Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7573641" data-attributes="member: 42582">On "ridiculous levels of drama that are unrleasltic" -  the suggestion is nonsense, and upthread I already explained why.How much drama occurs in [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]'s game? Let's call it D.How much ingame time passes per unit of such drama? Let's call it T.Taking it as a premise that the drama denstiy per unit time in Maxperson's game is realisitc - so now we know that a drama-density-per-unit-time of D/T is realistic.Now let's call the amount of real-world time spent playing P. Suppose I spend a greater amount of real-world time on dramatic stuff than Maxperson does. I can do that, while maintaining the ratio D/T. All I have to do, if I'm increasing D, is to similarly step up T. Which I can do, by simply increasing the value of T relative to P: that is, cover more ingame time per amount of real-world time. [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] and [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] seem to proceed on the assumption that the ratio of T to P is fixed in some fashion, but that assumption is baseless. For instance, in my Prince Valiant game months or even seasons pass between sessions. In my Cortex+ Heroic game, seasons pass, travel takes indeterminate amounts of time, etc.Traveller's mechanics call for tighter time tracking (it's more "old school" in that way), but time passes at an average of around 3 weeks per session.So as I said, this whole idea . . . . . . is nonsense, because from the density of drama per unit of time spent playing, absolutely nothing can be inferred about the density of drama per unit of ingame time (ie the D/T ratio), and hence nothing can be inferred about realism.</blockquote>

Verification