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
*Dungeons & Dragons
Who Killed the Megaverse?
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="Jer" data-source="post: 7776531" data-attributes="member: 19857"><p>While I agree with you, the fact is that lack of exposure to how actual weapons and armor work leads to people thinking that somehow a gun is more deadly than a crossbow bolt, and if they believe that then it <em>will</em> be harder for them to swallow.</p><p></p><p>Sure the gun does more physical damage - if you shoot a gun at a target and shoot an arrow at a target you can see which one gets more damaged. But a crossbow bolt to the chest is going to kill you the same way that a bullet in the chest will. The hero running through a hail of arrows to close in with a sword is going to be equally as dead as the hero running through a hail of bullets - in a movie they'll both make it through because that's how the narrative works. In real life they're both equally dead unless they're either incredibly lucky or their enemies are really unskilled.</p><p></p><p>And there isn't anything inherently more real about a barbarian shrugging off fireballs to close with the wizard and fight him with his sword than there is about a barbarian shrugging off mortar rounds to close with a solider and fight him with his sword. It's just that in the real world there are actually guys with mortars and we feel that the "rush them" tactic would not be a good one to engage with them in a fight, while we can sit comfortably in our ignorance of how the same tactic might work for a barbarian rushing a wizard hurling meteor swarms or fireballs at them. (Though again in a movie the "rush them" tactic is just fine for the guy with the mortar if we're watching the right kind of movie - if we see Captain America or Jack Ryan run through a hail of attacks and tackle a guy with a heavy weapon, we probably buy it because that's how action movies work. Try to pull off the same in a realistic movie about war and it likely won't work).</p><p></p><p>IMO with a lot of different gamers I've seen what it comes down to is if they think that high tech weapons are inherently more deadly than low tech ones because they are more damaging then they aren't going to buy into any kind of system that says that a gun can do the same damage as a crossbow. They are going to insist that the difference in their damaging capabilities be modeled by the system and won't buy into the narrative if that isn't taken into account, and because of that they are going to be worried about breaking the balance of the game. On the other hand, if they think that any and every weapon ever made can one-shot kill a person so the damaging capabilities of the weapon isn't a good proxy for the 'deadliness' of the weapon, then they're going to be much more open to mixing it in without concerns about breaking the narrative or the balance of the game. Because they will accept that a laser gun might have the same damage roll as a crossbow (but maybe do fire damage instead of normal damage) and it isn't going to break their suspension of disbelief.</p><p></p><p>(This is all related to how you view the abstraction of hit points as well, which is a long and well worn set of arguments that never change anyone's minds...)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jer, post: 7776531, member: 19857"] While I agree with you, the fact is that lack of exposure to how actual weapons and armor work leads to people thinking that somehow a gun is more deadly than a crossbow bolt, and if they believe that then it [I]will[/I] be harder for them to swallow. Sure the gun does more physical damage - if you shoot a gun at a target and shoot an arrow at a target you can see which one gets more damaged. But a crossbow bolt to the chest is going to kill you the same way that a bullet in the chest will. The hero running through a hail of arrows to close in with a sword is going to be equally as dead as the hero running through a hail of bullets - in a movie they'll both make it through because that's how the narrative works. In real life they're both equally dead unless they're either incredibly lucky or their enemies are really unskilled. And there isn't anything inherently more real about a barbarian shrugging off fireballs to close with the wizard and fight him with his sword than there is about a barbarian shrugging off mortar rounds to close with a solider and fight him with his sword. It's just that in the real world there are actually guys with mortars and we feel that the "rush them" tactic would not be a good one to engage with them in a fight, while we can sit comfortably in our ignorance of how the same tactic might work for a barbarian rushing a wizard hurling meteor swarms or fireballs at them. (Though again in a movie the "rush them" tactic is just fine for the guy with the mortar if we're watching the right kind of movie - if we see Captain America or Jack Ryan run through a hail of attacks and tackle a guy with a heavy weapon, we probably buy it because that's how action movies work. Try to pull off the same in a realistic movie about war and it likely won't work). IMO with a lot of different gamers I've seen what it comes down to is if they think that high tech weapons are inherently more deadly than low tech ones because they are more damaging then they aren't going to buy into any kind of system that says that a gun can do the same damage as a crossbow. They are going to insist that the difference in their damaging capabilities be modeled by the system and won't buy into the narrative if that isn't taken into account, and because of that they are going to be worried about breaking the balance of the game. On the other hand, if they think that any and every weapon ever made can one-shot kill a person so the damaging capabilities of the weapon isn't a good proxy for the 'deadliness' of the weapon, then they're going to be much more open to mixing it in without concerns about breaking the narrative or the balance of the game. Because they will accept that a laser gun might have the same damage roll as a crossbow (but maybe do fire damage instead of normal damage) and it isn't going to break their suspension of disbelief. (This is all related to how you view the abstraction of hit points as well, which is a long and well worn set of arguments that never change anyone's minds...) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Who Killed the Megaverse?
Top