Do you like "off screen" events to be rules-plausible?

[megamania]

Anyone familiar with my storyhours knows I build villians in the (not so) background. I have never liked a game were you face a villian at low levels then face them again at high levels and they have this cool stuff but no reasons. How did the villian get this artifact? Could we have? Isn't that a magic item we sold four levels ago? Was he following us even then?

 

[S'mon]

William the Conqueror: Great warrior, conquered and held England through strategic & tactical genius. Fell off horse & died.

William of Orange: Decent warrior, incredibly brave, competent leader, took control of England, Scotland & Wales through diplomatic ability, defeated King James in Ireland through military and diplomatic ability. Fell off horse and died.

That's 2 of the 3 kings of England called William. Modelling similar characters in a D&D world I need to make William the Conqueror high level - 9th+ depending on campaign demographics - and William of Orange at least mid level.

IRL they died from falling off horses. As far as I'm concerned, if it happened IRL it can happen in my D&D game (the reverse, of course, is not true). Which in practical terms requires GM fiat: "Many years later, King William had grown old and fat. One day..."

I do have a query for rules-as-physics types. Is it ok for me to say "Old King William used to be an F12 with 80 hp, but through age was down to 3 hp when he fell off his horse"? Is that better than saying an 80 hp king died falling off his horse?

 

[BryonD]

This strikes me as just as contrived as simply declaring him dead. A save-or-die trap from falling off a horse with a DC that a high-level fighter couldn't easily make?

A 1 always fails.

Though if it is behind the scenes story then it is pretty much contrived no matter what. I find that point to be a red herring.

The logical conclusion my characters would draw from this?

OH MY GOD, HORSES ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS THINGS ON THE PLANET. Dragon bites don't have that chance! Giant's clubs don't have that chance! Horses kill heroes! EVERYBODY PANIC! And open a glue factory!

I know of an actual case of a real person dying from falling off a three foot ladder.
Nobody assumed that ladders should all be burned.

In this case it isn't the horse that is deadly, it is the circumstances of the particular fall.
We are by definition talking about something that would be considered a freak accident.
So you could just as easily invent a freak accident that involved surviving a dragon bite or a giant's club but the immediately dying of something that one would never expect. The dragon bite him, he lived but spun away, slipped on a pebble and fell over and smashed his head on a stone. The dragon bite the guy, but the crazy bad luck circumstances killed him. And freak crap like that happens in the real world, so as background stuff if you want to throw it in then there is nothing wrong with it (in GREAT moderation).

But to me it is a non-starter to argue that a game should model freak accidents and have them not feel contrived.

But there is a vast difference between saying that freak accidents happening to PCs are no fun so we don't do that and saying that freak accidents happening to npcs is not rules-plausible.

 

[BryonD]

William the Conqueror: Great warrior, conquered and held England through strategic & tactical genius. Fell off horse & died.

How many ranks did he have in ride?
What were the circumstances of his fall?

I completely agree that people die from falls off horses. But the scenario is being established that a D&D character can be made where this CAN'T happen.
My reply is EITHER accept that the fictional character is better than anyone who ever lived and stop trying to reference reality, or accept that high DCs and unexpected circumstance modifiers happen from time to time in reality as it would be modeled by D20.

Either way, the rules work.

IRL they died from falling off horses. As far as I'm concerned, if it happened IRL it can happen in my D&D game (the reverse, of course, is not true). Which in practical terms requires GM fiat: "Many years later, King William had grown old and fat. One day..."

I'm completely in agreement.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I know of an actual case of a real person dying from falling off a three foot ladder.
Nobody assumed that ladders should all be burned.

The gaping hole at the center of this argument is that 20th level fighters are NOT real people. They're nigh-demigods.

This link is pretty elucidating: http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html

If this king is supposed to be a 'realistic person,' he's not going to be a 20th level fighter. And if he *is* a 20th level fighter, it's jarring for me to see him die like a realistic person would die.

But to me it is a non-starter to argue that a game should model freak accidents and have them not feel contrived.

Heroic characters should be immune to freak accidents, by and large. Freak accidents are for those normal mortals who are not blessed by the fates and who don't slay dragons.

William the Conqueror: Great warrior, conquered and held England through strategic & tactical genius. Fell off horse & died.

William of Orange: Decent warrior, incredibly brave, competent leader, took control of England, Scotland & Wales through diplomatic ability, defeated King James in Ireland through military and diplomatic ability. Fell off horse and died.

That's 2 of the 3 kings of England called William. Modelling similar characters in a D&D world I need to make William the Conqueror high level - 9th+ depending on campaign demographics - and William of Orange at least mid level.

Why ever for? D&D was never meant to model the real world, and it doesn't do a very good job. Williams from the real world are not a good analogy to high-level D&D characters.

 

[Andre]

The gaping hole at the center of this argument is that 20th level fighters are NOT real people. They're nigh-demigods...snip...If this king is supposed to be a 'realistic person,' he's not going to be a 20th level fighter. And if he *is* a 20th level fighter, it's jarring for me to see him die like a realistic person would die.

Heroic characters should be immune to freak accidents, by and large. Freak accidents are for those normal mortals who are not blessed by the fates and who don't slay dragons.

Why ever for? D&D was never meant to model the real world, and it doesn't do a very good job. Williams from the real world are not a good analogy to high-level D&D characters.

