Recent content by AlViking

The point seems to be that you don't personally care for them.

The rules don't need to tell us. If it matters, the GM or player can fill in details. That's why it's called abstraction. But imagine if this were the requirement. That if a character is climbing a cliff and there is a chance of falling, the game has to tell you exactly why and how that...

Shown being worn on the belt unlit, shown being held in the hand while lit. It frees up your hands if you don't need the light.

I don't believe any of these videos one way or another. We don't have good numbers and sales are shifting to DndBeyond. Unless it comes from an official WOTC source it's guesswork.

You insisting that I'm wrong doesn't mean anything so I guess we're at an impasse. If all you can point to is @pemerton saying one the 10 aspects of someone's blog post is not right, it doesn't really hold a lot of weight. Although I will say that I only skim their posts because I don't have...

If D&D couldn't take advantage of mythical hazards (which in this case may or may not be mythical after all), it wouldn't have very many hazards. :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_quicksand Dry quicksand is loose sand whose bulk density is reduced by blowing air through it and which yields easily to weight or pressure. It acts similarly to normal quicksand, but it does not contain any water and does not operate on the same principle. Dry...

Well if you've said that it's wrong, I guess it must be! The scales have fallen from my eyes and now I see the truth! Oh wait ... nah. You just don't like the abstractions and simplifications that D&D uses. Everything in combat happens in world, represents in-world events. It's fantasy action...

Who said I take it personally? That doesn't mean I won't push back or like it.

So? Every TTRPG abstracts things. They just choose different things and different degrees. No TTRPG can accurately model reality, you'd need an AI and a super computer far more powerful than anything we have. Simulation as far as I'm concerned is not about accuracy. It's about the approach...

Despite my better judgement, I would just point out that this is just one example where the rules read like an instruction manual than a toolbox of rules to me (bold added). Think dangerous Everything in the world is a target. You’re thinking like an evil overlord: no single life is worth...

I could give you a more exhaustive list and it wouldn't matter. I even started writing one but it's pointless. It's not just one thing, it's the package taken together. I could go through the GM guidance, find the corresponding general ideas in the DMG and explain the differences. Things like...

While I agree to a degree with the jargon/non-jargon bit I would also say that even that Boeing simulator still uses a fair amount of abstraction. They don't constantly calculate the exact airflow patterns that exactly match reality because as odd as it sounds, we don't really know why planes...

Every game in existence, every simulation for that matter, simplifies, makes assumptions and create abstractions to model complex realities. It has little to do with what it means for a game to take a simulationist approach as far as I'm concerned. For me it's about the approach of the game...

Very powerful or very lucky fiends can travel as they wish in my campaign because there will always be options not listed in the books. Other fiends are summoned by foolish people and escape and of course they're always trying to get someone to open a portal for them. A few were once mortal and...