How important is "realism"?

[Garthanos]

By itself, any mechanic that lets AoEs be picky about friend or foe invites all sorts of questioning (I do it in an area with my team, the bad guys, and innocent folks.... how does the attack figure that out when the characters can't even figure out who is who sometimes?). 'It's magic!' isn't a solution. It's a cop out. And going with that without a decent explanation simply leaves players not knowing how magic works because it obviously has a certain omniscience but then other powers show almost the opposite... so where's the consistency?

BTW All the way back to AD&D it was well established that Divine magic was good at differentiating and being ally friendly and wizard magic rather wasnt... it was an implicit characterization difference.

 

[Tom B1]

Speculative realism: 'Hard' science fiction falls into this category, but also worldbuilding that tries to think through the implications of magic (5e strikes me as not having thought through these implications, given that cantrips, 1st level spells, and common magic items could solve many real world problems while undoubtedly creating others). Science fiction games strike me as potentially problematic because there are going to be a variety of expectations regarding how 'real' the universe has to be (i.e. do you want to play science fiction or science fantasy?)

Agree with what you said on all counts. And particularly that hard science games are hard to make realistic even with a few mcguffins because any form of spaceflight is complex and issues like fuel and how two bodies struggle to meet one another in space within the limits of fuel and momentum and many other aspects of that gaming environment are a challenge. It's probably harder than most other genres to make 'gritty' yet fun to play in.

 

[Garthanos]

But you obviously recognize that this is your personal preference? That is neither better or worse than mine.

I think it benefits the game to have the GM and the players understanding the same things about sources of power and effects in the game. It promotes common understandings of how things will play out and supports informed decision making for players.

The 5e fighters attacks have next to no descriptions of how they are attacking its boring ... bet you like that right?

I suppose you could argue that the rules say what you can do and the how is irrelevant.

how to me is relevant because having control over the details of that flavor lets me tell the story of my characters abilities it is player empowering.

But that, to me, would be putting the horse in behind the cart - the rules should derive from the realities of the setting/environment and not the setting/environment being painted on to game mechanics.

AD&D had almost no descriptions of what an attack did beyond reduce enemy hit points. In a way one could be expected to make that attack vivid or not... depending on the table I suppose.

Mechanics are very limited as to what will work in a functioning game. Flavor and the how (which is a really also a description beyond the effect) it is accomplished is utterly open ended.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Especially since there is no description of what HP are exactly.

One could argue that there is no rule for swashbuckling action like cutting a curtain so it falls on the head of your enemy. There is: it's called making a standard attack. It doesn't matter if you describe it as that or as an attack that leaves a nasty gash on the opponent's forearm, or nothing except an inconclusive exchange of attacks and parries resulting in one side being a little more exhausted than the other. It can be sad for people who want mechanical differentiation for different actions but never did the games rules (who encourage players to describe what they do with flourish to gain inspiration) actively preclude these actions from occuring.

 

[Garthanos]

Likewise, I usually prefer epic heroes to be leading armies rather than single-handedly fighting them.

Heroes turning into massive Dragons do not belong to the same category of the guy who needs to call troops to help him fight.

That said, being your preference while it isn't the person who is inspired by Cu Cuhlaine and Gilgamesh and Beowulf but it is rather like those inspired by Alexander the Great,and Bellesaurius they are different heroic archetype, in 4e there are even different classes and selectable Epic Destinies appropriate.

 

[Argyle King]

I'll also add that sometimes the small details can matter more than the big ones.

For example, I'm (usually) willing to ignore the bio-mechanics of how exactly a dragon can fly or exhale flames. I'll likely accept some vague answers such as "...special gland in the throat" or whatever.

However, I expect that the exhaled flames have an in-game effect somewhat like how real-world fire works.

Giant Mythological Creature Exhaling Flames?

Exhaled-Flames Are Incapable of Burning Gasoline-Soaked Bath Tissue Because Game Mechanics?

 

[Garthanos]

Especially since there is no description of what HP are exactly.

One could argue that there is no rule for swashbuckling action like cutting a curtain so it falls on the head of your enemy. There is: it's called making a standard attack.

AD&D

It doesn't matter if you describe it as that or as an attack that leaves a nasty gash on the opponent's forearm, or nothing except an inconclusive exchange of attacks and parries resulting in one side being a little more exhausted than the other. It can be sad for people who want mechanical differentiation for different actions

I like tactically distinct differentiation.

but never did the games rules (who encourage players to describe what they do with flourish to gain inspiration) actively preclude these actions from occuring.

its not going to get inspiration when it is the standard and happens all the time

That said I approve of the inspiration mechanic.

 

[Garthanos]

Exhaled-Flames Are Incapable of Burning Gasoline-Soaked Bath Tissue Because Game Mechanics?

Tell me do you have mechanics for bath tissue in your game inquiring minds want to know? LOL

 

[Argyle King]

Heroes turning into massive Dragons do not belong to the same category of the guy who needs to call troups to help him fight.

That said, being your preference while it isnt the person who is inspired by Cu Cuhlaine and Gilgamesh and Beowulf but it is rather like those inspired by Alexander the Great,and Bellesaurius they are different heroic archetype, in 4e there are even different classes and selectable Epic Destinies appropriate.

I played 4E. I had fun with 4E.

I would agree that it is a good fit for superheroes or mythic fantasy.

Where I occasionally struggled against 4E was that the PCs were sometimes so far above the world around them (rather than being part of it) and so much better than most of the (supposedly) legendary creatures that it became difficult to take a lot of things seriously.

 

[Argyle King]

Tell me do you have mechanics for bath tissue in your game inquiring minds want to know? LOL

I think it's mostly reasonable to assume it would catch fire.

In some games, it would (as per the rules) be impossible to catch fire because it didn't match a particular keyword -and thus doesn't work because reasons.

My example is meant to be somewhat hyperbolic, but it's not entirely divorced from how some games I've played work.