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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 2883527" data-attributes="member: 7240">Wanting to figure out how powerful someone is and successfully doing so is not metagaming. It is gaming.Actually, if you assess the power levels of medievals based on the value of their gear, my argument works very well if you look at who fought whom and who ruled whom. Given that this was true simply based on a geometric progression in gear value, I see no reason that geometric progression in combat ability would not further reinforce this kind of social order.I did not construe his argument quite so narrowly.Seems fair. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I don't know anything about Eberron except snippets of what I've picked up on ENWorld. I haven't had much of an incentive to learn more because it doesn't seem to be about stuff that interests me very much. The idea of making polytheism deistic does not impress me very much. Generally, deism is something that one only associates with monotheistic systems or the over-god in a monotheistic philosophy operating within a monotheistic matrix (like certain relatively deistic approaches to Hinduism).Dead on. The rules are the physics of the D&D universe. They are absolute because they are a set of universal and empirically replicatable laws of cause and effect.Indeed. If I want a universe with a different set of physics I either modify D20 or use a game system that is consistent with the setting I want to run. For me, rules and "flavour" are two sides of the same coin; they are inextricable. If I want to depict a world with different laws of nature, I find or make rules that are consistent with those laws of nature. Self-consistency, for me, is integral to suspension of disbelief. Forgotten Realms drives me batty because the laws of cause and effect near the characters are different from the laws of cause and effect in places remote from them.Fair enough. I think most people game this way. I personally don't find that satisfying and so I am quite enthusiastic about discussions here on ENWorld where people ask the kind of question Snoweel is asking here.My solution to your quarterstaff problem would be to create a house rule modifying the conditions under which objects can be sundered. By making it a house rule, rather than over-ruling the rules every time, one could have the best of both worlds -- the staff would have the physical properties you want, and the world would remain self-consistent. Furthermore, players would have a greater sense of fairness because the properties of physical objects would be both consistent and predictable.Agreed. I use rules as a tool for describing settings; modifying the rules and creating a setting are the same process for me. Rules are not merely a tool for resolving conflicts; they are a tool for describing the kind of world in which the characters are adventuring.I can see that. For some people, suspension of disbelief is contingent upon the degree to which a D&D world is consistent our own world; for me, it is contingent upon which the world is consistent with itself. My feeling is that if you can make giant exploding balls of fire out of words, objects not accelerating on their way down or wounds working like an action movie is pretty minor by comparison.</blockquote>

Verification