Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 1657986" data-attributes="member: 1645">As an aside, that's one argument for a lower- (or rarer-) magic game -- it's better grounded in reality.And who's to question that non-expert judgment?While I've been playing a bit of a devil's advocate, I do agree that a handbook full of rules and guidelines from the experts makes perfect sense.&nbsp; The problem is that the mathematical models the &quot;experts&quot; come up with are often quite complex without actually yielding realistic results.&nbsp; (You can put &quot;realistic&quot; in quotes, if &quot;realistic&quot; fantasy bothers you.)Do the rules, as written, actually provide a better simulation than simple guidelines plus DM fiat?&nbsp; We certainly rely on the latter for most decisions, after all.Naturally, the less you trust your DM, the more you want spelled out in the rules.&nbsp; The more you trust your DM, the more you can rely on his judgment, and the less you have to consult the rules and add up modifiers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mmadsen, post: 1657986, member: 1645"] As an aside, that's one argument for a lower- (or rarer-) magic game -- it's better grounded in reality. And who's to question that non-expert judgment? While I've been playing a bit of a devil's advocate, I do agree that a handbook full of rules and guidelines from the experts makes perfect sense. The problem is that the mathematical models the "experts" come up with are often quite complex without actually yielding realistic results. (You can put "realistic" in quotes, if "realistic" fantasy bothers you.) Do the rules, as written, actually provide a better simulation than simple guidelines plus DM fiat? We certainly rely on the latter for most decisions, after all. Naturally, the less you trust your DM, the more you want spelled out in the rules. The more you trust your DM, the more you can rely on his judgment, and the less you have to consult the rules and add up modifiers. [/QUOTE]

Verification