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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5650214" data-attributes="member: 27160">My point is that (1) I don't think "simulating these stories" is what D&D has ever tried to do, even though it was inspired by the tales and the worlds they are set in, and (2) if simulating these stories is what D&D is trying to do, then it fails catastrophically at doing so.Gandalf and Elric are not immune to physical harm from "low level" creatures - they simply don't take any because that is not part of the story.  There really aren't any "low level" creatures in the stories, in fact.  Some creatures and characters have weaknesses or lack the strengths that others possess, but "level" per se is not a concept really supported by anything in the books. Because their world does not work the way the D&D world(s) work.  If they went out to commit genocide, they might die.  Of course, they would not, if the story the author was telling demanded that they did not, but as far as their world was concerned that would be down to luck (or maybe destiny), rather than the "physics" of the world.If Gandalf, having shown he can defeat a Balrog, decided (in a fit of hubris) to go out and slay them all, you can bet that no good would come of it.  And nothing in the "physics" of Middle Earth would make Gandalf's demise (and likely disgrace) in the least unlikely, barring the character of Gandalf himself being unlikely to draw erroneous conclusions about his own inviolability.No, I'm wanting any system for Simulationist-focussed play to model an internally-consistent world and, if it is attempting to model any specific genre, one that models the genre world, not attempts to force the genre stories to happen.This relates to the "impossible thing before breakfast" that Edwards brings up.  What you seem to be asking for here is for genre stories to be generated by simulating the setting where those stories took place.  That can't work.  Many things were assumed to have happened (in the imaginary world) where the stories were set.  "The Story" was presumed, in the conceit necessary for good fiction, to have been simply one particularly interesting series of events that happened there.  By trying to "force the luck" to generate such supposedly unusual events, we break the world model.To paraphrase Charles Tilly in his excellent book "Why?", "The Truth is Not a Story".  Stories are simply ways we arrange sets of information that seem to us to be extraordinary or noteworthy.  If we try to generate a story by defining the way the world works, we are doomed to failure - which is why successful Narrativist supporting games don't model world physics (as a general rule).The characters in these sources do not go out to deal with lesser threats, whether paid to or not, because there is an actual cost to doing so.  They would, in the world they inhabit, actually be at risk.  Their lives and talents are simply far better risked in tackling the bigger, more important threats.  The fact that they don't fall to "lesser threats" is down to the intent of the storyteller, not to the nature of the world they inhabit.  Modelling the world they inhabit would support simulationist play; trying to model the story they took part in would not (at least, not successfully).I highlighted the phrase above because I think there is a confusion, here.  D&D was inspired by these stories; it was wisely enough drawn, however, not to attempt to 'simulate' them, nor even the worlds they were held to take place in.Insignificant reward, perhaps, but also insignificant cost.  A few 12th level characters could eradicate an orc village (say) in 2E in, what, a day?  Less?  With no significant risk at all.</blockquote>

Verification