygax gave in his DMG: adventuring is more exciting as a focus of play, and hence as a vehicle for advancement, than is training.But it's poor form not because it's metagaming but because it's cheating.But AD&D players were absolutely expected to metagame. They were expected to use their own intelligence to guess what sorts of traps a GM might place, or what sorts of monsters s/he might use; they were expected to be familiar with the Monster Manual (Moldvay Basic tells players, not just GMs, to read the monster chapter); all this was part of being a skilled player. And it's the reason why new monsters, and new ideas for traps, were such a constant feature of magazines and modules of that era - this was the way that the GM would out-metagame the players! (Without resorting to cheating.)No doubt, as [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION] has noted, this all changed in the second half of the 80s and especially the 2nd ed AD&D era. But there were 10 to 15 years of RPGing before then (taking 1974 as a starting date, it's about 10 years if you date it to the Dragonlance modules and about 15 if you date it to 2nd ed AD&D itself).******************************On metagame mechanics in Conan RPGingI think "the rest of the group" is a red herring, given that Conan almost always works solo.But to the extent that he sometimes has friends - in Tower of the Elephant Conan's "savage instinct" lets him "wheel suddenly" and kill the lion that attacks him; and Taurus later gets poisoned by a giant spider.In The People of the Black Circle there are multipe similar examples - one I just found involves Conan's Stygian girdle leading the green-robed acolytes to resort to "the whirl of blades", which results in one Irakazai bleeding to death among the rocks.And looking at solo action - in the Scarlet Citadel Conan has been holding off all comers (mechanicall, perhaps, calling on bonuses and so building up the doom pool), and then is taken down by Tsotha-lanti (perhaps cashing in the doom pool dice eg to make it true, in the fiction, that he has a purple lotus juice ring).This sounds like a less-than-optimally designed metagame mechanic, because it doesn't seem to give the GM very good guidance on when to invoke it, and what the result should be.But it also sounds like an issue of GMing skill and experience.There is a lot of discussion and advice among RPGers on how to run these sorts of mechanics - mostly under the label "fail forward", although the utility of that discussion and advice can go well beyond "fail forward" in the strict sense.As far as a Conan-esque game is concerned, complications would include things like the purple lotus juice; having the Argus be sacked by Belit's pirates; having an unexpected rescuer actually want to kill you (I'm thinking of the Scarlet Citadel); etc. One way that all of these differ from what you describe in your Star Wars game is that they are not complications that just mechanically worsen the situation of the player (eg by running out of ammo, or having a gun blow up, or even by shooting out the lights). Rather, they change the situation and its stakes - Conan is captured; Conan is no longer just travelling to Cush fleeing the justice of the city, but is caught up in an intense and dangerous romance with Belit; etc.I think you mean you're disappointed that they went with it. I assume you're not disappointed in them - they didn't do anything wrong, that displays moral failing or bad character.</blockquote>

Verification