How Does "The Rules Aren't Physics" Fix Anything?

[Rex Blunder]

I think the 'god-like' wish fulfillment play those cater to is not strictly compatible with the D&D genre. Historically, anyway.

I dunno. The 1st edition gods in "Deities and Demigods" had hit points and armor class. So presumably you were supposed to kill 'em.

Edit: Unless I misunderstood, and by godlike you mean "having narrative control," not "having powers like unto the gods".

 

[Professor Phobos]

Bottom Line: Whether the rules are physics or not, they need to be consistent enough that players have a clue what will work and what won't.

I sort of agree with you overall, but what's stopping them from asking? Or,

Players: "Hey, we expected to be able to heal these guys."
DM: "Oh, technically you can't do that. But that's unfair to you guys, so go ahead. Just remember in the future- no healing."
Player: "But wait, if we could heal them now, how come we can't heal them again?"
DM: "Shut up, Frank!"

Problem solved.

 

[Storm-Bringer]

You, uh...

You did notice that Rex's examples were all from 3.X or earlier, right?

And that some of them (definitely raise dead, probably teleportation, possibly falling damage) are being cleaned up in 4E?

Ah, the irony.

Begging the question.

How are they being 'cleaned up'? Not to raise the spectre of Raise Dead again (pun intended), but I hardly see that as 'cleaned up', since it hasn't really changed. 'Everyone can be raised if the DM says so' and 'No one can be raised unless the DM says so' are no different. 'Probably' and 'possibly' hardly support a positive assertation that they "are being cleaned up in 4e".

How are problems in 3.x demonstrable proof that 4e has 'fixed' them?

 

[Storm-Bringer]

I dunno. The 1st edition gods in "Deities and Demigods" had hit points and armor class. So presumably you were supposed to kill 'em.

Edit: Unless I misunderstood, and by godlike you mean "having narrative control," not "having powers like unto the gods".

Sort of having narrative control, but more like the Exalted or Nobilis level of power.

I think the original Deities and Demigods was often mistaken for the Super Monster Manual, and players could often advance to a level where they could feasibly threaten a deity, but those were intended for the deity's manifestation on the Material Plane. It was not exactly clear, but the indication was there that challenging a deity on their own plane was simply impossible except for other deities.

 

[Storm-Bringer]

I sort of agree with you overall, but what's stopping them from asking? Or,

Players: "Hey, we expected to be able to heal these guys."
DM: "Oh, technically you can't do that. But that's unfair to you guys, so go ahead. Just remember in the future- no healing."
Player: "But wait, if we could heal them now, how come we can't heal them again?"
DM: "Shut up, Frank!"

Problem solved.

No, that is the exact heart of the problem. If I can't consistently heal my retainers/henchmen/followers, they become equipment, to be disposed of when they are broken. Additionally, if there is an important NPC that needs to be brought back up to healthy (don't we all love escort missions? ), as a player, I need to know I can use whatever equipment or spells necessary to accomplish that goal. Otherwise, you are well into the territory of 'PCs Glow', and the important NPCs have a white circle around their feet. It turns into an incredibly slow moving CRPG.

 

[Rex Blunder]

If that is the exact heart of the problem, then you have no problem, because Chris Sims says that you can heal NPCs.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

But how does that actually solve anything?

In and of its self, it does not. But what it does make life a whole lot easier for the designers.

3rd edition ended up having a bunch of rules that end up causing more problems than they were worth as a result of trying to be simulationist. There are instances where leaning towards simulation help (such as diagonal movement and the confirm roll for criticals vs very high AC opponents in my opinion). But there are more instances where simulationist rules were not such a great plan.


- Poison doing ability damage causes poisons to be much more dangerous than they need to be.
- Grappling giving a size bonus meant that large creatures would nearly always succeed on grapple checks since they would also have very high strength values and a CR appropriate Bab.
- Ability bonuses being tied into so many different things that changing a score via a buff or a poison / ability drain would require a bunch of recalculation.
- Monsters playing by exactly the same rules would often result in more book keeping than would be ideal.
- Monsters getting abilities that make sense flavor wise but are meaningless in actual game play.
- A skill system that guaranteed it would be impossible to have a skill based challenge that would be reasonable for everyone in the party to have to attempt.
- The implementation of Disarm / Sunder / BullRush essentially being crappy.
- Mounted combat that leads to a 'kill the horse' strategy always being the best.

While I am not sure if it would show up in 4th edition, what harm would there be in making it so that the players mount would be guaranteed to survive within reason? As a player, if I put a bunch of effort into mounted combat, I would like to have the horse survive a 10th level Fireball.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Storm-Bringer]

If that is the exact heart of the problem, then you have no problem, because Chris Sims says that you can heal NPCs.

Well, that isn't precisely the point. The rules need to be consistent, where they exist and are applied. You can swap out 'raise dead' for 'heal', and the problem remains. In fact, the problem becomes worse, as you can heal your NPCs all day, but once they are dead, that is the end of their story. How does one form of healing work but not the other?

 

[Warbringer]

Trust me, I'm a statistician.

So, dice it off?

Don't trust me, I'm a statistician in marketing

 

[Warbringer]

The problem isn't with the argument that rules aren't physics - the problem is that people don't understand how science works

if the rules give a clear model of how events are be judged in the rules I don't care if its a physical model or not