Are metagame abilities good?
Moderator: Moderators
Are metagame abilities good?
Eberron had action points, FantasyCraft has action dice, I'm sure there are others I can't come up with at the moment (WEG Star Wars' force points!).
Some of them let you add to rolls, FantasyCraft even lets you push a pile of them over and say "bugger this, get to the good part" and skip to the next scene.
I tend to think it's situational, but that all three of the ones I mentioned work well. I know a bunch of folks here are more sensitive than I am about verisimilitude though, so what's everyone else's opinion?
Some of them let you add to rolls, FantasyCraft even lets you push a pile of them over and say "bugger this, get to the good part" and skip to the next scene.
I tend to think it's situational, but that all three of the ones I mentioned work well. I know a bunch of folks here are more sensitive than I am about verisimilitude though, so what's everyone else's opinion?
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 953
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:30 pm
Characters generally aren't aware of having luck, so that would be metagame. Storyteller "Willpower" might be is probably something that exists in character in some fashion, and at least one game I can think of, TORG, the points are definitely something the characters understand and can talk about ("possibility energy").Swordslinger wrote:I don't consider them metagame so much as luck modifying. In a game, you generally want the PCs to survive. Offering mechanics that let them avert a few bad rolls is kind of nice.
Oh on the actual question, I generally don't mind them.
Last edited by CCarter on Thu Oct 20, 2011 1:37 am, edited 2 times in total.
It sort of depends on how you imagine hit points working.
I normally imagine any hit point injury as being physical damage, but with "luck" or "dodging ability" letting characters turn a major wound into a minor one. As long as characters can be aware they're injured and that being hit by some things is worse than being hit by other things, the system works.
The only problem with this is that healing spells are inconsistent with that, which has actually always annoyed me. I wrote a rant on the subject in Regdar's Repository, years ago as "Degobah".
If however you move to a system where HPs are just plot points (4E) then yeah they're basically a metagame resource, and it requires extra explanations as to why characters who took 40 damage after being missed completely by the dragon are now chugging healing potions.
I normally imagine any hit point injury as being physical damage, but with "luck" or "dodging ability" letting characters turn a major wound into a minor one. As long as characters can be aware they're injured and that being hit by some things is worse than being hit by other things, the system works.
The only problem with this is that healing spells are inconsistent with that, which has actually always annoyed me. I wrote a rant on the subject in Regdar's Repository, years ago as "Degobah".
If however you move to a system where HPs are just plot points (4E) then yeah they're basically a metagame resource, and it requires extra explanations as to why characters who took 40 damage after being missed completely by the dragon are now chugging healing potions.
opinion? all that stuff is crap. it breaks the 4th wall and shows internally that it is a game.
breaking 4th wall = bad.
breaking 4th wall = bad.
Play the game, not the rules.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
- OgreBattle
- King
- Posts: 6820
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am
Re: Are metagame abilities good?
I like them and they've contributed to memorable moments in games.fectin wrote: I tend to think it's situational, but that all three of the ones I mentioned work well. I know a bunch of folks here are more sensitive than I am about verisimilitude though, so what's everyone else's opinion?
Narratively, it's having that paragraph dedicated to your characters actions, it's the build up as the music gets more intense, it's your time in the spotlight.
Gameplay wise, it breaks up monotony and lets you do something with pre-existing options.
Every time I use an action point in 4e it's usually to do something cool like sending a blast of thunder to shove a bunch of orcs together so they're all sent down to hell together when shadowy claws erupt from the ground.
Fighting a dragon, like playing in a football game, is exhausting even if you didn't get stabbed in the gut.and it requires extra explanations as to why characters who took 40 damage after being missed completely by the dragon are now chugging healing potions
It's magic Gatorade.
Player-choice luck modification is, in my opinion, probably a good thing, because it helps chop off bad bits of the players' probability curve. It's exactly the same reason critical tables are bad for players, but in reverse - giving PCs a reroll lets them survive that triple critical failure that they're statistically guaranteed to make at some point in their adventure.
I recognize that most players don't use them like this, and that in fact this method is just a kluge to fix a bad resolution mechanic, but whatever.
I recognize that most players don't use them like this, and that in fact this method is just a kluge to fix a bad resolution mechanic, but whatever.
DSMatticus wrote:There are two things you can learn from the Gaming Den:
1) Good design practices.
2) How to be a zookeeper for hyper-intelligent shit-flinging apes.
Your original quote was, "Characters generally aren't aware of having luck, so that would be metagame." Ignoring how hit points work, there is no real mechanism for characters being "aware" of exactly what their hit point max is, or how many they have "remaining." Especially in pre 4E D&D where there was only a single state with hit points above zero as far as attributes that can be personally measured by the character.CCarter wrote:It sort of depends on how you imagine hit points working.
Now characters can be aware of wounds, but assuming you do hit points that way, there is really no easy mechanism for mapping wounds to hit points, because of that problem where they are totally at 100% until they are at 0%. It's an annoying problem because the mechanics are at odds with each other, each demending a different observable result.
