Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7595102" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>No it's not. Reality is characterised by unpredictable and unanticipated events. GM decision - more-or-less by definition - can't produce those. That's one reason it produces outcomes in the fiction that are not particularly like real life.</p><p></p><p>Generalising the point: GM decisions are, more-or-less by definition, made for reasons. Thus they create a fiction that reflects one person's priorities for a shared fiction. This is not a characteristic of real life!</p><p></p><p>What do you mean by <em>adding becoming nicked and dulled in combat</em>? Do you mean adding that as a mechanical state? As a way of narrating why an attack roll fails? As background colour in the manner that [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION] describe upthread?</p><p></p><p>And what does this example have to do with <em>GM decides</em> as a method of resolution? In Prince Valiant, I can narrate a dulled weapon (reducing its adds in combat) as an outcome of a loss in combat. In BW, there are various rules for equipment degradation as well as the possibility of narrating this as a consequence of failure. In Cortex+ Heroic I could impose a Dulled Blade complication on a PC as a consequence of a successful reaction by a NPC.</p><p></p><p>There are any number of methods that can produce such outcomes in a RPG which allows for it. You've given no reason to think that <em>GM decides</em> is the one that will produce the most realistic distribution/occurrence of such events.</p><p></p><p>If [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION]'s D&D game includes player's narrating their PCs' care for their weapons, then we have at least one counterexample to your claim that <em>in D&D there is no such dulling or assumed care</em>. You <em>seem</em> to have in mind the dulling of weapons as a mechanical state of affairs, but your argument would become clearer if you spelled some of these assumptions out, <em>and</em> related them to the thread topic of <em>processes whereby the shared fiction is established</em>.</p><p></p><p>As far as weapon's breaking is concerned, there obviously are versions of D&D where this happens - eg 4e Dark Sun. They could easily be generalised. Would they make the game more realistic? Well, there are some swords that have been used in combat yet never broken. So it's not unrealistic that the gameworld should contain such swords, nor that they happen to be in the possession of the PCs. A GM who cares for such things could narrate awauy with broken swords that aren't part of the PCs' immediate situations.</p><p></p><p>There are so many assumptions built into your rhetorical question that it's hard to unpack them all. But just to focus on one: What are the odds of any given warrrio's sword breaking in any given fight? What are the odds of a GM dreaming of a pink buddy? What is the variation, across time and place and circumstance, in rates of broken swords and in rates of pink bunny dreams?</p><p></p><p>If the GM decides, on the basis of his/her dream, that today is the day when s/he will narrate a NPC's sword breaking at the dramatic moment, what makes the resuting fiction less realistic than any other decision-making process?</p><p></p><p>How can they be compltely different? They both involve the question of how massive bodies do or don't fall to earth. That's why [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] has connected them to one another.</p><p></p><p>The fact that the game treats the differently <em>in mechanical terms</em> is neither here nor there. <em>Realism</em>, to the extent that it's germane at all, is a property of fiction, not game mechanics.</p><p></p><p>This is ultimately another example of you making many many assumptions in your posts about how RPGing works, what an RPG system looks like, how it produces outcomes in the fiction, etc. I can unpack most of these, but the presence of the assumptions is making it very hard for you to engage in a conversation that isn't taking those assumptions for granted.</p><p></p><p>Consider, for instance, [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION]'s remarks about whether or not it is "realistic" to frame a scene with a 100' drop: whereas D&D leaves that sort of thing entirely in the discretion of the GM, Classic Traveller (as AbdulAlhazred knows) has rules for world generation, which in turn yield details about world atmosphere and hydography and average temperature, which actually create a starting point for answering questions about the "realism" of any particular posited topography.</p><p></p><p>These world features also feed into the creature generation system, so that flying "dragons" become more likely on low-grav, dense-atmosphere worlds while they are impossible on worlds like earth.</p><p></p><p>That's not to say that he's wrong to think that there is no "realistic" inferential pathway from those world-level details to any particular drop that the PCs might find themselves adjacent to. My point is that you don't seem to have a very well-developed sense of the range of RPG mechanics out there, and also the range of mechanical and non-mechanical decision-making processs.</p><p></p><p>Let's go back, for instance, to your claim that deciding which is the more-travelled path in the way [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION] suggested upthread - ie on the basis of a player check - is less realistic than [something-or-other]. Such a system can be used to introduce weapon degradation and weapon breakage - 4e Dark Sun uses a version of it, as does Prince Valiant, Burning Wheel and Cortex+ Heroic. You've said that these systems are not apt to produce realism, yet they have more prospect of yielding instancs of weapon degradation and weapon breakage than does D&D as you would pkay it out of the box, which is - you've said - a mark of realism. What's your response to this apparent contradiction? I've got no idea, because you don't seem to have anticipated it because of the assumptions you make about how RPGing works.