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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Warlord as a Fighter option; Assassin as a Rogue option
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 6050697" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I don't think that Evasion is simuationist, actually. It has some superifical nods to simulation (the not-helpless requirement, for example) but in fact it doesn't simulate a causal process at all. And we can tell this, because the rogue can "evade" an explosion that fills the entire area.</p><p></p><p>Wearing my simulationist hat, I ask - if a rogue can "evade" an explostion that fills the entire area, why can't s/he "evade" weapons (at least flaming ones), or go insubstantial in other ways, or . . .</p><p></p><p>Further complications are raised by the fact that a rogue standing on a 6" square pole 100' above the floor of a room can "evade" an explosion without any chance of being knocked off that pole. Why is an Acrobatics check not required? More generally, why does a "Reflex" save never result in the target actually changing position?</p><p></p><p>As I said, Evasion does <em>not</em> present a coherent internal logic for the gameworld, at least once the corner cases come up. There are two possible responses to that. One would be to adjudicate the corner cases differenty: require an Acrobatics check to use Evasion while balancing high on a thin pole; impose penalties to Reflex saves (either directly, or via a DEX-penalty) when conditions make it hard to move; etc. This is the Rolemaster/Runequest approach.</p><p></p><p>The other possible response is to treat Evasion as an ability with a metagame component and a fortune-in-the-middle resolution mode, and narrate in whatever makes sense to explain the use of Evasion on any given occasion. This makes Evasion much closer, in its resolution, to Come and Get It; and like Come and Get It, the required narration will only require more than a moment's thought in the very occasional corner case.</p><p></p><p>I guess there is a third possible response, which treats Evasion as stating an ingame causal principle of the gameworld, and then constructs the gameworld physics around that - some black box process permits rogues to "evade" explosion even when they have nowhere to move and the explosion fills the entire area - but that sort of play could treat Come and Get It similarly - some black box process permits the fighter to "pull" all his/her enemies closer once per 5 minutes.</p><p></p><p>As to hit points, they are not merely abstract. They include as a component luck and divine favour. That is metagame. (Unless the PCs in your game all carry their "luck and divine favour" meter around with them, to keep track of how much of those valuable resources they still haev left in the tank!)</p><p></p><p>To make the point more concrete: a high level fighter can survive a jump over a 100' cliff because of luck and divine favour. The player knows the PC can take the fall. Does the PC know this? If so, how? How can s/he know s/he is blessed with the requisite amount of luck?</p><p></p><p>Again, an alternative possibility is to ignore what Gygax wrote in his AD&D (and I'm not sure how much, if any, of that survived into 2nd ed AD&D and 3E - but it is clearly alive and well in 4e) and take the view that the reason the fighter can survive the fall is because s/he has so much meat! Again, that kind of literalist interpretation can be applied to Come and Get It to - the fighter PC has some sort of (unknown in the real world) quality which permits him/her to draw in foes. I don't know what that ability would be; but then I don't know what sort of non-magical ability would permit a fighter to survive a 100' fall either!</p><p></p><p>I can see two alternatives to doing it via metagame. One is to make fighters magical - which, historically, D&D has shied away from. The second is to posit non-magical abilities like "toughness" or "evasiveness" that are unalysed black boxes playing the same roll as the metagame abilities would, but with a footnote saying "by the way, this isn't metagame". But then why do we need the footnote? If Evasion can be a black box, and hit points can be a black box, why can't Come and Get It be a black box?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6050697, member: 42582"] I don't think that Evasion is simuationist, actually. It has some superifical nods to simulation (the not-helpless requirement, for example) but in fact it doesn't simulate a causal process at all. And we can tell this, because the rogue can "evade" an explosion that fills the entire area. Wearing my simulationist hat, I ask - if a rogue can "evade" an explostion that fills the entire area, why can't s/he "evade" weapons (at least flaming ones), or go insubstantial in other ways, or . . . Further complications are raised by the fact that a rogue standing on a 6" square pole 100' above the floor of a room can "evade" an explosion without any chance of being knocked off that pole. Why is an Acrobatics check not required? More generally, why does a "Reflex" save never result in the target actually changing position? As I said, Evasion does [I]not[/I] present a coherent internal logic for the gameworld, at least once the corner cases come up. There are two possible responses to that. One would be to adjudicate the corner cases differenty: require an Acrobatics check to use Evasion while balancing high on a thin pole; impose penalties to Reflex saves (either directly, or via a DEX-penalty) when conditions make it hard to move; etc. This is the Rolemaster/Runequest approach. The other possible response is to treat Evasion as an ability with a metagame component and a fortune-in-the-middle resolution mode, and narrate in whatever makes sense to explain the use of Evasion on any given occasion. This makes Evasion much closer, in its resolution, to Come and Get It; and like Come and Get It, the required narration will only require more than a moment's thought in the very occasional corner case. I guess there is a third possible response, which treats Evasion as stating an ingame causal principle of the gameworld, and then constructs the gameworld physics around that - some black box process permits rogues to "evade" explosion even when they have nowhere to move and the explosion fills the entire area - but that sort of play could treat Come and Get It similarly - some black box process permits the fighter to "pull" all his/her enemies closer once per 5 minutes. As to hit points, they are not merely abstract. They include as a component luck and divine favour. That is metagame. (Unless the PCs in your game all carry their "luck and divine favour" meter around with them, to keep track of how much of those valuable resources they still haev left in the tank!) To make the point more concrete: a high level fighter can survive a jump over a 100' cliff because of luck and divine favour. The player knows the PC can take the fall. Does the PC know this? If so, how? How can s/he know s/he is blessed with the requisite amount of luck? Again, an alternative possibility is to ignore what Gygax wrote in his AD&D (and I'm not sure how much, if any, of that survived into 2nd ed AD&D and 3E - but it is clearly alive and well in 4e) and take the view that the reason the fighter can survive the fall is because s/he has so much meat! Again, that kind of literalist interpretation can be applied to Come and Get It to - the fighter PC has some sort of (unknown in the real world) quality which permits him/her to draw in foes. I don't know what that ability would be; but then I don't know what sort of non-magical ability would permit a fighter to survive a 100' fall either! I can see two alternatives to doing it via metagame. One is to make fighters magical - which, historically, D&D has shied away from. The second is to posit non-magical abilities like "toughness" or "evasiveness" that are unalysed black boxes playing the same roll as the metagame abilities would, but with a footnote saying "by the way, this isn't metagame". But then why do we need the footnote? If Evasion can be a black box, and hit points can be a black box, why can't Come and Get It be a black box? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Warlord as a Fighter option; Assassin as a Rogue option
Top