D&D 4E Bridging the cognitive gap between how the game rules work and what they tell us about the setting

[Zeromaru X]

4e's model works PERFECTLY well for something like 'Seven Deadly Sins' style epic conflict where the PCs are literally invoking and being hammered by epic level magic that blasts the land almost on a scale equivalent to nuclear weapons.

All Shonen anime, actually. There are a lot of series where the characters are injured beyond what's physically possible, bleed litters of blood, and are completely fine the next scene. Like Naruto, Saint Seiya, Fist of the North Star, and many others. In these stories, what matters is the narrative, not the realism/verisimilitude. The same can be said of 4e.

As for injuries, I remember I've used the variant injury rules from an Unhearted Arcana article in Dragon 204. Not all of my players enjoyed this, but those who liked the tactical side of 4e really enjoyed the injuries mechanics.

 

[Zeromaru X]

Worth noting that realism can and does exist in many areas of the game beyond hit points and injury.

Can you cite some examples?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Can you cite some examples?

How specific do you need me to be to satisfy you? Most of the content in the 2e era, particularly in the Monstrous Manual, the Historical Reference series and the Arms & Equipment Guide fits the bill. The 1e DMG as well as the Dungeoneer's and Wilderness Survival Guides contain a wealth of world building info with an eye toward verisimilitude in many areas. I could easily go on.

I know I'm not talking about 5th edition (which is admittedly lacking in these areas without 3pp support/replacement), but if you can talk about 4e I can talk about AD&D.

 

[Zeromaru X]

How specific do you need me to be to satisfy you?

I don't need specificity, just some examples to look at. Remember, my "oldest" D&D experience was 3.5. I don't have played anything older, and unless there is a good reason to do so, I don't plan to, either.

I don't know anything about 2e and earlier rules. And the ones I know I don't like it. Like that one about f*cking your players if they take time buying stuff. Are you talking about that kind of rules?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't need specificity, just some examples to look at. Remember, my "oldest" D&D experience was 3.5. I don't have played anything older, and unless there is a good reason to do so, I don't plan to, either.

I don't know anything about 2e and earlier rules. And the ones I know I don't like it. Like that one about f*cking your players if they take time buying stuff. Are you talking about that kind of rules?

What rule is that? I'm not familiar with it, and quite frankly the idea of "getting to the action", which is how I interpret your buying stuff comment, seems much more like a 4e and/or 5e thing to me.

Did my examples make any sense to you? Older versions of the game exist and are relevant even if you're not familiar with or haven't played them.

 

[Undrave]

Like Naruto, Saint Seiya, Fist of the North Star, and many others. In these stories, what matters is the narrative, not the realism/verisimilitude. The same can be said of 4e.

Hey now, whenever Shiryu gets blinded it always takes a miracle for his vision to come back.

Or a trip to the Greek Afterlife.

 

[Zeromaru X]

What rule is that? I'm not familiar with it, and quite frankly the idea of "getting to the action", which is how I interpret your buying stuff comment, seems much more like a 4e and/or 5e thing to me.

It was a rule about f*cking your players when they were buying horses, if they took too much time. It was in the AD&D PHB or DMG, but I have to search for it. But this goes more into the "DM vs players" thing I dislike about the older editions.

As for the examples, I have to read those books to get an idea of what you're talking about.

Hey now, whenever Shiryu gets blinded it always takes a miracle for his vision to come back.

Or a trip to the Greek Afterlife.

Sure, but that was more about the narrative (a plot reason, a handicap for Shiryu, etc.) rather than realism. And Shiryu was able to fight perfectly fine even if blind (after a short arc about training, again favoring narrative over realism).

 

[Micah Sweet]

It was a rule about f*cking your players when they were buying horses, if they took too much time. It was in the AD&D PHB, but I have to search for it. But this goes more into the "DM vs players" thing I dislike about the older editions.

As for the examples, I have to read those books to get an idea of what you're talking about.

Then what you're saying is yes, you need me to provide rules text verbatim or my examples don't count. Telling you where such rules exist (and implying the presence of much more) isn't good enough.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Worth noting that realism can and does exist in many areas of the game beyond hit points and injury. You can't use, "but hit points!" as an excuse to disregard all claims of verisimilitude.

Worth noting that realism can and does exist in many aspects of musical theatre beyond the singing and dancing. But this doesn't make it anything other than a fundamentally unrealistic artform. And, unless you're part of Cornley Polytechnic Drama Society, you're not going to write a kitchen sink drama (or even a (UK) soap opera) as a musical.

The realism of an art form is normally capped by the least realistic common part that's not part of the explicit premise (no one cares if e.g. the gunplay is unrealistic if there are only guns once a season; it's not a core element). And combat and harm is a common thing in D&D. Therefore the level of realism in D&D is extremely low. And versimilitude without realism is pure aesthetics. Which isn't to say it's worthless - but it is about appearances.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Worth noting that realism can and does exist in many aspects of musical theatre beyond the singing and dancing. But this doesn't make it anything other than a fundamentally unrealistic artform. And, unless you're part of Cornley Polytechnic Drama Society, you're not going to write a kitchen sink drama (or even a (UK) soap opera) as a musical.

The realism of an art form is normally capped by the least realistic common part that's not part of the explicit premise (no one cares if e.g. the gunplay is unrealistic if there are only guns once a season; it's not a core element). And combat and harm is a common thing in D&D. Therefore the level of realism in D&D is extremely low. And versimilitude without realism is pure aesthetics. Which isn't to say it's worthless - but it is about appearances.

I completely disagree, but since you've already made up your mind there's no point arguing with you. Believe what you like.