D&D (2024) The Problem with Healing Powercreep

[Micah Sweet]

But, to a large degree, they always will be.

A lot of people I've seen say "I don't want disassociated mechanics, I want bespoke rules for everything that match what is really going on in the situation" are looking for realism. For every mechanic to tie directly into the world in their imagination and hewing ever closer to being exact. Now, maybe you have a different view, or a less extreme view, but you are always going to get some degree of this, no matter how hard you try to keep things simple.

That's pretty much what I want, but I like to think I've been pretty clear about my preferences at least.

 

[Micah Sweet]

At which level? At the level represented by earlier editions of the game rules? Or at the level of recognizing that the PCs are designed to be unrealistic action heroes at their weakest, and mythical beings at their strongest? Kind of hard to tell which thing you are disagreeing with since you quoted both as though they were making the same points.

When referring to how PCs are designed, what version of D&D (and its relatives) are you referring to? Just D&D 5e and 5.5?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

OK, I swore I would never do this again, but I apparently am again reading a game I have no interest in to argue with @pemerton. And to my great surprise I find that it has been misrepresented! I can't be arsed to quote the book, but in Marvel Heroic, plot points are purely meta and there is no attempt to represent them as anything but. That's it. That's what they are. We are done.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I am not insisting "that all methods of authoring a character are the same and make for the same experience". Rather, I am denying that claims others' are making about how mechanics and immersion relate are true.

I've played games where characters are authored in a shallow fashion, without much regard to seriousness of the fiction or the play experience. Most of them used D&D rules. That may say something about the D&D rules, but I also says something about the relatively broad audience that D&D attracts.

I've played games where characters are authored in a way that takes the fiction seriously: the fictions have cares and even passions, and that drives their decision-making. The play I've experienced that has fit this description has used systems as varied as Rolemaster and Cthulhu Dark, Burning Wheel and Classic Traveller. The notion that it somehow impedes this process to be able (say) to spend a "point" of some sort to add a bonus die (or whatever) is an empirical conjecture for which I have never encountered any evidence.

That's because it's not empirical; it is personal preference regarding what a person feels is immersive and and/or representative of the fiction. You and the people with which you're arguing simply have different preferences.

 

[Micah Sweet]

All you mean by "disassociated" is that there are processes that occur in the mechanical resolution that do not correlate to events or processes in the fiction.

That feature of rules - which is a logical feature (for lack of a better word in English) - tells us nothing about the psychological states and processes involved in immersing in the fiction.

I mean, you yourself concede the point in so far as you recognise that one of the least "disassociated" and most simulationist rulesets ever devised - Rolemaster - nevertheless requires a lot of thinking about mechanical processes which don't always produce immersion in the fiction.

Many people are not interested in games that mechanize emotional drives and intentions. This is a preference.

 

[Micah Sweet]

F

It's more a question of whether the rules are there to reflect the fiction or the fiction is there to reflect the rules. Which comes first?

Example, assuming gravity works the same as on Earth:

If, based on our own real-life observations, a typically strong (Human) character can jump 4 feet straight up then does the rule match that? (fiction first)

Or does a rule that says a typically strong character's maximum vertical jump is 10 feet force the fiction to bend to suit that rule? (rules first)

For my part I pretty much always want the rules to reflect the fiction, but there are many games that operate differently and they all have their fans too.

 

[Micah Sweet]

To be fair, 2014 and 2024 d&d both have a ton of mechanics that are meta. They have non-magical influence over PCs like 2024 lion roar applying fear. Or like inspiring leader always meaning whatever the other players has their character do or say you end up inspired by them, every short and long rest. They have tons of limited use abilities that aren’t easy to dietetically explain in full. Ki, Battlemaster manuevers, 2nd wind, rage. Heck, even sneak attack being rogue only, as in why can’t my fighter sneak attack while the Barbarian is next to the enemy is meta just without the decision point.

I think we often overlook just how much of this kind of stuff modern d&d has in it.

I am well aware of all these things in 5e, but they're not my preference and I don't care for them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I've GMed 1000s of hours of Rolemaster. I understand the "simulationist" aesthetic in RPG design and adjudication.

My point is simply that there is no particular correlation between that aesthetic, and actual immersive experience in play.

There is no correlation for you, because you have a different preference.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why can the character not think about it? I've read stories where the character had the ability to spend a limited amount of "stuff" to change fate or twist luck in their favor. Sure, it doesn't appear in Tolkien, but it appears in plenty of other authors. So why are you so certain that this is not something that CAN be done?



The world the character is in works the way you decide it does. If you want a world where people are aware of the spark of inspiration burning in their chest like a star and can choose to burn that blaze brighter for a surge of effort... it is trivial to do so.

The only problem would be, that you don't like that narrative. Not that the narrative cannot exist.

To me, games and stories are quite different things, with different priorities. For my part I see a very clear separation between stories (which I love) and the kinds of role-playing games I prefer to play. For me, RPGs are about exploring and interacting with a living world that exists independent of my character by taking actions through the lens of my PCs perspective. Stories are not about that, and I don't really want to play a game that pushes to be both, especially if it does so mechanically.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Neither is mana. Unless you write the story to include that as a thing. So why can't you write that into the narrative?



But spell slots are not a thing! No person on this earth has ever had a spell slot. So now what?

Magic isn't a thing in real life either. But it is in D&D. So making mechanics for it that are diagetic in that world makes sense to me.