History has so many examples of things that would be rejected as implausible in a work of fiction that I'd hesitate to reject anything simply because I don't find it 'realistic'. That said, just because I let you do something once 'because it's a cool trick' doesn't mean I'll let you pull it off a second time. Strange things happening, fine; reliance on strange things happening, not so much.
Mythbusters: Reality Or Dramatic? What Do You Allow In Your RPGS?
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
In my fantasy games, with sufficiently large values of two, one could possibly win that argument.
One can have light without darkness. Darkness is an absence of light. If all is light, there is no darkness. Shifting to metaphysics, the same applies to good and evil. Evil is the absence of goodness.
Thus, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that everything is cool and/or impossible.
I'm not sure I'd like to try to run that particular game, but it'd be worth a try.
Bedrockgames
Legend
Question: I love the Myth Busters show, but missed that episode. Did they determine what happens when the bullet is able to hit the rope directly in the center?
Depends on the game for me. As others have said, I try to keep things plausible, and in most campaigns, I would probably allow an attempt at this but make it very unlikely (by applying a serious penalty). On the other hand, if the game was heroic, I would probably not put a penalty in place.
One thing I've noticed though is you can have five people at the table, and five different notions of what is within the realm of possibility. Normally I don't like saying to my players, well I don't think that could ever happen so I won't allow it.
Depends on the game for me. As others have said, I try to keep things plausible, and in most campaigns, I would probably allow an attempt at this but make it very unlikely (by applying a serious penalty). On the other hand, if the game was heroic, I would probably not put a penalty in place.
One thing I've noticed though is you can have five people at the table, and five different notions of what is within the realm of possibility. Normally I don't like saying to my players, well I don't think that could ever happen so I won't allow it.
The Shaman
First Post
Yes.
I helped shoe horses, but I didn't actually forge the shoes.
No, but I have conspired. Details will not be forthcoming, so don't ask.
Closest I came was stepping out onto the skid of a hovering helecopter to land on a mountain peak.
Several.
Not yet, but I'm planning on taking lessons soon.
This relates to the conspiracy question above, so I'm afraid it's something I can't answer in this arena. Or I'd have to kill you all.
(That would be no on the paragliding and KGB agents.)
No, most of the time they're using a lifetime of accumulated information to adjudicate rules interpretations, rules which already do most of the heavy lifting.
You don't need to be an expert, and you don't need to be one-hundred percent accurate every single time, but if you stop trying to be, you'll find you get more right than you get wrong.
Not every question needs to be answered immediately, and if you answer one wrong, you can correct yourself in the future.
Which is why I prefer the term "verisimilitude," myself.
If reality was entirely consistent, I might side with your argument. It isn't, always. While I dislike GNS theory, if I accepted it as legitimate I'd be a much bigger fan of the 'N' part than the 'S' part. So yes, if someone comes up with an idea that I like, I'll let them try it rather than try to determine whether it would work in reality. For one thing, I don't know everything about reality to judge it.
I, generally, keep to what is plausible. On the other hand, I condider what is plausible in the game setting and genre, not in the real world. While some games are quite reallistic, others definitely are not - but that does not mean they lack their own consistency. In Exalted, I would allow a PC to break the rope with no roll at all (and to do it with a roll if he was, at the same time, duelling his nemesis atop a skyship). In Call of Cthulhu I would strongly suggest seeking another solution.
I don't think I would ever use a detailed mechanics (like object AC and HP) for shooting a rope. In most cases, such constructs are based on mechanics designed to model completely different situations (like people fighting) and, thus, have no consistency with the rest of the game, neither in "physical" nor in dramatic sense. And in the rare cases where the mechanical system is this detailed and consistent, it is too unwieldy and complicated to use, at least for me.
I don't think I would ever use a detailed mechanics (like object AC and HP) for shooting a rope. In most cases, such constructs are based on mechanics designed to model completely different situations (like people fighting) and, thus, have no consistency with the rest of the game, neither in "physical" nor in dramatic sense. And in the rare cases where the mechanical system is this detailed and consistent, it is too unwieldy and complicated to use, at least for me.
When I was young I strove for realism but as I get older I go more with the Rule of cool. It must be genre appropiate but as an old Twilight 2000 GM of mine once put it, "If it would look good in the movie, it should probably work".
Similar Threads
