Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8616634" data-attributes="member: 7026617">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&amp;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.&nbsp; 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&amp;D for that reason.When someone provides an argument about why this is a better design for damage bookkeeping than anything else, I will take them seriously.&nbsp; There are some arguments that are at least sound contextually: its really simple, and provides pace-of-resolution.&nbsp; But when someone essentially says &quot;Its as good or better than anything else that came along&quot;, 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.&nbsp; And if that's insulting, so be it.That's not simulation; that's genre emulation.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Its fundamentally a dramatic conceit and doesn't have any more to do with simulation than the D&amp;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.&nbsp; It serves a purpose, and you can't get some genres to work right without it.&nbsp; But its not simulation.(And there's absolutely no need to be coy about it the way D&amp;D has with its &quot;is it or isn't it actual damage?&quot; for decades.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 8616634, member: 7026617"] 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. 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. 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 [I]simulation[/I]. (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.) [/QUOTE]

Verification