Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6099951" data-attributes="member: 4937">I can't recall ever arguing over rules as physics explicitly.&nbsp; But I can remember seeing innumerable argements over physics as rules where the player and DM were arguing over what should the resolution be based on differing notions of what is 'realistic'.&nbsp;&nbsp; I think I can imagine the reverse, a DM arguing for physics as rules in a way that impacts the PC (say having an NPC that the PC is invested in die from falling off a horse, D&amp;D as 'Gone with the Wind'), and having the player respond negatively from a rules as physics stance that what the DM narrated was impossible because the character had 7 hit points (or something of that sort).&nbsp; But I cant' ever recall seeing the reverse.I'm perfectly content to play at a table where the DM holds a contrary opinion.&nbsp; I was talking about the art of DMing, not the art of being a good player.&nbsp; I would think though that if it ever came up, that it would break versimiltude for me.&nbsp; I would hold my tongue about it, but depending on how the DM had his version of 'realism' trump the rules I'd feel he made a mistake.&nbsp; I'd also have a small peice of me wondering whether in the future, this would be a trend and 'realism' would trump rules next time I offered a proposition.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6099951, member: 4937"] I can't recall ever arguing over rules as physics explicitly. But I can remember seeing innumerable argements over physics as rules where the player and DM were arguing over what should the resolution be based on differing notions of what is 'realistic'. I think I can imagine the reverse, a DM arguing for physics as rules in a way that impacts the PC (say having an NPC that the PC is invested in die from falling off a horse, D&D as 'Gone with the Wind'), and having the player respond negatively from a rules as physics stance that what the DM narrated was impossible because the character had 7 hit points (or something of that sort). But I cant' ever recall seeing the reverse. I'm perfectly content to play at a table where the DM holds a contrary opinion. I was talking about the art of DMing, not the art of being a good player. I would think though that if it ever came up, that it would break versimiltude for me. I would hold my tongue about it, but depending on how the DM had his version of 'realism' trump the rules I'd feel he made a mistake. I'd also have a small peice of me wondering whether in the future, this would be a trend and 'realism' would trump rules next time I offered a proposition. [/QUOTE]

Verification