Not a Conspiracy Theory: Moving Toward Better Criticism in RPGs

[AbdulAlhazred]

From another perspective this is just another example in a long slew of examples of outright dismissal/disrespect toward 5e fans perspectives.

It might have been stated rather bluntly, but if you want to learn a lot about RPGs, play a bunch of different RPGs. There really is no substitute for that, I assure you. I mean, its not about attacking your preferences, or disrespecting them, but imagine if you played one computer game, can you be an expert on computer games, generally? I'd say not...

 

[innerdude]

Just because I tend to find that argument a little disingenuous (even though I don't have a problem with metacurrencies myself) I should note its hard to call something a metacurrency in any real way when you have no choice as to whether to expend it or not. Someone playing Savage Worlds decides whether or not to use a Bennie; someone playing a D&D version doesn't normally have any player decision making that directly involves whether those will be extended, it seems a poor parallel to make.

If you want to argue level-elevating hit points in particular don't have a very good direct map to any in-character function, I won't argue; but they're not a metacurrancy.

You're not wrong, but at the same time, both Bennies and hit points do serve one similar function --- they act as markers to both the GM and other players that a unilateral fictional state declaration of "Your character is dead" is a degenerate one.

But you are correct that there's a substantive difference in how a player can declare to "use a Benny" vs. sacrifice hit points.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Just because I tend to find that argument a little disingenuous (even though I don't have a problem with metacurrencies myself) I should note its hard to call something a metacurrency in any real way when you have no choice as to whether to expend it or not. Someone playing Savage Worlds decides whether or not to use a Bennie; someone playing a D&D version doesn't normally have any player decision making that directly involves whether those will be extended, it seems a poor parallel to make.

If you want to argue level-elevating hit points in particular don't have a very good direct map to any in-character function, I won't argue; but they're not a metacurrancy.

I can see your point; OTOH I cannot count the number of times in 5e (or other editions either) play where I sat there thinking "is it time to expend X in order to end this encounter quickly and avoid taking some more damage?" X could be a spell, superiority dice, etc. In this sense, I think hit points CAN be seen as very akin to a meta-currency, they don't represent any specific thing in the fiction, and you often shape your play around their expenditure or saving. I mean, I agree, its not quite like superiority dice, or hit dice, or spell slots, where you literally decide whether or not to expend them at first hand, but its not far off!

 

[innerdude]

In retrospect my tone may have come across as harsh towards both Formalist literature criticism and trad 5e.

Formalism does still have a place in literature criticism. Its principles are still used in many ways in other techniques. It continues to have a presence, though it is largely subsumed in other theoretical practices, but in and of itself it is a worthy set of critical practices.

Something always has to come first. And early critical theories absolutely provide critical structures and frameworks from which other critiques begin. Formalism was a necessary, worthy first step at cataloguing an approach to understanding literature.

But its practices are greatly aided and enhanced by merging them into other perspectives.

I'll leave you to make the corollary to RPG critique as needed.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In BW and in MHRP, the function of "metacurrency" is basically dice pool manipulation (eg reroll 6s and add the successes; add and/or keep another die; etc). Or in other words it operates at the "roll the dice" stage rather than the "declare you action" stage.

Where does this sit, for you?

I know nothing about BW, but MHRP uses a  lot of aspects, both for characters and scene to scene.

 

[FrogReaver]

I can see your point; OTOH I cannot count the number of times in 5e (or other editions either) play where I sat there thinking "is it time to expend X in order to end this encounter quickly and avoid taking some more damage?" X could be a spell, superiority dice, etc. In this sense, I think hit points CAN be seen as very akin to a meta-currency, they don't represent any specific thing in the fiction, and you often shape your play around their expenditure or saving. I mean, I agree, its not quite like superiority dice, or hit dice, or spell slots, where you literally decide whether or not to expend them at first hand, but its not far off!

We’ve developed a great shorthand where I work for things like this - ‘It’s similar but different.’

Thinking about it, I feel this is applicable to most of the discussions here - it’s just which side wants to emphasize the similarities and which the differences changes based on the particular comparison.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

We’ve developed a great shorthand where I work for things like this - ‘It’s similar but different.’

Thinking about it, I feel this is applicable to most of the discussions here - it’s just which side wants to emphasize the similarities and which the differences changes based on the particular comparison.

I find my opinion has some similarities to this, and some differences

 

[Aldarc]

Strong disagree on the change 5e point; often it doesn't even take that much to get 5e where you want it to be meet one's preferences, and even if it does, the GM is in all likelihood doing most of that work.

If your players don't want to learn a non-5e system, you can't make them. "Fixing" 5e is the better option in that case.

I will mostly agree on the financial bit. That's a hurdle that can usually be stepped over, one way or another.

When look at 5e, I see the same problems that I saw when I thought that 3e (d20 System) could be hacked into anything, back when I first got into the hobby. I knew the game well or so I thought. However, there was always something off from what I wanted the game to do. It was absolutely frustrating. Honestly, I don't really consider 5e all that different in that regard.

It might have been stated rather bluntly, but if you want to learn a lot about RPGs, play a bunch of different RPGs. There really is no substitute for that, I assure you. I mean, its not about attacking your preferences, or disrespecting them, but imagine if you played one computer game, can you be an expert on computer games, generally? I'd say not...

I find that learning/playing new RPGs that exist outside of your comfort zone help you understand and better hone your preferences.

I'll go farther than that; its not a very good substitute with a number of other trad games, not at least without modifying it on pretty fundamental levels. The experience of playing any incarnation of D&D and pretty much any edition of RuneQuest is quite different, and that's even before you get into the play-cycle of the latter.

I'm reminded of this bit from Seth Skorkowsky on Twitter the other day:

 

[Lanefan]

This doesn't seem to me like a very meaningful or insightful conclusion, TBH. That is, sure there are an 'infinite' number of incredibly minute variations on the following fiction. ALL of them must honor the agenda and, for the most part, live by the principles of play which the game (DW in this case I presume) espouses. Not only that, but the fiction has to follow from whatever came before, and that is a VERY strict constraint!

The bolded is just as true, I'd say, in typical D&D play as it is here. The exceptions, of course, in any system are those cases where the PCs really are in a madhouse setting - e.g. something like Tel'eran'rhiod (or however it's spelled; you know, the dream-world from Wheel of Time) or the Elemental Plane of Chaos or Alice's Wonderland - where logic and continuity go flying out the window; shortly followed by a space-warp causing the window to fly out of itself.

So, basically, yes, the player rolls an 8 while conducting the Volley move. Lets assume they choose "move into danger" as the complication. ... [explains various fiction-based possibilities] .... Most of the time the GM should be drawing from these, as opposed to spinning off into lala land to invent something completely new.

The essential phrase there being "Most of the time", because...

Clearly "stuff happens which nobody anticipated" should be pretty routine in RPGs, right?

...there always has to be room for the unexpected.

 

[FrogReaver]

It might have been stated rather bluntly, but if you want to learn a lot about RPGs, play a bunch of different RPGs. There really is no substitute for that, I assure you.

Okay, I have no problem with that notion in general. It's true in a very basic sense. The problem is with how that idea is being used to exclude me or gatekeep me or etc from the conversation. I must essentially 'play more games' or my opinions get to be immediately dismissed. That's never going to be a position that yields a productive conversation between anyone that holds it and me (and most likely anyone else in a similar position as me).

I mean, its not about attacking your preferences, or disrespecting them,

I don't think you (general) intend to - but on some level shouldn't I be the one to get judge whether my preferences are being attacked, dismissed or disrespected?

but imagine if you played one computer game, can you be an expert on computer games, generally? I'd say not...

Why is there a need to set yourself up as an expert? What do you hope to gain by having expert authority in the conversation?