D&D General Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E

[Hussar]

Per the 1e DMG

Weapon

Derringer - 1-4
Other Hand Gun - 1-8
Shotgun - 1-10
Scatter gun - 1-8
Other Shoulder Arms - 2-8
Gatling Gun - 1-8
Cannon (canister) - 3-12
Dynamite (per stick)* - 4-24

Edit: In 5e

Pistol, automatic - 2d6
Revolver - 2d8
Rifle, hunting - 2d10
Rifle, automatic - 2d8
Shotgun - 2d8

Sorry. Misspoke.

How much damage does a bullet do in the real world?

Since we’re all about deification after all.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

It creates a host of plot holes and narrative inconsistencies if and when, for example, a hobgoblin is able to blast something with a bazooka for 15 damage; but then pulls out a tiny, metal sewing needle yet is still to poke things for 15 damage. Without a very good in-game explanation.

Sorry. Misspoke.

How much damage does a bullet do in the real world?

Since we’re all about deification after all.

Interesting philosophical concept, but I don't believe that anyone around here is advocating for the worship of the Divine Bullet. I could be wrong

Soldiers and military engineers in the real world, on the other hand, likely DO have a general idea of what sort of cover might protect one from a bullet, however. Or how thick armored vehicle plating needs to be to protect the occupants from one I would imagine. From commonly used military firearms at least.

 

[Lanefan]

If Dispel Magic can do that, why can't they make a Dragon's stop breathing rocks/acid/etc? Or make a Beholder blind with it

Good and valid question re the Dragon - though while I can get behind its breath weapon being an innate feature of the creature itself (there's real-world creatures with various types of 'spit' attacks so this one's not that big a stretch), it certainly needs magic to fly and thus IMO hitting one with a Dispel Magic should be able to, if the Dragon's unlucky, interrupt its flight at least briefly.

Messy question re the Beholder as while they need magic to function they also have an always-on ability that negates magic. Then again, those things turn logic into a pretzel anyway...

 

[Maxperson]

Sorry. Misspoke.

How much damage does a bullet do in the real world?

Since we’re all about deification after all.

It doesn't really matter exactly how much it does in the real world.

In the real world, bullets kill easily. In D&D, commoners die easily to bullets. They are on par.

 

[Lanefan]

You don't. Full stop. Do the monsters know exactly how your PC's are dealing damage? After all, a fighter could easily be dealing 25 points of damage with a longsword without any magic. Welcome to 5th edition.

I know how much damage a longsword can do. It can kill people. One hit and most people fall down dead. So, unless little glowing numbers pop out of people's head when you hit them with swords, the notion of HP's existing in the game world is an old, old argument.

Put it another way, @Lanefan. How much damage can a longsword do to a person in the real world? That's EXACTLY how much damage a longsword can do to a person in D&D land.

As Lanefan the ENWorld poster hasn't spent much (as in, hasn't spent any) time around real live actively-in-use longswords as either participant or spectator, I've no idea how much damage a longsword normally does in the real world.

Lanefan the high-level Fighter PC, however, has spent his entire adult life around longswords and is in fact specialized in their use. He knows what they're capable of as weapons and is fully able to recognize when one hits him significantly harder than it should, as abstracted by how many hit points the blow cost him. My point is that he (in character) is also going to have a pretty good idea why that blow hurt so much, which means in order to keep player and character knowledge aligned I-as-his-player need to be told this info via DM narration.

And if the "monsters" are other people, anywhere from run-of-the-mill bandits (i.e. very-low-level Thieves) to the Black Knight of Antioch (very high-level Cavalier), they could more or less exactly know how the PCs are dealing the damage they do because they can to some extent give the same right back.

 

[Lanefan]

It creates a host of plot holes and narrative inconsistencies if and when, for example, a hobgoblin is able to blast something with a bazooka for 15 damage; but then pulls out a tiny, metal sewing needle yet is still to poke things for 15 damage. Without a very good in-game explanation.

