Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5458641" data-attributes="member: 42582">Two things. First, we established upthread that the "traipsing" reference is from Races and Classes, and also that on this point R&C is in express contradiction to W&M.Second, from the fact that someone somewhere in the gameworld might traipse through a fairy ring, it doesn't follow that the actual game played is shallow just because no PC ever traipses through a fairy ring and talks to a little person. Presumably many NPCs in the gameworld are also having sex, having children, going to church, etc, but in most of the time in my games sex doesn't come up in anything more than a peripheral way, the PCs don't have kids, and the only time their church visits actually come up in game is when they want healing or other magical benefits. I don't think this makes my game shallow, though, because there are other worthwhile themes to be explored in a fanatsy RPG besides sex, family and organised worship (worhty as these themes might also be).Now if you regard "traipsing through fairy rings" as a placeholder for all things of any thematic depth that might occur in a fantasy RPG, it would be a different thing. But in my view W&M makes it pretty clear that that is not the intention of the game designers.A gameworld can be consistent in salient respects without having a detailed or realistic economy. All that is required is that the economy of the gameworld not be salient. The 1st ed AD&D has some suggestions on how to make the economy non-salient - I don't think it therefore follows that the 1st ed AD&D is opposed to the notion of a consistent gameworld.The sort of consistency I want in my gameworld is consistency in the broad sweep of history, of myth and of politics, and consistency when this is reduced down into particular (generally non-commercial) interactions with people and places. I want consistency in the difference between devil-worshipping tieflings and demon-worshipping gnolls. I want my sun-cult that combines worship of Bahamut, Kord, Pelor and Ioun to interact in an interesting and evocative way with the more mainstream cults of those various gods, in a way that doesn't strike the players just as arbitrary, but rather helps them engage with the nuances of the mythic history and resonance of the gameworld.The presence or absence of rules to support an economic simulations is irrelevant to this. When I read The Hobbit or the LotR, if my first observation is that the more-or-less autarkic shire is presented as having a standard of living comparable to that of an England that was one of the centres of world commerce and production - an economically absurd notion - then I have probably missed the point. If the economic absurdity led me to conclude that the world was a mere facade, I think I would have doubly missed the point. Economics is just not a salient consideration for those particular fantasy stories.You seem to be suggesting that anyone who doesn't care about the economics of the gameworld can only be playing a dungeon-bashing game. If you are, I think it's nonsense for the reasons I've given above. If you're not, then apologies for the misunderstanding, but I 've completely failed to grasp the point you're trying to make.</blockquote>

Verification