</p><p></p><p>For my part, I take it as amply sufficient evidence that there is no valid inference from <em>method of establishing the fiction</em> to <em>degree of realism of the fiction that is establsihed</em>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7595102, member: 42582"] No it's not. Reality is characterised by unpredictable and unanticipated events. GM decision - more-or-less by definition - can't produce those. That's one reason it produces outcomes in the fiction that are not particularly like real life. Generalising the point: GM decisions are, more-or-less by definition, made for reasons. Thus they create a fiction that reflects one person's priorities for a shared fiction. This is not a characteristic of real life! What do you mean by [I]adding becoming nicked and dulled in combat[/I]? Do you mean adding that as a mechanical state? As a way of narrating why an attack roll fails? As background colour in the manner that [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION] describe upthread? And what does this example have to do with [I]GM decides[/I] as a method of resolution? In Prince Valiant, I can narrate a dulled weapon (reducing its adds in combat) as an outcome of a loss in combat. In BW, there are various rules for equipment degradation as well as the possibility of narrating this as a consequence of failure. In Cortex+ Heroic I could impose a Dulled Blade complication on a PC as a consequence of a successful reaction by a NPC. There are any number of methods that can produce such outcomes in a RPG which allows for it. You've given no reason to think that [I]GM decides[/I] is the one that will produce the most realistic distribution/occurrence of such events. If [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION]'s D&D game includes player's narrating their PCs' care for their weapons, then we have at least one counterexample to your claim that [i]in D&D there is no such dulling or assumed care[/i]. You [I]seem[/I] to have in mind the dulling of weapons as a mechanical state of affairs, but your argument would become clearer if you spelled some of these assumptions out, [I]and[/I] related them to the thread topic of [I]processes whereby the shared fiction is established[/I]. As far as weapon's breaking is concerned, there obviously are versions of D&D where this happens - eg 4e Dark Sun. They could easily be generalised. Would they make the game more realistic? Well, there are some swords that have been used in combat yet never broken. So it's not unrealistic that the gameworld should contain such swords, nor that they happen to be in the possession of the PCs. A GM who cares for such things could narrate awauy with broken swords that aren't part of the PCs' immediate situations. There are so many assumptions built into your rhetorical question that it's hard to unpack them all. But just to focus on one: What are the odds of any given warrrio's sword breaking in any given fight? What are the odds of a GM dreaming of a pink buddy? What is the variation, across time and place and circumstance, in rates of broken swords and in rates of pink bunny dreams? If the GM decides, on the basis of his/her dream, that today is the day when s/he will narrate a NPC's sword breaking at the dramatic moment, what makes the resuting fiction less realistic than any other decision-making process? How can they be compltely different? They both involve the question of how massive bodies do or don't fall to earth. That's why [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION] has connected them to one another. The fact that the game treats the differently [I]in mechanical terms[/I] is neither here nor there. [I]Realism[/I], to the extent that it's germane at all, is a property of fiction, not game mechanics. This is ultimately another example of you making many many assumptions in your posts about how RPGing works, what an RPG system looks like, how it produces outcomes in the fiction, etc. I can unpack most of these, but the presence of the assumptions is making it very hard for you to engage in a conversation that isn't taking those assumptions for granted. Consider, for instance, [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION]'s remarks about whether or not it is "realistic" to frame a scene with a 100' drop: whereas D&D leaves that sort of thing entirely in the discretion of the GM, Classic Traveller (as AbdulAlhazred knows) has rules for world generation, which in turn yield details about world atmosphere and hydography and average temperature, which actually create a starting point for answering questions about the "realism" of any particular posited topography. These world features also feed into the creature generation system, so that flying "dragons" become more likely on low-grav, dense-atmosphere worlds while they are impossible on worlds like earth. That's not to say that he's wrong to think that there is no "realistic" inferential pathway from those world-level details to any particular drop that the PCs might find themselves adjacent to. My point is that you don't seem to have a very well-developed sense of the range of RPG mechanics out there, and also the range of mechanical and non-mechanical decision-making processs. Let's go back, for instance, to your claim that deciding which is the more-travelled path in the way [MENTION=6785785]hawkeyefan[/MENTION] suggested upthread - ie on the basis of a player check - is less realistic than [something-or-other]. Such a system can be used to introduce weapon degradation and weapon breakage - 4e Dark Sun uses a version of it, as does Prince Valiant, Burning Wheel and Cortex+ Heroic. You've said that these systems are not apt to produce realism, yet they have more prospect of yielding instancs of weapon degradation and weapon breakage than does D&D as you would pkay it out of the box, which is - you've said - a mark of realism. What's your response to this apparent contradiction? I've got no idea, because you don't seem to have anticipated it because of the assumptions you make about how RPGing works. For my part, I take it as amply sufficient evidence that there is no valid inference from [I]method of establishing the fiction[/i] to [I]degree of realism of the fiction that is establsihed[/I]. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life
Top