How does the nature of a game system impact how in-character knowledge of a rules-based metaphysics impacts gameplay?

Question

Inspired by response to this, in turn inspired by this

It appears to be the majority opinion that some quality of the impact of game systems prevents authoritative answers as to the impact of special in-character knowledge of the rules-as-metaphysics in a system-agnostic manner (i.e. in a general manner with specific differences between general system categories based of off general principles).

I currently disagree with this opinion, but am aware I am likely wrong because I do not understand this position at all. How and why does the impact of special in-character knowledge of the rules-as-metaphysics vary between game systems? If this is not possible to answer, what is it about system differences that makes no general theory of the impact of in-character knowledge formulatable? What prevents these issues from being overcome?

Edit/Re-Explaination:

The question "How does a post-modernist cosmology affect a game?" is not answerable because different rule systems behave so erratically different (i.e. they form a chaotic system) that either no possible unifying principle can be applied or such a principle would require more effort than it is appropriate to ask for from this site (this is a reasonable position). I don't understand why or that this is the case. Explain.

Answer 1

Once you start introducing "rules as metaphysics" into the imagined space, a few things start to happen. The first is that you'll see characters start to "reason" out the effects — Earthdawn, for instance, has levels of initiation that can correspond to character levels, and in one book for Vampire: the Masquerade, an NPC scientist discovers the "vitae efficiency unit," which players will recognize as the "blood point." (There are some who say that the game Paranoia started out this way: the multiple clones were meant to represent players who just recreated the same character again and again after dying.) At this point, the intrusion of the rules into the metaphysics is mild, and doesn't harm the verisimilitude very much.

The second level is where characters in the game are so exposed to the rules as they intrude into the imagined space that they no longer behave in ways untainted by the knowledge. This is the Order of the Stick level -- characters talk openly about spell levels and saving throws and the like -- or something like Buffy, where people make inside jokes about the genre they're in. (Remember "Normal Again," where Buffy is flashing between the world of the story as we know it and a world where she's a mentally ill girl and all the plot holes and dramatic contrivances are held up as signs of her madness? Like that.)

The third and final level of rules as metaphysics intrusion is where the characters have so much access to rules knowledge that they eventually understand that they are characters in a game being played. (No lie -- there's an Over the Edge scenario where this is the end state.) At this point, gameplay generally devolves into pawn stance as the players lose the incentive to roleplay or the game becomes an exploration of metafiction.

Thus, the impact on differing games of "rules as metaphysics" varies based on their resilience to parody and camp. In your example, if the GM describes Charles as "checking an Aspect," it's akin to saying that "Charles looks at Alice's watch -- not Bob's, Alice's -- and sees that there's only ten minutes left, so he has time to make his escape." (The "ten o'clock monster" from LARP, as another example.) If Charles understands Aspects, then Charles understands Fate Points, which means that Charles stops acting in ways recognizable to Alice as "like a person." How important that is will vary from system to system and setting to setting.

Answer 2

This is a question of post-modernism and setting. Self-awareness is a post-modernist response to "normal" settings. Any game, in any setting, can be made post-modern and self-aware. Most games, and most published settings do not presume this self-awareness, as the fact of the self-awareness becomes the focus of the narrative, rather than the narrative itself.

Most normal stories do not focus on the mechanics of story, because that's not the story they want to tell. The entire post-modernism movement was founded on exposing the mechanics of art as art.

Answer 3

The relationship between rules and in fictional setting varies by system. For any two given systems and settings, the rules will simulate different things, for different reasons, in order to produce different kinds of stories.

In a game like GURPS, for example, the rules an (extremely approximate) simulation of the physical laws that govern the game world and the experiences of its characters, and the difficulty of an action is governed by (for example) the abilities and circumstances of the character and the resources and expertise required to achieve the task. In a system like Fate, on the other hand, the rules are built around resolving the dramatic moments of stories that take place within a world, and the difficulty of an action is governed by how dramatically important the action is and how interesting the consequences of failure and success are. In each game, the consequences of characters knowing about the "rules" would be drastically different; In GURPS, a character might try to find rules contradictions or loopholes they could exploit; In Fate, a character might try and ramp up (or eliminate) the dramatic stakes in order to improve their chances of success.

Because the way in which the rules of the game relate to to the fictional world can vary so much, the consequences of characters being aware of the rules will change from one game to the next.