Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[pemerton]

The last AD&D 2nd ed game I played in - which was around 30 years ago - I played a character that was, mechanically, a Skills & Powers cleric but was, in the fiction, essentially a paladin (heavy arms and armour, noble background (maybe a Cavalier kit?), able to heal with a touch, etc).

I portrayed my character as a holy warrior. The other players played their PCs - to a lesser or greater extent - as responding to my PC being a holy warrior. But as far as the game was concerned, it would have made no difference if my character was a swashbuckler or a mage or whatever.

When I GMed 4e D&D, two of the characters were paladins - one literally (a CHA paladin of the Raven Queen) and one by dint of build (a fighter/cleric multiclass with a cleric paragon path, devoted to Moradin). Both players portrayed their characters as holy warriors. The other players played their PCs as responding to those two PCs being holy warriors. And the game would have been different had those two PCs been swashbucklers or mages. It would not have been the game that it was - a game about the relationship between the gods and their mortal servants, about what fidelity to a god means and demands in the mortal world, about defeating Orcus, etc.

4e D&D was not the first FRPG that I GMed where the game was not independent of the PCs. I GMed some AD&D along similar lines; and I GMed a lot of Rolemaster along similar lines. But 4e D&D did it better, both because of some aspects of its PC build rules, and many aspects of its action resolution rules. 4e was the first RPG I played where I would say the rules actively supported rather than occasionally impeded play-to-find-out [who these characters are, what happens to them as characters] RPGing.

 

[Umbran]

Cart before horse before cart...

If they supported and promoted those editions as well as the current one, it's ironclad guaranteed more people would play those editions.

Yes, but you have no data saying how many more that would be. That's not a personal fault - it isn't your job to have those numbers.

But, a non-distinct "some" is not sufficient for a solid business decision.

There is a near-constant stream of folks making assertions as if they knew what "actually" was going on in the market. Nobody can come with real data, of course, but everybody knows.

 

[Kannik]

Makes sense except for one thing: for me, the two bolded bits are in direct conflict.

Organically playing the character (which to me implies at least a decent degree of immersion and first-person thinking) ideally shouldn't involve meta-anything, because you're thinking (as best you can) as the character would think; and it doesn't really get much more artificial than the acquisition and spending of metacurrency.

If one prefers no metacurrency, PbtA games, FitD (which as been a large part of the discussion in this thread) games, and Legend in the Mist, as examples, all do not have metacurrency.

For systems that do have a metacurrency, a quick note that they operate differently than the type of metacurrency such as, for example, Inspiration or the Lucky feat in D&D, or (from my understanding) Bennies in Savage Worlds, all of which are mostly independent of the character. Instead, metacurrencies as they are in, for example, FATE or Cortex Prime tie directly into a character’s narrative/history/personality/literary makeup. Both in their use, but also, critically, in terms of acquiring them. There’s no disconnect or not “thinking as the character would think,” because in order to gain the metacurrency you have to lean into those very things. You are thinking as your character would think. You are acting as your character would act. They reinforce each other. (In addition, through that same design they also help reduce the temptation to not think/act as your character would think/act in those situations where doing so would put them at a disadvantage in terms of outcome.)

As for the “rules” aspect of it, there’s nothing about metacurrency rules that is any more intrusive or onerous (and I would argue often less onerous) than any other rule in an RPG, be it tracking Hit Points, or looking up that spell again, or etc. Further, metacurrency use tends to only come up a handful or three of times over the course session. Even when the game includes them, they truly do not dominate. It is as organic as any other game, and they fade into the background.

If there’s an assumption that someone playing these games are automatically going to and only try to exploit the mechanical rules and ignore the fiction, that concern can be put to rest. Firstly, for, as noted above, the design of these types of games is to more fully put the character (again, in the literary sense) front and centre and encourage the player to come from that character in all situations presented to them. And as the mechanics flow from the same, they encourage the same. Secondly, as many people who come to these games are already committed to their more character-forward nature.

 

[pemerton]

metacurrency use tends to only come up a handful or three of times over the course session.

In my experience, the play of Marvel Heroic RP/Cortex+ Heroic involves a lot of plot points being spent and earned; many more than a handful of times over the course of a session.