Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 5452936" data-attributes="member: 71571">Every time I see D&amp;D discussions basing itself on 'realism' vs 'gamism' I shake my head.Seriously, shake my head.Look, I'm not saying that D&amp;D can't be used for realism, but look at what most threads on this and every other D&amp;D board is about.&nbsp; They aren't about creating rules to simulate aspects of reality; they're more often about gaming the rules in the face of reality.You have Char-Op forums (gamism), you have arguments over how rules work in extreme corner cases as if D&amp;D were some game where the rules must always work 100% to cover every case (gamism), you have discussions on what the DPR is of a Ranger vs an Avenger (gamism).What you do not have are discussions on castle constructions in a world of flying enemies.&nbsp; You do not have discussions on the impact dungeons and their treasure have on local economies.&nbsp; You do not have discussions on political structures as ruled over by variously colored dragons.&nbsp; You do not have attempts to create a system to reflect the amount of ambient light given which of the three moons happen to be in the sky at any given time.&nbsp; No discussions on whether D&amp;D is trying to simulate Raymond Faust,or wuxia films more.&nbsp; No discussions on the particulars on how divine magic works, and why it sometimes requires a god, and sometimes does not.-----The game is designed to feature combat as a game in itself, with the narrative 'realism' being a responsibility of the players, similiar to how the original D&amp;D was fast and loose, and didn't try to simulate every minutia of the game world.A more valid discussion would be 'What is a game system attempting to accomplish, and how effective is it at doing so?'&nbsp; D&amp;D sets out to accomplish what it does, and it is VERY capable of doing so.&nbsp; It's when people start trying to get it to accomplish things it isn't designed to do that it starts to seem 'bad'.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DracoSuave, post: 5452936, member: 71571"] Every time I see D&D discussions basing itself on 'realism' vs 'gamism' I shake my head. Seriously, shake my head. Look, I'm not saying that D&D can't be used for realism, but look at what most threads on this and every other D&D board is about. They aren't about creating rules to simulate aspects of reality; they're more often about gaming the rules in the face of reality. You have Char-Op forums (gamism), you have arguments over how rules work in extreme corner cases as if D&D were some game where the rules must always work 100% to cover every case (gamism), you have discussions on what the DPR is of a Ranger vs an Avenger (gamism). What you do not have are discussions on castle constructions in a world of flying enemies. You do not have discussions on the impact dungeons and their treasure have on local economies. You do not have discussions on political structures as ruled over by variously colored dragons. You do not have attempts to create a system to reflect the amount of ambient light given which of the three moons happen to be in the sky at any given time. No discussions on whether D&D is trying to simulate Raymond Faust,or wuxia films more. No discussions on the particulars on how divine magic works, and why it sometimes requires a god, and sometimes does not. ----- The game is designed to feature combat as a game in itself, with the narrative 'realism' being a responsibility of the players, similiar to how the original D&D was fast and loose, and didn't try to simulate every minutia of the game world. A more valid discussion would be 'What is a game system attempting to accomplish, and how effective is it at doing so?' D&D sets out to accomplish what it does, and it is VERY capable of doing so. It's when people start trying to get it to accomplish things it isn't designed to do that it starts to seem 'bad'. [/QUOTE]

Verification