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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9446801" data-attributes="member: 7045806">What am I missing? Because I don't see the functional difference here. You are trading one issue for another. It's a zero sum argument.Bob the world builder on youtube did a video on movement speed in a 6 second time frame. You can, with a brisk walk, move 30 feet in 6 seconds. He demonstrates this in the video. But this is just to illustrate the issue with the discussion. Changing that 6 second time frame just trades one issue for another. Cleans up some things to make others weird. Extend the time to 12 seconds and now we walk too slow. Extend it to a minute, and it gets worse. He, also. has a video that shows him having trouble chugging a potion in the time allotted. So if you want to "fix" that issue, you end up with a slow walking speed. If you speed it up to 3 seconds to make walking speed quicker, potions become undrinkable. Where is the net gain?This is all to say that the "simulationist" arguments are awkward, when you aren't actually moving closer to that goal. They come off as "laboratory analysis" instead of anything relevant to game play, or even something productive in pursuit of "realism." It would take a reconstruction of the system from the ground up to achieve what is argued here. Anything short of that is just hot swapping issues based on personal preference. I don't care about walking speed simlation, but I do care about potions.So it all seems like a pointless argument about personal preference of where the "simulation" falls apart. And would end in meaningless rules changes that don't actually do anything. Lets close one plot hole, and open another.</blockquote>

Verification