And a further inconsistency is created if after capturing (and maybe charming) the Hobgoblin and questioning it about the bazooka it just dropped, a PC fires it and can only do 10 points damage on a direct hit rather than 15; or worse, can't use it at all despite having just been told how.

An even worse inconsistency appeared in a 4e module I converted and ran, where the "attacks" writeup for a Hobgoblin (why is it always Hobgoblins?!) showed a weapon - a staff - that did 4d6 electrical damage on a hit, but from all I could tell that weapon was supposed to disappear when the Hob died as there was no mention of it under either equipment or treasure. On asking here at the time I was told this was standard procedure for 4e. Screw that, says I, and the "Shock-Staff" is now a standard entry on our magic items list.

 

[Hussar]

It doesn't really matter exactly how much it does in the real world.

In the real world, bullets kill easily. In D&D, commoners die easily to bullets. They are on par.

So, it's totally believable that you absolutely cannot kill someone with a sword if they have enough HP? How does one narrate that? Someone is sleeping, totally incapacitated, but, if they have enough HP, you literally, no matter what, cannot ever kill them with a single blow of an axe or sword. And that creates no inconsistencies.

But, a hobgoblin does the same damage as a fighter, and that's totally inconsistent unless we start to build the monster the way that PC's are built.

Here's a hint:

MONSTERS ARE NOT BUILT USING PC RULES IN FIFTH EDITION D&D

 

[Hussar]

As Lanefan the ENWorld poster hasn't spent much (as in, hasn't spent any) time around real live actively-in-use longswords as either participant or spectator, I've no idea how much damage a longsword normally does in the real world.

Lanefan the high-level Fighter PC, however, has spent his entire adult life around longswords and is in fact specialized in their use. He knows what they're capable of as weapons and is fully able to recognize when one hits him significantly harder than it should, as abstracted by how many hit points the blow cost him. My point is that he (in character) is also going to have a pretty good idea why that blow hurt so much, which means in order to keep player and character knowledge aligned I-as-his-player need to be told this info via DM narration.

And if the "monsters" are other people, anywhere from run-of-the-mill bandits (i.e. very-low-level Thieves) to the Black Knight of Antioch (very high-level Cavalier), they could more or less exactly know how the PCs are dealing the damage they do because they can to some extent give the same right back.

So, Lanefan the high-level Fighter PC can tell the difference between two humans? One human cannot EVER be killed by a single sword thrust, while the other dies nearly instantly, despite both being identical in every other way - same clothing, equipment, etc. And that's totally believable? No inconsistencies at all?

 

[Sepulchrave II]

My personal aesthetic preference is for weapons to do predictable damage based on their type. And that’s exactly what it is - a personal aesthetic preference

All arguments which appeal to the idea of an abstracted system having some kind of meaningful relationship with real world physics or biology are ultimately predicated on circular reasoning.

 

[Hussar]

My personal aesthetic preference is for weapons to do predictable damage based on their type. And that’s exactly what it is - a personal aesthetic preference

All arguments which support the notion of an abstracted system having any meaningful relationship with real world physics or biology are ultimately predicated on circular reasoning.

Now this? This I can 100% back and agree with. It's about as honest as it gets. Instead of pretending that the 99 impossible things that get ignored don't exist and then bitch about the one thing that isn't ignored, just straight up claim a preference.

I totally get that. I mean, good grief, most of D&D has worked like this for a long time. Although, to be fair, it's only when something picks up a lumpy metal thing that this actually happens. We don't pay much attention to the damage that claws or bites do. I mean, (I don't have the 2024 MM, so, I'm using the 2014 stats here) why does a troll's claw do almost double the damage of a crocodile's bite? Whereas an ogre, which is bigger and stronger than a troll, does a whopping 1 more point of damage with a great club? So on and so forth.

But, at the very least, can we not agree that this is simply a difference of preferences, rather than trying to prove the "superiority" of one way or another?