Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 6503301" data-attributes="member: 20564">I see where you are coming from.&nbsp; How's this - I've run and played very realistic games and enjoyed them greatly.&nbsp; Knowing I have three turns before hitting the bottom of the canyon gives the character (and the others) a wonderful countdown timer for drama.&nbsp; It's not arbitrary and as well supports the physics (in this case literally) of the setting.&nbsp; And I would love how real it was, and with some DMs the not-arbitrary portion was important.&nbsp; Not because of lack of trust, but because of lack of consistency.&nbsp; Right now I'm a fan of simple and of subtractive design - give us enough rules we're all on the same page and then trust that everyone at the table wants a good story.&nbsp; I'd rather say &quot;You've got three rounds before you splat at the bottom of the canyon.&nbsp; Go!&quot; rather then spending looking for falling speed in the rules, not finding it and googling terminal velocity of a man-shaped object in air, checking that vs. height of the cliff and rounding up to deal with acceleration time, and then giving it to the players.&nbsp; Just kills the pacing.&nbsp; And if the realistic number ens up being too long (or worse, grossly too short) for drama I think need to break player expectations I've set up and fudge it anyway.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 6503301, member: 20564"] I see where you are coming from. How's this - I've run and played very realistic games and enjoyed them greatly. Knowing I have three turns before hitting the bottom of the canyon gives the character (and the others) a wonderful countdown timer for drama. It's not arbitrary and as well supports the physics (in this case literally) of the setting. And I would love how real it was, and with some DMs the not-arbitrary portion was important. Not because of lack of trust, but because of lack of consistency. Right now I'm a fan of simple and of subtractive design - give us enough rules we're all on the same page and then trust that everyone at the table wants a good story. I'd rather say "You've got three rounds before you splat at the bottom of the canyon. Go!" rather then spending looking for falling speed in the rules, not finding it and googling terminal velocity of a man-shaped object in air, checking that vs. height of the cliff and rounding up to deal with acceleration time, and then giving it to the players. Just kills the pacing. And if the realistic number ens up being too long (or worse, grossly too short) for drama I think need to break player expectations I've set up and fudge it anyway. [/QUOTE]

Verification