Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="robertliguori" data-source="post: 4032556" data-attributes="member: 47776">I'm not seeing the issues mentioned.&nbsp; If you feel that it should be possible for a high-level fighter to die from falling off a horse, then falls from horses should be capable of dealing in excess of 50 damage.&nbsp; If you think that it should be possible to accidentally Call a 10-HD outsider with a second-level spell, include rules for that.&nbsp; If you don't think that Weapon Specialization should have a minimum fighter level, remove the minimum level.Do you think it is important for the GM and players to share assumptions about what is possible within the confines of the rules?&nbsp; If not, how do you expect the characters to act meaningfully?&nbsp; Do you start from the assumption that there should be laws of physics in the gameworld,&nbsp; which the GM is obligated to follow regardless of the drama of the situation?&nbsp; If so, why are the examples given particularly problematic?&nbsp; Play simply happens to take place in a universe where there is a hard limit on how badly apprentice mages can flub up on their own, in which high-level fighters can not only survive falls from horses but can shrug off direct hits from lances, and which certain martial techniques are only available to people who are of a certain level of experience and accomplishment.&nbsp; It is assumed, if you're playing D&amp;D, that these are shared expectations.&nbsp; If you don't share these expectations, feel free to communicate your new expectations to the players, and even feel free to announce that you intend to communicate your new expectations solely through non-precedent-setting encounters in the game world, and that in these cases, anything, regardless of the rules, can happen.&nbsp; Some players like having a story told to them.&nbsp; However, the majority of the hobby like, when they play RPGs, to be playing a game, and games have rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="robertliguori, post: 4032556, member: 47776"] I'm not seeing the issues mentioned. If you feel that it should be possible for a high-level fighter to die from falling off a horse, then falls from horses should be capable of dealing in excess of 50 damage. If you think that it should be possible to accidentally Call a 10-HD outsider with a second-level spell, include rules for that. If you don't think that Weapon Specialization should have a minimum fighter level, remove the minimum level. Do you think it is important for the GM and players to share assumptions about what is possible within the confines of the rules? If not, how do you expect the characters to act meaningfully? Do you start from the assumption that there should be laws of physics in the gameworld, which the GM is obligated to follow regardless of the drama of the situation? If so, why are the examples given particularly problematic? Play simply happens to take place in a universe where there is a hard limit on how badly apprentice mages can flub up on their own, in which high-level fighters can not only survive falls from horses but can shrug off direct hits from lances, and which certain martial techniques are only available to people who are of a certain level of experience and accomplishment. It is assumed, if you're playing D&D, that these are shared expectations. If you don't share these expectations, feel free to communicate your new expectations to the players, and even feel free to announce that you intend to communicate your new expectations solely through non-precedent-setting encounters in the game world, and that in these cases, anything, regardless of the rules, can happen. Some players like having a story told to them. However, the majority of the hobby like, when they play RPGs, to be playing a game, and games have rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification