Let's Talk About Metacurrency

[Reynard]

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.

I mean, they are clearly talking about themselves. i don't think we need to assume every poster is making proclamations about how other people should play.

As to immersion and metacurrency: I get how backtracking/retconning by way of metacurrency might disrupt the sense of immersion that comes with the flow of play, but I personally do not think immersion is of particular importance. it is cool when it happens in the moment, but it is not something I think is worth chasing all the time.

 

[Fenris-77]

I mean, they are clearly talking about themselves. i don't think we need to assume every poster is making proclamations about how other people should play.

As to immersion and metacurrency: I get how backtracking/retconning by way of metacurrency might disrupt the sense of immersion that comes with the flow of play, but I personally do not think immersion is of particular importance. it is cool when it happens in the moment, but it is not something I think is worth chasing all the time.

Some play styles chase immersion specifically, which is fine and cool. Where the mistakes creep in is when people want to talk about it like it's one thing, when its not, or about metacurrency as another and opposite thing, which it isn't. I wasn't taking issue with anyone's playstyle, just in repeating facile talking points that only serve to muddy the waters.

 

[Lanefan]

This sounds like a skill issue. I find it trivially easy to incorporate such things into a consistent narrative. You just build on the things that are already there.

As informed by the initial die roll, right?

This is a misperception I think. Most games that feature such things frame it as the dice roll isn't the final word, precisely because other factors may come in later. This is known as Fortune in the Middle. The dice roll represents a likely outcome - he doesn't seem persuaded, the missile doesn't seem to be on target - that may then be superceded. If people narrate it as 'You're definitely dead and your head falls off, oh wait you're spending a point :rewind noise:', again that seems like a skill issue.

The dice roll directly informs the actual outcome; all the other mechanical effects and-or roleplay that try to alter the odds one way or the other have in theory been done before the dice get rolled, and the dice as the final arbiter then tell me what to narrate.

Which also means that once the dice are rolled an the result known there's no "Hey, wait, I meant to [do something that changes] that roll!". You're too late, and have blown your chance.

"Rewind noise" should never occur, I think we agree on that. But for me it's not a skill issue, it's an integrity issue: are dice rolls, once made and the result known, sacrosanct or not.

 

[Lanefan]

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.

Underneath it all, I think the bolded is what makes me dislike the concept in principle.

For me, I generally want player knowledge and character knowledge to be as close to the same as reasonably possible (though knowing full well that it'll only ever get sort-of-close-enough and never be perfect), meaning that a mechanic that actively tries to separate the two is directly working against my goals.