Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Libramarian" data-source="post: 5872600" data-attributes="member: 6688858">Yes, this is good and essentially what I do right now in 1e. I use 1d6/10 feet for falling damage in a situation that is kind of abstract and where one can reasonably imagine that there are damage mitigating things going on, like falling down a rocky cliff or falling into a forest canopy. You take one &quot;hit&quot; per 10 feet.If the fiction makes this impossible, e.g. straight drop far away from the edge, I use the cumulative falling damage, where 30 feet is 1d6+2d6+3d6, etc.I wouldn't be averse to using a more in-depth, realistic treatment of falling damage for that situation if one of my players had a simulationist thing for it, at least to an extent. I don't mind some &quot;incoherence&quot; between the realism of the falling damage rules and the realism of the poison rules or the getting hit by club rules. Simulationism isn't always whole hog, sometimes people just have &quot;a thing&quot; for particular situations and want to explore their resolution with more simulationist rules.The posts in this thread basically saying &quot;it's absurd to care about realism if you're playing D&amp;D in the first place&quot; and giving suggestions to go play HarnMaster or Runequest are unhelpful. Yes, D&amp;D has always been in the game school vs. the realism-simulation school going back to Gygax's use of these terms in the 1e DMG, but the midline between these two schools has clearly shifted towards the game side between then and now. It's entirely reasonable that was in the &quot;game school&quot; by late 70s/early 80s standards is now in the &quot;realism-simulation&quot; school by 2012 standards. You can't criticize people for being inconsistent when the terms are shifting in meaning.I mean 1e has a pretty simulationist vibe by today's standards. Obviously this doesn't make it &quot;anti-D&amp;D&quot; or whatever.This sort of militant anti-simulationism I've been noticing in contemporary D&amp;D culture feels contrived and alienating. I've never played with anyone who didn't at least kind of like simulationism as a supporting element.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Libramarian, post: 5872600, member: 6688858"] Yes, this is good and essentially what I do right now in 1e. I use 1d6/10 feet for falling damage in a situation that is kind of abstract and where one can reasonably imagine that there are damage mitigating things going on, like falling down a rocky cliff or falling into a forest canopy. You take one "hit" per 10 feet. If the fiction makes this impossible, e.g. straight drop far away from the edge, I use the cumulative falling damage, where 30 feet is 1d6+2d6+3d6, etc. I wouldn't be averse to using a more in-depth, realistic treatment of falling damage for that situation if one of my players had a simulationist thing for it, at least to an extent. I don't mind some "incoherence" between the realism of the falling damage rules and the realism of the poison rules or the getting hit by club rules. Simulationism isn't always whole hog, sometimes people just have "a thing" for particular situations and want to explore their resolution with more simulationist rules. The posts in this thread basically saying "it's absurd to care about realism if you're playing D&D in the first place" and giving suggestions to go play HarnMaster or Runequest are unhelpful. Yes, D&D has always been in the game school vs. the realism-simulation school going back to Gygax's use of these terms in the 1e DMG, but the midline between these two schools has clearly shifted towards the game side between then and now. It's entirely reasonable that was in the "game school" by late 70s/early 80s standards is now in the "realism-simulation" school by 2012 standards. You can't criticize people for being inconsistent when the terms are shifting in meaning. I mean 1e has a pretty simulationist vibe by today's standards. Obviously this doesn't make it "anti-D&D" or whatever. This sort of militant anti-simulationism I've been noticing in contemporary D&D culture feels contrived and alienating. I've never played with anyone who didn't at least kind of like simulationism as a supporting element. [/QUOTE]

Verification