Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Firearms
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7606028" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>Economics? Demographics and population? Geography? Realistic weather patterns? Feudalism? Army sizes? You've never heard arguments about realism applied to these things? You've not been around that long. </p><p></p><p>No one rants about the fact that studded leather armor shouldn't exist? Or that chain mail should be just called mail? Or that what's called a 'longsword' in D&D is actually an arming sword? Perhaps I should dig out my house rules for you if you think things like that don't bother people.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Believe me, there are people that care about these things. Ever played GURPS? Chain mail has multiple AC's depending on the type of weapon used against it. Heck, there are bits and pieces of this in the original 1e AD&D rules, where different weapons got bonuses or penalties against certain types of armor.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is just normal nerdiness.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't buy it. I think quite obviously they do, or most of them do care about whether it's realistic. What I suspect is these kinds of arguments are just proxy arguments for the claim, "You shouldn't care whether it is realistic, because I don't care if it is realistic." Incidentally, I've seen arguments from realism go the other direction with firearms as well - that they should be more lethal - because the writer couldn't swallow the idea of a gun only doing say 1d10 damage, and arguments break out citing things like the infamous 1986 Miami-Dade shootout (among other things) as to whether or not it was realistic for a person to be struck multiple times by a bullet and still be fighting.</p><p></p><p>But beyond that, I don't really see why there needs to be a rule about everything being equally 'realistic', whatever that means applied to something that isn't real. Fantasy and science fiction always have conceits in them, which the audience is expected to accept, that a certain magical thing or a certain bit of technology works. That's the conceit of the genre or the story. So, dragons can fly - axiomatically - because it is fantasy. However, outside of the conceits it's typical to try to be reasonably 'realistic', or at least 'believable' so as to not demand too much suspension of disbelief and so stretch the audiences into incredulity. RPGs are no different. It's not unreasonable to expect the audience to accept flying dragons, but still expect that something shared between the fantasy world and the real world - like say firearms - behave in a familiar and plausible manner. Firearms are real; dragons are not real. Why should we apply any sort of identical standard of 'realism' to them in the first place?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7606028, member: 4937"] Economics? Demographics and population? Geography? Realistic weather patterns? Feudalism? Army sizes? You've never heard arguments about realism applied to these things? You've not been around that long. No one rants about the fact that studded leather armor shouldn't exist? Or that chain mail should be just called mail? Or that what's called a 'longsword' in D&D is actually an arming sword? Perhaps I should dig out my house rules for you if you think things like that don't bother people. Believe me, there are people that care about these things. Ever played GURPS? Chain mail has multiple AC's depending on the type of weapon used against it. Heck, there are bits and pieces of this in the original 1e AD&D rules, where different weapons got bonuses or penalties against certain types of armor. This is just normal nerdiness. I don't buy it. I think quite obviously they do, or most of them do care about whether it's realistic. What I suspect is these kinds of arguments are just proxy arguments for the claim, "You shouldn't care whether it is realistic, because I don't care if it is realistic." Incidentally, I've seen arguments from realism go the other direction with firearms as well - that they should be more lethal - because the writer couldn't swallow the idea of a gun only doing say 1d10 damage, and arguments break out citing things like the infamous 1986 Miami-Dade shootout (among other things) as to whether or not it was realistic for a person to be struck multiple times by a bullet and still be fighting. But beyond that, I don't really see why there needs to be a rule about everything being equally 'realistic', whatever that means applied to something that isn't real. Fantasy and science fiction always have conceits in them, which the audience is expected to accept, that a certain magical thing or a certain bit of technology works. That's the conceit of the genre or the story. So, dragons can fly - axiomatically - because it is fantasy. However, outside of the conceits it's typical to try to be reasonably 'realistic', or at least 'believable' so as to not demand too much suspension of disbelief and so stretch the audiences into incredulity. RPGs are no different. It's not unreasonable to expect the audience to accept flying dragons, but still expect that something shared between the fantasy world and the real world - like say firearms - behave in a familiar and plausible manner. Firearms are real; dragons are not real. Why should we apply any sort of identical standard of 'realism' to them in the first place? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Firearms
Top