Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 8608446" data-attributes="member: 7031982">Ah, I see.&nbsp; Yes, I can agree that in simple games more is left to GM adjudication, which can then be inconsistent.&nbsp; I was thinking about consistency not in the application/interpretation of rules, but in the rules themselves. In a mechanically simple RPG like Dungeon World, a fighter does 1d10 damage and a thief does 1d8.&nbsp; (I may have the numbers wrong; it's been a long time.). Very consistent.Or in Quest, which is even simpler, all weapons do 2 damage, except improvised weapons and unarmed do 1 damage.&nbsp; Even more consistent.In D&amp;D...with only low to moderate complexity...all of the sudden different weapons do different damage, supposedly balanced by other pros and cons, and all of the sudden everybody complains and argues about how illogical some of those rules are.So my claim is that as game rules get more complex, perhaps in an attempt to more accurate simulate reality, more apparent contradictions are going to arise.&nbsp; That's the kind of consistency I was referring to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bill Zebub, post: 8608446, member: 7031982"] Ah, I see. Yes, I can agree that in simple games more is left to GM adjudication, which can then be inconsistent. I was thinking about consistency not in the application/interpretation of rules, but in the rules themselves. In a mechanically simple RPG like Dungeon World, a fighter does 1d10 damage and a thief does 1d8. (I may have the numbers wrong; it's been a long time.). Very consistent. Or in Quest, which is even simpler, all weapons do 2 damage, except improvised weapons and unarmed do 1 damage. Even more consistent. In D&D...with only low to moderate complexity...all of the sudden different weapons do different damage, supposedly balanced by other pros and cons, and all of the sudden everybody complains and argues about how illogical some of those rules are. So my claim is that as game rules get more complex, perhaps in an attempt to more accurate simulate reality, more apparent contradictions are going to arise. That's the kind of consistency I was referring to. [/QUOTE]

Verification