top of page
Search
  • Writer's pictureDaniel

10- Make Believe & Meta, Ambivalent Partners

Updated: Oct 21, 2022


As I’ve covered previously, the two main heads, Make Believe & Mechanics, meld into our RPG Chimeras. But these two don’t always get along. In fact, it's important to see that these core components actually have an ambivalent relationship.


On the one hand, they can be seen as a helpful (arguably, ‘necessary’) combination to have Make Believe now that we’re grown. As adults we feel the need for objective structures (Meta/Mechanics) to help us arbitrate results. Generally, we’re not content to simply say, “I kill the Troll” without rules to make that victory feel legitimate.


On the other, they can be seen as interfering with each other, for they are two very different mental activities. Deep flows of the imagination are radically different from processing algorithms, referencing ‘rules’, math, etc.

That being said, obviously melding those activities has proven to generate successful entertainment for almost 50 years. Their precise mixtures & measurements vary, not just between different published games/editions, but within each group. Each published game & group steers their focus (intentionally or just habitually) somewhere on a spectrum between the extremes of Make Believe & Mechanics. The important question is, how do the different mixtures generate different experiences?


Some focus heavily on the mechanics end of that spectrum. The game is strongly viewed through the lens of the rules (numerical effects, various algorithms, etc.). On the furthest end these RPG sessions feel quite like the board game, Dungeon!. They do have characters with names, personalities, goals, etc., but the true focus is on the meta.


Or perhaps this kind of gaming sounds familiar to you:


“Leeroy Jenkins!”

Here’s a snippet from the infamous “Leeroy Jenkins” battle planning in World of Warcraft. The players have gathered to prepare their strategy for a difficult encounter:

- Jamaal: “OK guys, these Eggs have given us a lot of trouble in the past. Does anybody need anything off this guy or can we bypass him?”

- Ritter: “I think Leeroy needs something from this guy.”

- Jamaal: “Does he need those Devout Shoulders …since he’s a paladin?”

- Ritter: “Yeah, that will help him heal better, he’ll have more mana.”

- Jamaal: “…I’ll run in first, gather up all the eggs…we can blast them all down with AOE. I will use Intimidating Shout to scatter them so we don’t have to fight a whole bunch at once. When my Shouts are done, I’ll need Anfrony to come in and drop his Shout too… When his are done, Bas will need to run in and do the same thing. We’re gonna need Divine Intervention on our mages … I think this is a pretty good plan... What do you think, Abduhl? Can you give me a number crunch?

- Abduhl: “… I’m coming up with 32.33% of survival.”


(Until Leeroy crashes their entire plan, that is.)


Yes, this is in a video game, but this excerpt is not too dissimilar from the meta-focus some groups employ, where players have access to information about all classes, abilities, spells, items, strengths & weaknesses of characters & creatures in the world. They analyze the mechanics, crunch the numbers, and work to maximize their statistical chances of success.


On the far opposite end of this spectrum would be a game & style that eschews as much mechanics & ‘rules’ as possible. How to label this is problematic, but it's a game with minimal & non-regimented (or even purposefully subjective) guidelines. That is, this game may simply reward events where the players generate something dramatic without any of the typical structure offered by mechanics. Or perhaps it is not explicit in its subordination of the rules. It’s possible to be using a system with a full body of mechanics, and yet your group’s play style silently agrees to ignore all rules if something 'dramatic' would happen instead.


Most play somewhere in between the extremes. In our quest to get what we really want out of our RPGs, we can step back and recognize some changes that can have serious effect on our gaming experiences.


How and what we predominantly focus on in our RPGs directly affects the experience of our games. That is, if you really want a stronger, more natural/fluid Make Believe experience, and yet your games have a serious focus on Mechanics, your methods are at odds with your goal.

Conversely, if you enjoy all of the miniature wargaming elements and yet are playing a (perhaps even rule-less) “pure Make Believe” RPG, you will be regularly disappointed.


Perhaps you’re content right in the mixture your groups use, but it’s likely not in the exact sweet spot you would prefer. The tension between these two Chimera heads is more complicated, but a good first step for increasing your enjoyment is to look at how your sessions seem to go. What proportion of the time is spent focusing on rules and numbers vs. your characters exploring the world and interacting.




27 views0 comments
bottom of page