D&D General D&D isn't a simulation game, so what is???

[darkbard]

Though I think that I'd argue that 4e is still far, far more interested in supporting gamist interests than simulationist ones; too many of its powers are interesting from a tactical POV, but don't seem to really match up with their fluff all that well (as shown by the frequent suggestions to reskin them for other purposes). Probably its strongest simulationist element is simply the fact it actually puts a priority on positioning.



Yeah. Their primary strength is they do provide a fairly measured pace-of-resolution structure, which I expect is a strong virtue to many people. Its not the only way to do that, but most of the others are overtly metagame in structure (i.e. expended metacurrency, which can do the same thing while leaving the basic wounding process alone) which some people don't like, and they are slightly more complicated.

I won't argue with your characterization of 4E as more gamist than simulationist. But in my experiences with 4E, reskinning was done not because the mechanics and pre-written fiction were at odds generally but rather that a specific PC's build depended on certain (a) fiction and/or (b) mechanical interactions to work as the player imagines for their character and that another power with different pre-written fiction facilitates (a) and/or (b) better. Hence the reskin.

 

[Cadence]

EDIT: not to mention many people don't realize they're even hurt until they're no longer in the middle of the fight. There are numerous stories of people thinking they were stung by a wasp only to find they'd been shot 5 minutes later. Apparently winning a sword duel and then falling over dead from your wounds a few minutes after the fight was over was also a thing.

Iirc, upthread it is pointed out that at least one version of Traveller has the penalties not kick in until after combat?

 

[Bill Zebub]

Iirc, upthread it is pointed out that at least one version of Traveller has the penalties not kick in until after combat?

That would be a cool use for Con (or a similar stat in another system): when injured, make a Con save to postpone penalties until after combat.

 

[Cadence]

That would be a cool use for Con (or a similar stat in another system): when injured, make a Con save to postpone penalties until after combat.

Do Barbarians in some D&D editions have that power when they go negative?

 

[Oofta]

That is, never suffers any critical wounds!

This never happens in 5e D&D. It's the reverse - as per your chart, a person is critically injured, yet five seconds later is back on their feet swinging away.

The obvious solution is to abandon your chart - they never were critically injured.

That's why I think the 4e version is the best implementation. It's no surprise that it is also the closest to how action points work in Robin Laws HeroWars.

The chart is simply a gauge. I use it to give people a general idea of how close to dropping they are. As with all action heroes the PC's damage is cosmetic until it's not.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Then let me rephrase. No one I have ever played with had much of an issue. That's ... hundreds of people over the years. Occasionally it comes up, people shrug or mention something about "action movie logic" and we move on. There have been other threads on this forum that confirm the attitude with surveys.

One should note there are at least two relevant groups here:

1. People who fundamentally don't care about the mechanics in any game if it gets things done and doesn't bite them on the rear;
2. People who know they're going to still be playing D&D because its the only game in town.

How often are either of those likely to say anything about this?

If we want to play numbers, I've seen people talking about how incoherent hit points were for literally decades. Most of them either shrug and give up, figuring out that complaining about it gets nowhere, or move on to other games and don't impact anything in D&D for that reason.

You may not think "its got more to people being overly attached to tradition than any real grounding in argument." is insulting. I do. It comes off as "I'm the enlightened one here, not you unwashed masses who should listen to my words of wisdom." On the other hand I'm not particularly offended because you're just some rando internet guy.

When someone provides an argument about why this is a better design for damage bookkeeping than anything else, I will take them seriously. There are some arguments that are at least sound contextually: its really simple, and provides pace-of-resolution. But when someone essentially says "Its as good or better than anything else that came along", if they aren't willing to unpack that, then, yeah, I'm going to reserve the right to assume they haven't bothered to think about it, its just what they're used to and that's that. And if that's insulting, so be it.

What is D&D trying to simulate? Certainly not the real world, that's far too messy. D&D does a decent job of simulating action movie logic where the protagonist gets beat to a bloody pulp but other than occasionally getting a second wind and maybe, just maybe looking a bit tired at a long drawn out slug-fest or muttering "I'm getting too old for this", is doing just fine.

That's not simulation; that's genre emulation. Its not handled with any consistency, and barring a self-referential/fourth wall breaking movie or book, no one in the setting thinks it works that way. Its fundamentally a dramatic conceit and doesn't have any more to do with simulation than the D&D Reflex save does.

Look, man, I've probably played more superhero games than I have fantasy over my years in the hobby; I quite get genre emulation. It serves a purpose, and you can't get some genres to work right without it. But its not simulation.

(And there's absolutely no need to be coy about it the way D&D has with its "is it or isn't it actual damage?" for decades.)

 

[Thomas Shey]

We don't need to invoke Schroedinger here. It's enough to say that the fiction hasn't been established yet. That's something that non-simulationist mechanics allow for - the deferral of authorship until we get more information out of the resolution process.

Though there can be problems even from other POVs if it takes too long.

 

[DND_Reborn]

John McClane is never running low on hit points.

Maybe, maybe not...

But if you follow this:

I would say he was certainly below half his maximum hit points well before the end of the first movie.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I won't argue with your characterization of 4E as more gamist than simulationist. But in my experiences with 4E, reskinning was done not because the mechanics and pre-written fiction were at odds generally but rather that a specific PC's build depended on certain (a) fiction and/or (b) mechanical interactions to work as the player imagines for their character and that another power with different pre-written fiction facilitates (a) and/or (b) better. Hence the reskin.

I'm aware. My argument is when something is easy to reskin like that, its not very tightly bound to its normal function. That isn't a great flaw, but it does bring into question whether the specific construct was put together with the thing it theoretically represents in mind primarily, or that was just the spark for an interesting mechanic. I play a game right now that often does that (Fragged Empire) where "burning" can represent fire or acid or nanotech weapons--but on that level its not heavily simulationist.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Iirc, upthread it is pointed out that at least one version of Traveller has the penalties not kick in until after combat?

I've made an argument before that when you start breaking down medical reports on combat trauma (which can be found if you dig around enough--groups like the FBI and the military collect the damnedest statistics), that there's fundamentally only few things that happen during combat (as compared to afterwards when a number more settle in):

1. Nothing. There's injury going on, but adrenaline in both its positive and negative effects is papering it over.
2. Shocking out, either physically or mentally.
3. Bleeding out (because of a particularly big bleeder--others can take some time to be a problem).
4. A very small number of coarse disabling effects (its shocking when you get into it how much people manage to somehow ignore broken bones and ripped tendons until the adrenaline wears off), usually because a given body part is just gone.
5. Under most circumstances, a pretty rare chance of instant death effects. Again, its shocking how people keep operating with lethal injuries for a bit.

Barring #3 and #5 there, there's good evidence that an awful lot of people suffering from lethal injuries can be saved if a trained EMT or equivalent is there right now after the fight is over.