D&D 4E How does 4E hold up on verisimilitude?

[ForbidenMaster]

And?

And owlbears

 

[Otterscrubber]

4e has completely tossed verisimilitude to the wind. Whether thats a good or bad thing is a matter of personal taste. Here's a few examples:

1 Every character cna heal themselves, multiple times per day, without magic. Hit points in 4e are more of an "abstraction" than ever before.

...

5 The economy is very "gamist", players can only sell items for 20% of their value and spend full market price to make their own items.

The only ones on that list that really bothers me (and I mean absolutely loathe) is #5.

Verisimilitude is defined as the appearance of truth, it has nothing whatsoever to do with internal consistency in a game where anything is possible. Let me address this in two of your points.

#1. 4e HP are far, far more truthful appearing that a guy who gets hit with 20 arrows. Does that make any kind of sense? Call it abstraction, but I'd call it the only way to explain it with anything even vaguely approaching the verisimilitude you seem to be looking for.

#5 Merchants buy low and sell high. Usually they can do this because they have a credible method of providing items to customer via established distribution methods that require a lot of time and effort in their lives (if you're looking for an explanation with some verisimilitude to it) and deal in bulk or highly specialized items dealing with highly specialized clients who don't deal with people they don't know. Why would a PC who does not have a business, or a business reputation, or a distribution network be able to offload any valuable items anywhere near top value at the drop of a hat? That's simply not the way business works, at least if you're looking for verisimilitude .

 

[AndrewRogue]

The verisimilitude is right on, presuming you are playing in the right mind-set.

 

[Lanefan]

It's thrown verisimili-whatever under the bus in one other key way: there is a *huge* disconnect or gap between a 1 h.p. minion or commoner and a 25 h.p. 1st-level PC or monster skirmisher. There really ought to be at least three or four "levels" between commoner and 4e's 1st level, to reflect the stages a commoner would logically go through in becoming what the game calls a 1st level character.

That, and having something that happens over *here* be able to force someone over *there* to move somewhere against their will.

Lanefan

 

[VannATLC]

It's thrown verisimili-whatever under the bus in one other key way: there is a *huge* disconnect or gap between a 1 h.p. minion or commoner and a 25 h.p. 1st-level PC or monster skirmisher. There really ought to be at least three or four "levels" between commoner and 4e's 1st level, to reflect the stages a commoner would logically go through in becoming what the game calls a 1st level character.

The fact you even wrote that indicates you have no actual understanding of what a minion represents.

 

[Hairfoot]

#1. 4e HP are far, far more truthful appearing that a guy who gets hit with 20 arrows. Does that make any kind of sense? Call it abstraction, but I'd call it the only way to explain it with anything even vaguely approaching the verisimilitude you seem to be looking for.

I've never had a big problem with HP. To me they're just a convenient abstract. I can see them representing fatigue, skill, near misses, opponent fumbles, blows diminished by armour, blood loss and so on and so forth. But a ranger shooting 8 people with a crossbow in 10 ten seconds cannot be rationalised. To me it's just silly.

 

[essenbee]

I've been playing and DMing RPGs for 30 years and the only time I ever heard a gamer use the word "verisimilitude" is on this forum when I joined a few months ago...

 

[cwhs01]

It's really, really bad. The designers made a lot of design decisions to enhance playability of the game at the expense of verisimilitude, realism, simulationism, whatever you want to call it. I know a lot of people like this, but it's exactly the opposite of what I want out of an RPG.

eh? Why would you want to sacrifice playability for anything? Is it a "no pain, no gain" thing?
I seriously don't understand this as, for me at least, its a game and anything that makes it run faster, play smoother and be more gm friendly is a good thing. Secondary concerns are considerations of realism and verisimilitude. Things that sacrifice playability (eg. facing rules, wound points, hundreds of unique mechanical subsystems for skills etc.) are allmost allways a negative.
Playing dnd shouldn't be a chore.

 

[Meeki]

Well, in my opinion, both editions fail at being real. 3e is just more of a builder's type system where the characters were able to pick and choose a huge variety of options, while 4e is focused on the characters being heroic and give them abilities to represent that.

Mechanics wise both are about the same as far as I can see. It all depends on the campaign setting as far as economics and the likes go
.

 

[Aegir]

I've been playing and DMing RPGs for 30 years and the only time I ever heard a gamer use the word "verisimilitude" is on this forum when I joined a few months ago...

It fits as a word used to describe a fantasy game tho'.

Like many names in a fantasy setting; I have absolutely no clue how its actually said.