Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Omega Probe" data-source="post: 9873549" data-attributes="member: 7056301">Not a huge fan of most of the systems I've played. It tends to have an antagonistic nature, players vs. GM. The GM always has the power to do whatever they want, but if they're spending metacurrency to interfere with the players' flow, it can feel like an aggression. This doesn't have to be a problem, but it can be a problem.The reverse, when players use metacurrency to make a narrative intervention, I do like. I like games where the players can drive the scene almost as much as the GM, it promotes a style of play where all the players participate in creating the story, as opposed to a game where the GM creates the story, and all the other players just deal with it.But that can be handled with "narrative" skills, where you roll to see if something you want or need is part of the scene. You could even have some sort of mechanic by which the difficulty of making a narrative intervention increases with each attempt, and certain failures create complications instead of being helpful. That shifts the weight of the punishment onto the player, and away from the GM (for the most part), so it doesn't feel like it's removing player agency.For a more mechanically-oriented metacurrency, my favourite is "Luck" in CoC. You can spend it to help with rolls, reduce damage, or save yourself from certain death. At the same time, the Keeper can ask for "Luck" rolls to set the scene in your favour, or against you, so you have to be careful when you spend it. What I like about it, at a fundamental level, is that it's in players hands, not the Keeper's. It promotes and preserves player agency.</blockquote>

Verification