Let's Talk About Metacurrency

[Artamo]

I do agree with @Crimson Longinus (!) that it’s difficult to reconcile “this trauma will cause you to bleed out and die in the next 18-30 seconds”, which is what the death save system basically requires you to narrate, with “the damage you took will not inconvenience you in any way after a 6 hour break”, which is basically how I narrate full hit points plus full Hit Dice.

I look at it like Raiders of the Lost Ark:

Indy gets punched, kicked, shot in the arm, thrown through a windshield, dragged underneath and behind a truck, then gets a few kisses from Marion and a good night’s sleep, and is ready to fight Nazis again.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Given that the OP asks us to give our opinions on metacurrency, and that "Ugh, I don't like it" is a valid opinion, I fail to see the problem.

Further, the OP phrased it (to follow the same analogy) as an open question, in terms closer to "I'm thinking of starting a restaurant - should I serve pizza in it or not?".

Agreed. This is not a "tell me what you like about meta-currency" thread, and I'm hardly the only person here who said they don't care for it. Furthermore, I suggested games where I might make an exception, like the supers genre or some licensed RPGs.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Though to be fair, with the current natural healing rates this is absurd too. How can you have suffered real injuries if you're absolutely fine next day?

Personally I use gritty rests, which still far from realistic, at least make this somewhat more verisimilitudious.

Yeah. In most versions of D&D and similar games, you can't really be "injured" at all, because hit point damage has no effect at all until you run out and fall down. It can be quite frustrating.

 

[Micah Sweet]

We aren't talking about realism. That's not necessary for something to be in the fiction. Hit Points are damage, but they are action movie damage.

Even in action movies, you can get hurt in a way that affects you in more than appearance.

 

[Micah Sweet]

My personal take: some people want to play D&D as an action movie, and some people want to play it as a medieval war movie, but both are trying to use the same bucket of hit points. There may be better systems for both: maybe Feng Shui for the action movie folks and Harnmaster for the medieval war folks but ultimately, they want to do it in D&D.

Yeah. This is what injury subsystems are for, and I try to use them whenever I can get away with it.

 

[Reynard]

Even in action movies, you can get hurt in a way that affects you in more than appearance.

But is that desirable in a game where combat is the main mode of play? I'd argue not, based on experience with lots of different systems. Death spirals by way wound penalties and similar almost never improve the experience or create the kind of play folks imagine they will, in my experience.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The hack I use is that even "natural" healing is frankly supernatural, because it is a magical world.

Characters in an area where the normal background world-magic is suppressed would perceive that area as horribly cursed. Healing would be dreadfully slow and often incomplete, crop yields would be low, livestock would be sickly and scrawny, craftwork would be difficult, time-consuming, and give poor results - all because things would work in "our-world realistic" ways instead of in "pastoral fantastic" ways normal to the setting.

I would be more accepting of that explanation (though I'm still uncomfortable with it) if any RPG actually explicitly used it to explain things. But none of them bother, and I want a more realistic world than that anyway

 

[Umbran]

Given that the OP asks us to give our opinions on metacurrency, and that "Ugh, I don't like it" is a valid opinion, I fail to see the problem.

I didn't say it was a "problem".

I said that it was a self-limitimg position, from the perspective of discussion in the thread.

Further, the OP phrased it (to follow the same analogy) as an open question, in terms closer to "I'm thinking of starting a restaurant - should I serve pizza in it or not?".

The position is still pretty solidly limited.
"Should I serve pizza? What kind of pizza?"
"I don't eat pizza."
"Okay then."

 

[Reynard]

I would be more accepting of that explanation (though I'm still uncomfortable with it) if any RPG actually explicitly used it to explain things. But none of them bother, and I want a more realistic world than that anyway

(NOTE: the following little rant is not really focused at Micah; Im just using the quote as a jumping off point)

The funny thing about "realism" in D&D is that it never seems to come in the form of PCs behaving like human beings. Characters Penny pinch at the inn despite having just come in from weeks in the wild under constant threat. Characters don't find solace in one another's arms despite it being a terrible idea,like folks under real constant stress often do. They don't break under pressure or betray their principles for a little respite from the terrors of adventuring.

But, sure, let's add twisted ankles to the crit chart.

 

[Umbran]

Right but every time the previous blows landed, there is a very high probability that the fiction was about getting hit: bruises, blood and the whole bit. I have never seen in 40 years, running for literally hundreds of people,a table that did not describe hit point damage as, well, damage 95% of the time.

Is that an issue of damage, or an issue that when asked to describe something, the default is to go with that which is outwardly visible?