Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Gygax on Realism in Game Design
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GreyICE" data-source="post: 6008836" data-attributes="member: 6684526"><p>Ah, you underestimate Gygax. He did have many words to say about logic.</p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">As its rules were specifically designed</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">to make it fun and enjoyable, and the consensus of opinion is that D&D</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">is so, does it need to have logical justification of any or all of its rules?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">Because logic does not necessarily create an enjoyable game form, the</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">reply must be generally negative. Logic, even game logic, must be </span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">transcended in the interest of the overall game. If an illogical or inconsistent</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">part fits with the others to form a superior whole, then its very</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">illogicalness and inconsistence are logical and consistent within the</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">framework of the game, for the rules exist for the play of the game, although</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">all too often it seems that the game is designed for the use of the</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">rules in many of today’s products. When questioned about the whys</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">and wherefores of D&D I sometimes rationalize the matter and give</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">“realistic” and “logical” reasons. The truth of the matter is that D&D</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">was written principally as a game — perhaps I used game realism and</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">game logic consciously or unconsciously when I did so, but that is begging</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">the question. Enjoyment is the real reason for D&D being created,</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">written, and published.</span></p><p></p><p></p><p>-------------------------</p><p></p><p>I think there's a lot to say for this approach, and there's been several exemplar systems of it recently. From AD&D's save versus everything, we got it narrowed down to Fortitude, Reflex, and Will. Not particularly realistic categories, but it beat having "Save versus poison, save versus death, save versus red ants, save versus stinky socks." Then those got overused and had corner cases (for instance, how do you model a swarm of rats having individual members of the swarm clinging to you and still chewing? Is that a Fortitude, Reflex, or Will save) and it got simplified to Saving Throws. What does a Saving Throw do? It represents your chance to shake off an effect. Is it logical that every character has the same chance to shake off most every effect? Meh, maybe. But being blinded just isn't any fun, and a 50% chance to shake it off every round makes it much less likely to ruin your experience (over being essentially taken out of combat).</p><p></p><p>Also, </p><p></p><p>"If an illogical or inconsistent</p><p>part fits with the others to form a superior whole, then its very</p><p>illogicalness and inconsistence are logical and consistent within the</p><p>framework of the game"</p><p></p><p>I think that Gygax just told everyone to "Not sweat the corner cases" a memo game designers still haven't gotten in 2012!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GreyICE, post: 6008836, member: 6684526"] Ah, you underestimate Gygax. He did have many words to say about logic. [FONT="Tahoma"]As its rules were specifically designed to make it fun and enjoyable, and the consensus of opinion is that D&D is so, does it need to have logical justification of any or all of its rules? Because logic does not necessarily create an enjoyable game form, the reply must be generally negative. Logic, even game logic, must be transcended in the interest of the overall game. If an illogical or inconsistent part fits with the others to form a superior whole, then its very illogicalness and inconsistence are logical and consistent within the framework of the game, for the rules exist for the play of the game, although all too often it seems that the game is designed for the use of the rules in many of today’s products. When questioned about the whys and wherefores of D&D I sometimes rationalize the matter and give “realistic” and “logical” reasons. The truth of the matter is that D&D was written principally as a game — perhaps I used game realism and game logic consciously or unconsciously when I did so, but that is begging the question. Enjoyment is the real reason for D&D being created, written, and published.[/FONT] ------------------------- I think there's a lot to say for this approach, and there's been several exemplar systems of it recently. From AD&D's save versus everything, we got it narrowed down to Fortitude, Reflex, and Will. Not particularly realistic categories, but it beat having "Save versus poison, save versus death, save versus red ants, save versus stinky socks." Then those got overused and had corner cases (for instance, how do you model a swarm of rats having individual members of the swarm clinging to you and still chewing? Is that a Fortitude, Reflex, or Will save) and it got simplified to Saving Throws. What does a Saving Throw do? It represents your chance to shake off an effect. Is it logical that every character has the same chance to shake off most every effect? Meh, maybe. But being blinded just isn't any fun, and a 50% chance to shake it off every round makes it much less likely to ruin your experience (over being essentially taken out of combat). Also, "If an illogical or inconsistent part fits with the others to form a superior whole, then its very illogicalness and inconsistence are logical and consistent within the framework of the game" I think that Gygax just told everyone to "Not sweat the corner cases" a memo game designers still haven't gotten in 2012! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Gygax on Realism in Game Design
Top