Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fanboy2000" data-source="post: 4742418" data-attributes="member: 19998">There's a rule I remember about fiction writing that's always stuck with me: people will accept the impossible, but not the improbable. Many people who have no problem with Superman flying (to go back a bit in the thread), have a problem with the glasses as a disguise.I chalk this up to personal taste. People call for realism in unrealistic situations because calling for realism sounds objective while saying something isn't to your particular taste does not, and I've noticed a preference to be objective in this culture.Similar terms seem to mask personal taste with objectivity: suspension of disbelief and consistency to name two.Suspension of disbelief is usually used to counter the realism argument by saying that whatever brought them out of the game is objectively bad and most others would agree with them. This is false because what takes one person out of the moment will not affect another.Consistency sounds the most objective but it falls short in that many stories are inconsistent with each other. The history of the Marvel and DC universes are notoriously inconsistent, yet people still read them. TV shows are often inconsistent, sitcoms are notorious for keeping kids in school far longer than should. Soap operas are notable for their loose rules on character aging and other such things. Yet still people watch them and enjoy them.As a DM I don't deal with generalities with my group. Either A is fun or it is not fun. If it's not fun I don't do it. Generalities get in the way my total domination of the game by encouraging players to make arguments based on generalities to try to get away with things that aren't fun for me.Remember, happiness is mandatory. The players are required to have fun.</blockquote>

Verification