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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Doug McCrae" data-source="post: 3573743" data-attributes="member: 21169">And yet are the rules coherent? The rules on XP don't seem to square with the rules on demographics. If coherence is the aim, we can't find it in the rules.In fact as you pointed out before, the laws of physics aren't coherent yet because quantum theory hasn't been reconciled with relativity. However science is striving to reconcile them, I think it's the #1 goal in physics, whereas game designers don't seem too bothered if there are discrepancies here and there, so long as their rules work.I think the rules-as-physics analogy fails. Game rules aren't like physics. As rules for modeling reality there is a monstrously huge gulf in quality between the rules of D&D and the works of science. The laws of physics are as close as humanity can get to the truth. They are a great and noble body of work.D&D is just a game.You're absolutely right that there's an issue of coherence when the rules used for PC action do not correlate with the game universe. For me it isn't much of a problem though. We just accept that those rules are approximations. So long as what happened by the rules doesn't break the laws of universe (as perceived by the GM and players) there isn't any difficulty. So long as what happened could have happened, it's ok.For me, the universe comes first, and rules are modified or ad hoc rulings made where there's a plausibility issue.Isn't there an issue of coherence for you too, when all the cats the PCs meet are mutants? I don't feel you really answered the ranger problem either, as your answer doesn't explain how the wizard could have a con of 3, or how the same could apply to any 90-year olds.</blockquote>

Verification