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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Difference Between Realism vs. Believability
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="steenan" data-source="post: 5262722" data-attributes="member: 23240"><p>I'd add one think to the topic of believability. </p><p></p><p>There are two kinds of believability, two ways in which it can be achieved. They come from two different ways in which we may perceive and analyze a fictional world: as a world, ruled by its internal laws, and as a work of fiction, ruled by laws of art. They are not opposites, and they are, in some cases, very similar - but they can also be extremely different.</p><p></p><p>An setting may be believable in a "scientific" sense. That does not mean it follows real world's science, but that it consistently follows its own laws, laws that can be discovered by someone who lives there. The laws may be strange, but they are there and they work. Books by Brandon Sanderson and Jacek Dukaj are great examples here. It's hard, if possible, to "overthink" such setting. A lot of fun comes from figuring out how it works and (in RPG) exploiting it. In this kind of logic, when one asks "If a portable hole placed in a bag of holding explodes, may I use it to make a bomb?" is "Definitely yes.".</p><p></p><p>A setting may also be ruled by laws of its genre; laws that treat it as a work of art. Indiana Jones, Star Wars or Pirates of Caribbean have very little "scientific" consistency, but are fun anyway. We don't ask how is something possible, or why a character acts as he does. We ask what is appropriate, interesting and fun in this kind of story. Trying to apply scientific analysis to this kind of setting is an exercise in futility. Applying literary analysis, on other hand, works. In this kind of logic, an answer to "Why can't I trip an opponent more than once an encounter?" is "Because it would be boring if you did it all the time.".</p><p></p><p>It is possible to "internalize" a genre, by explaining and rationalizing the tropes in-setting. This gives a game the "scientific" believability without losing genre coherence, thus allowing for more kinds of exploration. Exalted and Earthdawn are both examples of such approach.</p><p></p><p>Many problems we encounter in RPGs come from confusing this kinds of settings and kinds of believability, by game designers or by players. If a game is written with genre consistency, but presented as if it had scientific consistency, it leads to frustration and abuses. That's a problem that plagues most editions of D&D. A game that has scientific consistency and is treated as if it had genre consistency won't create interesting story, as it won't guide the play as the players expect it to.</p><p></p><p>There is no direct relation between the type of consistency and the game being rules-light or rules-heavy. Rules-heavy "scientific" games have rules that may be treated as (an approximation of) their "laws of physics". Rules-heavy "genre" games have strong metagame rules that enforce appropriate tropes. Rules-light games make sure that players know how the world works (in "scientific" ones) or how the genre works (in genre games) and use this knowledge in making their decisions and rulings.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="steenan, post: 5262722, member: 23240"] I'd add one think to the topic of believability. There are two kinds of believability, two ways in which it can be achieved. They come from two different ways in which we may perceive and analyze a fictional world: as a world, ruled by its internal laws, and as a work of fiction, ruled by laws of art. They are not opposites, and they are, in some cases, very similar - but they can also be extremely different. An setting may be believable in a "scientific" sense. That does not mean it follows real world's science, but that it consistently follows its own laws, laws that can be discovered by someone who lives there. The laws may be strange, but they are there and they work. Books by Brandon Sanderson and Jacek Dukaj are great examples here. It's hard, if possible, to "overthink" such setting. A lot of fun comes from figuring out how it works and (in RPG) exploiting it. In this kind of logic, when one asks "If a portable hole placed in a bag of holding explodes, may I use it to make a bomb?" is "Definitely yes.". A setting may also be ruled by laws of its genre; laws that treat it as a work of art. Indiana Jones, Star Wars or Pirates of Caribbean have very little "scientific" consistency, but are fun anyway. We don't ask how is something possible, or why a character acts as he does. We ask what is appropriate, interesting and fun in this kind of story. Trying to apply scientific analysis to this kind of setting is an exercise in futility. Applying literary analysis, on other hand, works. In this kind of logic, an answer to "Why can't I trip an opponent more than once an encounter?" is "Because it would be boring if you did it all the time.". It is possible to "internalize" a genre, by explaining and rationalizing the tropes in-setting. This gives a game the "scientific" believability without losing genre coherence, thus allowing for more kinds of exploration. Exalted and Earthdawn are both examples of such approach. Many problems we encounter in RPGs come from confusing this kinds of settings and kinds of believability, by game designers or by players. If a game is written with genre consistency, but presented as if it had scientific consistency, it leads to frustration and abuses. That's a problem that plagues most editions of D&D. A game that has scientific consistency and is treated as if it had genre consistency won't create interesting story, as it won't guide the play as the players expect it to. There is no direct relation between the type of consistency and the game being rules-light or rules-heavy. Rules-heavy "scientific" games have rules that may be treated as (an approximation of) their "laws of physics". Rules-heavy "genre" games have strong metagame rules that enforce appropriate tropes. Rules-light games make sure that players know how the world works (in "scientific" ones) or how the genre works (in genre games) and use this knowledge in making their decisions and rulings. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
The Difference Between Realism vs. Believability
Top