I wonder if the disagreements we're seeing on the OP's question have more to do with expectations than rules?

For example, a character could also ask, "Did you hear? The king fell off his horse and died. The funeral is scheduled for this Sunday. Gee, why didn't the kingdom's high priest rasie him? Hmm..."

That's not a rules question - in the core rules, raise dead exists - it's a question of the underlying assumptions of the campaign. In some campaigns, to avoid these situations, a GM may implement house rules or setting limits that restrict resurrection. In other campaigns, the GM may just ignore such things. Either way, it's not about rules - it's about the underlying expectations of the players and GM.

The core rules of DnD do not mimic the real world. They have built in assumptions (notably, hit points, levels, powerful magic that is ubiquitous and reliable) that make a mockery of any attempt to use the rules inflexibly to account for every single incident. Some degree of hand-waving will occur in any campaign. Seems to me, the only difference is how much hand-waving the players and GM are comfortable with.

 

[prosfilaes]

I think another major problem with the argument is a double standard in these two statements.

I don't see where it's a double-standard. Most D&D games range from dramatic realism up through Hollywood mayhem. If you're heading down the rabbit hole or into cyberspace, you can toss real life away; if you're running a strictly realistic game, you don't have to worry about what's dramatic. The vast majority of games, however, have to balance what's dramatic with what's realistic.

 

[S'mon]

Why ever for? D&D was never meant to model the real world, and it doesn't do a very good job. Williams from the real world are not a good analogy to high-level D&D characters.

You haven't met my son, Baby William.

Anyway I'm not of course trying to model the real world, merely a setting that bears some resemblance to the real world. Like I said, that requires that real-world events can happen in the game world, at least off-camera.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

I have sympathies for both sides of the argument. My sense of internal consistency is compromised if I subscribe to either viewpoint fully, however.

Leaving the 'falling off the horse' model aside for a moment (it's been done to death, pardon the pun), I think that extending the game mechanics absolutely to everything which transpires in the game world creates more problems than it solves.

Senility does not exist in the D&D world, unless fiated. As people get older, they get smarter, wiser and more charismatic.

Wounds never get infected, unless fiated. People are never maimed in combat, unless fiated. Diseases never spread, unless fiated. Dying words are never spoken in a desperate last breath, because once a character is below 0 hp, he is unconscious. Unless fiated. And so on.

That said, I think it's more fun to have a 20th-level character ripped apart by a pack of barghests, than to fall off a horse.

William of Orange: Decent warrior, incredibly brave, competent leader, took control of England, Scotland & Wales through diplomatic ability, defeated King James in Ireland through military and diplomatic ability. Fell off horse and died.

I'll raise a glass to the little gentleman in black velvet.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The core rules of DnD do not mimic the real world. They have built in assumptions (notably, hit points, levels, powerful magic that is ubiquitous and reliable) that make a mockery of any attempt to use the rules inflexibly to account for every single incident. Some degree of hand-waving will occur in any campaign. Seems to me, the only difference is how much hand-waving the players and GM are comfortable with.

I was with ya 'till this point.

I don't think that the assumptions in the rules destroy a believable world. They may destroy a realistic world, but not a believable one, where some people are Heroes and some people are Mere Mortals. Heroes don't die from freak accidents and they slay dragons. Mere Mortals die from freak accidents and die AWESOMELY before the might of a dragon. The fact that both exist in the implied D&D setting means that Heroes are needed to defend and protect Mere Mortals in a world where the evil and dangerous things come with teeth and claws.

IMO, the hand-waving should be possible within the rules. In the language of the OP, they should be rules-plausible. Heroes dying by freak accidents really isn't. If the rules change to make such a thing possible it is, but how much work do we really want to go through to emulate heroes dying of freak accidents when we can just say "They don't," and usually get a more interesting story out of it. Me, not much. I don't need to emulate a heroic chance for a freak accident, I just have to make sure that, like the rules say, most of the people in the world AREN'T heroes. But it's not just the PC's that are, either.

Anyway I'm not of course trying to model the real world, merely a setting that bears some resemblance to the real world. Like I said, that requires that real-world events can happen in the game world, at least off-camera.

Then why would anyone be 20th level in that model? Something like E6 sounds more the speed of the real world. Something like a 1st level Aristocrat is more like the real world. A 20th level fighter is ludicrously beyond the real world because of all their heroic abilities. Rather than shoehorning this nigh-demigod into a "real world," I find it much more consistent to note that the 20th level fighter is a kind of creature that doesn't exist in the Real World, just like Magic Missile is something that doesn't exist in the Real World, and Kobolds are something that don't exist in the Real World, and so he can, believably, be immune to freak accidents, while a more "realistic" creature like a 1st level Commoner can still be subject to them.

20th level fighters don't exist in the real world. Heck, 10th level fighters don't exist in the real world, and even 5th level fighters are a grand stretch. This world's inhabitants are Mere Mortals to a man, even if they're really super-cool mere mortals. Thus, great people can die from freak accidents, and do, all the time.

I don't see any need to have freak accidents happen to the Heroes of the game just to maintain believability or a resemblance to the Real World.

PS:

KB, I think the wording of the poll is a bit wonky. The actual question asks if you like it if things are NOT rules-plausible (meaning I'd answer no, I don't like it), but the thread title suggests my answer would be YES, I DO want things to be rules-plausible....so I think the results might be wonky...