"I think Hydrogen is a rare element" and other science facts.

[Umbran]

("attar")

No, it's Otto. He's a sprite that hangs around rose gardens, and keeps getting stuffed into spell component pouches.

He's not happy about it, 'cuz he usually ends up next to the bat guano.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Verisimilitude to what though? Fantasy fiction in general?

That, and just common sense expectations. Like people generally expect significantly larger things to be stronger than smaller things, even though they would be unaware of the exact ratios and reasons.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I suppose, but if you can't believe the guy writing the DMG when they say D&D isn't a reality sim, then who would you believe?

Also, when has anyone gone on record saying D&D is a reality simulator?*

*Maybe somebody has, if so, I'd love to be enlightened!

It is as sim as you want it to be. Some editions and variants make that sim easier than others, obviously. The rules themselves are informed by simulation at least as often as they are by gameplay demands or narrativist thinking.

 

[Laurefindel]

That, and just common sense expectations. Like people generally expect significantly larger things to be stronger than smaller things, even though they would be unaware of the exact ratios and reasons.

Agreed

We tend to compare and judge things based on what we’ve seen and experienced, and extrapolate from there. Whether it’s realistic usually doesn’t matter.

Dog-size ant? We know what an ant look like. We’ve seen how it moves. We know roughly how strong a dog is, and how fast it can move. We know ants how very strong for their size. How much? Bah, let’s just say ‘strong’. We know dog can run fast because of their flexible body, which seems more flexible than that of an ant. So dog-size ant? A bit slower than a dog. A bit stronger than a dog. Chitinous shell, big mandibules… we don’t need to know the science behind it but I can imagine it just fine. D&D matches my perception of reality.

Someone falling 50 feet on asphalt? I don’t know the science behind it but my flawed experience tells me ‘splat!’. Character/villain falls 50 feet and doesn’t go splat? D&D fails to match my perception of reality.

 

[Faolyn]

To which the GM should have answered, "Well, do yo figure they get thunderstorms in caves?"

Admittedly, it doesn't have thunderstorms. But fantasy caves are often larger than real caves.

Edit: OK, that was weird. The link totally vanished.

Anyway, it's the Hang Sơn Đoòn cave in Vietnam, which has rain and even seasons.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Yeah, the logic there doesn't hold up either. Halflings in most circumstances should be terrible D&D adventurers. By the rules they aren't. I've learned to live with it.

Interestingly, if it were just about lifting capacity, we could have low strength halfling adventurers (even fighters). A couple bags of holding, armor weight that is size-dependent, and so on and it works. It is the to-hit and damage that really kill it for things with a strength penalty (or just plain not trying to maximize strength whenever possible for most warrior types). It's the same reason why it is hard to make Taran the pig tender turned fighter, or have special rules for characters (PrCs or feats or cantrips) for PCs that want to use their skill and wits but not strength.

The strong version of the claim here is not "there is a nefarious plot to attack a section of players". It's not a nefarious plot; it's just a general atmosphere wherein this section of players is considered backwards or guilty by association or not worth our time.

Ah. I think we see where the subtextual (and hard to discuss) issue might lie. Yes, someone somewhere has definitely painted all... gamers who might associate themselves with ThAC0... with this brush. However, so far as I'm aware, WotC hasn't (the in-book disclaimers specify - so much as they do at all - in-book language, much less the creators, much less the fans). I guess I don't see how a despondent clown named ThAC0 fits into the same frame as this.

Wait how does 2024 differ on halflings?

Because of the background-gated initial attributes, they can start with the same Str as the humans, orcs, and goliaths (edit: and end up with the same maximum).

Yet much weaker than humans.

I agree that D&D is not very simulationistic, but also most games make some concessions to gameability in this department. So it is not either or, you can have a compromise, and doing so doesn't make it completely non-simulationistic, but merely less simulationistic. Also, you cannot argue the two points do not impact the game much. If it didn't why it was such a huge deal for so many people and they could not play a species without an ASI to the class' main stat? It obviously was a massive deal to a lot of people, so you cannot say it had little impact.

The problem happens because D&D wants +/-2 strength to matter significantly enough that you want to improve the score, yet made the difference in carrying capacity small -- making 'realistic' halflings (or horses) a huge score shift. GURPS 3e had the same issue -- making a talking horse character or the like would require strength scores way off the end of the normal chart (and thus cost huge amounts in build resources, based on the resultant combat benefit). So D&D instead (when it has) gives halflings a much more moderated strength deficit, not one that can line up with (certain views of) realism. It's pretty much in the '8 is less than 10 is less than 12, don't worry about by how much' level of verisimilitude. Of course the game has not always been very realistic about how much things weigh, either (TSR era 1/10 lb coins, for instance), so maybe it's the using of real-world units of measurement that's the questionable decision.

 

[Faolyn]

I suppose, but if you can't believe the guy writing the DMG when they say D&D isn't a reality sim, then who would you believe?

Also, when has anyone gone on record saying D&D is a reality simulator?*

*Maybe somebody has, if so, I'd love to be enlightened!

I don't think anyone actually has said that, but then a lot of people say things like halflings have to be weaker because it's realistic.

 

[Faolyn]

So what I want in a fantasy game where all sort of weird and implausible stuff exists is not any precise scientifically accurate realism, I just want broad strokes WYSIWYG verisimilitude. And I don't really want to harp the halfling issue, but to me it is a pretty common sense assumption that humans would be physically stronger than halflings just like it would be to assume that giants are stronger than humans. Now you can break such common sense assumptions and invent explanations, but more you do so, more unrelatable and unpredictable your fantasy milieu becomes.

Ogres are Large giants and have (at least in 5.14) Strength 19, and it's not even slightly difficult for a Medium human to get Strength 20.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Ogres are Large giants and have (at least in 5.14) Strength 19, and it's not even slightly difficult for a Medium human to get Strength 20.

Yes. Which is a bit strange and I'd give them higher strength. Then again, if we assume 19 is the average ogre strength, they're still significantly stronger than humans on average.

 

[Edgar Ironpelt]

("attar")

It's a fair cop, guv. Yeah, it's attar of roses or rose otto, but not otto of roses.