Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3087597" data-attributes="member: 30001">The problem/challenge with this line of reasoning is, IMO, that the rules were not designed to be a simulation of a fantasy world.  The rules were designed to support the game.  For example - I don't think that the rules for assigning XP to *player characters* apply to NPCs.  Given the demographic rules in the DMG, I seriously doubt that commoners above 1st level have really accumulated XP in the same way that PCs have.  That's a heck of a lot of monsters being killed.Ultimately, I think you could create the reality for your campaign world and then work backwards with the rules.  I would not consider DnD to be a complete set of rules. You spend either inherited or personal wealth the same way, so I don't see the advantage in one vs. the other.  Military might can be a result of personal bonds, or of dedication to the state, or whatever.  I don't see the difference between the types of dedication if the end result is that the soldier fights for that cause.  AFAIK DnD rules do not address the nature of the loyalty.I'm not sure that the number of soldiers you could hire for an equivalent amount of money to upgrade a +2 sword to a +3 sword but I suspect that the extra +1 to hit and damage is dwarfed by the military might gained by hiring.  Most DMs don't allow (whether explicity or through guilt-trips) PCs to do this kind of hiring.  That works fine for DnD as a game, but can be misleading for a simulation.I'm not sure what you mean by personal bonds being nearly unbreakable.  Players are more likely to have their characters accomodate each other but this is metagaming.  I don't think it make sense to give metagaming logic this sort of official recognition in the campaign culture.  No one would actually *choose* to be a 1st level commoner - so the implication IMO there is that the metagame logic, and even some of the explicit rules of DnD, are PC-only constructs.  If the players knew that I'd DM each one seperately with equal time, *many* would have broken bonds with their fellow PCs.Again, PCs are given adventures to go on because of metagaming logic.  If players had to actually have their characters *find* the adventures, rather than just have them dumped in their laps by the DM, then it could take far longer than a year to go up a level.  It's the metagaming logic that requires the DM to provide the PCs with an adventure every gaming session that creates this situation.  A simulation would make PCs look for their adventures.This assumes a certain set of guidelines in granting XP that aren't clear to me.  Why not give a ruler XP for officiating over a yearly holiday ceremony?  Consider it "story award".This is completely in line with history and seems sort of natural no matter what the rules are.  AFAIK this one is pretty naturally accomplished by the current rules.Older, more established realms would have trouble coming up with developed lands that were cleared and farmable to grant to new barons - and the number of such "wanna-be barons" could be really high.  It's possible that realms would start wars by virtue of the sheer number of ambitious, agressive, and weapon-weilding nobles without land.The system of laws against attacking someone in power is the law of the land, pretty natural for any system of government.  "Acting outside the system" is a pretty broad statement, I'm not sure what that means.  If that means assembling a group of armed people (ie. "adventuring party") and going off and killing someone, there are a number of historical examples of laws against that, enforced to varying degrees.It's the nature of the DnD game though, that players operate in somewhat lawless situations.  If they didn't, they could understandably expect the authorities to take care of most (probably all) situations that PCs are expected to take care of.  Take pretty much any premise of any published adventure, and with a strong government it pretty much becomes implausable.</blockquote>

Verification