Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 215387" data-attributes="member: 537">In D&amp;D? No.Now some people say &quot;yes, there is _a_ reality we try to simulate, although it's not the same as the real world&quot;, and that's true, to some extent. However, using terms like &quot;_a_ reality&quot; is just playing with words, I think. It's a good rule of thumb that if people are using words like &quot;simulate&quot;, &quot;model&quot; and &quot;reality&quot;, they're not thinking about _a_ reality, they're thinking about REALITY -- ie modelling what real people would be like, or what a real world would be like (if you throw in some wild and wacky elements). Correct?That's a different paradigm to what D&amp;D is about. D&amp;D is fundamentally not about simulating the real world. It's not even about simulating fiction. It's about _recreating in metaphorical terms_ the essence of myth and fantasy. In D&amp;D, if you want to recreate Conan, Merlin or Aragorn, you don't &quot;build&quot; their stats and abilities by reference to what specific things they did in the books (or movies). You look at what their character was about, and what role they played in the stories they appeared in, and you design something around the overall concept. It's &quot;simulation&quot; in the abstract, as opposed to concrete.It's not _completely_ metaphorical, of course. If it was, we'd be playing Papers &amp; Paychecks, instead of poncing around with swords, fireballs, flamestrikes, and all the other make-believe weirdness. However, the point still stands: D&amp;D is not the game for you, if you want to create a detailed, realistic portrayal of the common man (SHARK's world notwithstanding). D&amp;D is about larger-than-life heroes, facing larger-than-life challenges. They may have very human concerns (or they'd be pretty boring) but these aren't the focus of the ruleset. Think Indiana Jones, not Death of a Salesman.You _could_ use D&amp;D to run a world simulation, but you'd be fighting the system most of the time. There are better rulesets for this purpose. GURPS springs to mind, for some reason. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Of course, I PERSONALLY ignore all of the above, and just make up characters like Zippo the flaming bunny with his +12 chainsaw of speed. Zippo is a hit with the cHyx0rs, due to his 10 ranks in Innuendo and Profession (erotic art). He also has a Brooklyn accent, or is supposed to, but every time he speaks everyone says he sounds Pakistani. The guy is a hoot, let me tell you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hong, post: 215387, member: 537"] In D&D? No. Now some people say "yes, there is _a_ reality we try to simulate, although it's not the same as the real world", and that's true, to some extent. However, using terms like "_a_ reality" is just playing with words, I think. It's a good rule of thumb that if people are using words like "simulate", "model" and "reality", they're not thinking about _a_ reality, they're thinking about REALITY -- ie modelling what real people would be like, or what a real world would be like (if you throw in some wild and wacky elements). Correct? That's a different paradigm to what D&D is about. D&D is fundamentally not about simulating the real world. It's not even about simulating fiction. It's about _recreating in metaphorical terms_ the essence of myth and fantasy. In D&D, if you want to recreate Conan, Merlin or Aragorn, you don't "build" their stats and abilities by reference to what specific things they did in the books (or movies). You look at what their character was about, and what role they played in the stories they appeared in, and you design something around the overall concept. It's "simulation" in the abstract, as opposed to concrete. It's not _completely_ metaphorical, of course. If it was, we'd be playing Papers & Paychecks, instead of poncing around with swords, fireballs, flamestrikes, and all the other make-believe weirdness. However, the point still stands: D&D is not the game for you, if you want to create a detailed, realistic portrayal of the common man (SHARK's world notwithstanding). D&D is about larger-than-life heroes, facing larger-than-life challenges. They may have very human concerns (or they'd be pretty boring) but these aren't the focus of the ruleset. Think Indiana Jones, not Death of a Salesman. You _could_ use D&D to run a world simulation, but you'd be fighting the system most of the time. There are better rulesets for this purpose. GURPS springs to mind, for some reason. :) Of course, I PERSONALLY ignore all of the above, and just make up characters like Zippo the flaming bunny with his +12 chainsaw of speed. Zippo is a hit with the cHyx0rs, due to his 10 ranks in Innuendo and Profession (erotic art). He also has a Brooklyn accent, or is supposed to, but every time he speaks everyone says he sounds Pakistani. The guy is a hoot, let me tell you. [/QUOTE]

Verification