Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4776037" data-attributes="member: 22779">The problem comes in though, where do you stop?&nbsp; If you actually decide that rules=physics, your world becomes so completely bizarre that it's very hard to relate to.&nbsp; Take even the simple example of armor making you harder to hit.&nbsp; Huh?&nbsp; How does putting on a suit of armor make it more difficult to hit me?&nbsp; It makes it harder to hurt me, that's true, but touch me?&nbsp; Sorry, don't believe it.&nbsp; But, somehow, putting on full plate makes me so much faster that claws that would catch me when I was naked, suddenly miss by a mile.Or, really, how does being stronger make you more accurate?&nbsp; Accuracy has very little to do with strength, but, in D&amp;D land, Arnold Swartzenegger is going to hit you far more often than Bruce Lee.&nbsp; Harder I could understand, but more often?Going back to my question about hippogriffs.&nbsp; If the physics of the world allow a hippogriff to fly without magic, why can't my character pick up two pieces of paper, flap his arms and fly away?&nbsp; It's about as aerodynmically likely as getting half a ton of critter off the ground under its own power.&nbsp; So, where do you stop?&nbsp; At what point do you say that Rules=physics except in these cases?&nbsp; To me, I look at the rules as abstract constructs that allow me to adjudicate events which occur in the game and nothing more.&nbsp; They do not speak at all to &quot;real&quot; events in the world.&nbsp; That's what the DM is for.Could that same 8 year old draw a 40 foot cone cast on a diagonal?&nbsp; How about a 30 foot spread?&nbsp; You can be as dismissive of people having issues with this all you like, but, I'll guarantee that in every session you play, someone miscounts a move or an area of effect or a reach situation.&nbsp; Watch your next session, I'll bet dollars to donuts that someone during the session makes a mistake.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4776037, member: 22779"] The problem comes in though, where do you stop? If you actually decide that rules=physics, your world becomes so completely bizarre that it's very hard to relate to. Take even the simple example of armor making you harder to hit. Huh? How does putting on a suit of armor make it more difficult to hit me? It makes it harder to hurt me, that's true, but touch me? Sorry, don't believe it. But, somehow, putting on full plate makes me so much faster that claws that would catch me when I was naked, suddenly miss by a mile. Or, really, how does being stronger make you more accurate? Accuracy has very little to do with strength, but, in D&D land, Arnold Swartzenegger is going to hit you far more often than Bruce Lee. Harder I could understand, but more often? Going back to my question about hippogriffs. If the physics of the world allow a hippogriff to fly without magic, why can't my character pick up two pieces of paper, flap his arms and fly away? It's about as aerodynmically likely as getting half a ton of critter off the ground under its own power. So, where do you stop? At what point do you say that Rules=physics except in these cases? To me, I look at the rules as abstract constructs that allow me to adjudicate events which occur in the game and nothing more. They do not speak at all to "real" events in the world. That's what the DM is for. Could that same 8 year old draw a 40 foot cone cast on a diagonal? How about a 30 foot spread? You can be as dismissive of people having issues with this all you like, but, I'll guarantee that in every session you play, someone miscounts a move or an area of effect or a reach situation. Watch your next session, I'll bet dollars to donuts that someone during the session makes a mistake. [/QUOTE]

Verification