With 4E there is a second state, so the characters can physically know they have deem damaged to a certain level. But that really doesn't exist in the rules prior to 4E.
- Foxwarrior
- Duke
- Posts: 1639
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 8:54 am
- Location: RPG City, USA
-
- Master
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 2:38 am
There are feats in 3.5e which allow you to know HP. Don't remember where though. Anyways, calling Action Points metagame abilities is like calling Weapon Supremacy(or [tome] Combat School) metagame abilities for their "You may add +5 to any attack roll 1/round." Or any reroll abilities.
When I hear metagame abilities I think things like, "Spend 1 plot point for reinforcements to show up," not "+d6 to the next whatever"
When I hear metagame abilities I think things like, "Spend 1 plot point for reinforcements to show up," not "+d6 to the next whatever"
Take FantasyCraft for a more blatant example then. You have some number of starting action dice. You can take feats that give you more, either directly (additional d4 starting action dice equal to the number of luck feats you have) or through gameplay (whenever the GM activates one of your fumbles, gain an additional d4 action die). You can spend them to add to rolls of all kinds, to activate fumbles, to activate critical hits, to heal, or to restore spellpoints. You can also use them to get hints, to skip scenes, to add features to the scene ("I swing from the chandeliers!" "Are there Chandeliers?" "There are now!"), and probably a bunch of other things I'm forgetting.
As far as I've seen, it works out well. It gets very meta though, because you're a player tracking player resources instead of a character tracking character resources.
As far as I've seen, it works out well. It gets very meta though, because you're a player tracking player resources instead of a character tracking character resources.
Last edited by fectin on Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I think a character should be able to feel roughly how injured they are, based off the HP figure. They could feel the pain or blood loss or whatever despite their being no other mechanics to represent loss of function.tzor wrote:Your original quote was, "Characters generally aren't aware of having luck, so that would be metagame." Ignoring how hit points work, there is no real mechanism for characters being "aware" of exactly what their hit point max is, or how many they have "remaining." Especially in pre 4E D&D where there was only a single state with hit points above zero as far as attributes that can be personally measured by the character.CCarter wrote:It sort of depends on how you imagine hit points working.
Now characters can be aware of wounds, but assuming you do hit points that way, there is really no easy mechanism for mapping wounds to hit points, because of that problem where they are totally at 100% until they are at 0%. It's an annoying problem because the mechanics are at odds with each other, each demending a different observable result.
With 4E there is a second state, so the characters can physically know they have deem damaged to a certain level. But that really doesn't exist in the rules prior to 4E.
I'd concede that potentially using the exact total HPs to make a decision could be metagaming because its using information too exact for the character to know, but I normally wouldn't care. Usually not a problem IMHO because the player typically doesn't know exactly how much damage an attack will deal anyway, due to damage bonuses and whatever.
Comparatively I find luck points worse because their existence isn't noticeable by the character at all i.e. the player knows the character can win the next 4 rounds of blackjack by editing rolls, the character doesn't.
-
- Prince
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:55 pm
The existence of luck points as such isn't noticeable by the character, but their effects most certainly are over repeated instances of noticing that "fortune" smiles on them whenever they need it to. Not even as precise as measuring hit points IC, but still somewhat noticeable - like the problem raised in the Doubt threads, where repeated observation could make you reasonably sure that you did indeed have reality manipulation powers and were not insane.CCarter wrote:I think a character should be able to feel roughly how injured they are, based off the HP figure. They could feel the pain or blood loss or whatever despite their being no other mechanics to represent loss of function.tzor wrote:Your original quote was, "Characters generally aren't aware of having luck, so that would be metagame." Ignoring how hit points work, there is no real mechanism for characters being "aware" of exactly what their hit point max is, or how many they have "remaining." Especially in pre 4E D&D where there was only a single state with hit points above zero as far as attributes that can be personally measured by the character.CCarter wrote:It sort of depends on how you imagine hit points working.
Now characters can be aware of wounds, but assuming you do hit points that way, there is really no easy mechanism for mapping wounds to hit points, because of that problem where they are totally at 100% until they are at 0%. It's an annoying problem because the mechanics are at odds with each other, each demending a different observable result.
With 4E there is a second state, so the characters can physically know they have deem damaged to a certain level. But that really doesn't exist in the rules prior to 4E.
I'd concede that potentially using the exact total HPs to make a decision could be metagaming because its using information too exact for the character to know, but I normally wouldn't care. Usually not a problem IMHO because the player typically doesn't know exactly how much damage an attack will deal anyway, due to damage bonuses and whatever.
Comparatively I find luck points worse because their existence isn't noticeable by the character at all i.e. the player knows the character can win the next 4 rounds of blackjack by editing rolls, the character doesn't.
- OgreBattle
- King
- Posts: 6820
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am
that gives you 1~2 per, you mean how many a house cat BITE you can take, as they are 1 HP loss each successful one.Foxwarrior wrote:You can in fact determine your hit points in D&D. Simply count how many cat-claw scratches it takes to knock you unconscious.
but, that is breaking the 4th wall.
Play the game, not the rules.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.