Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 5337252" data-attributes="member: 65637">To comment on the original topic:The problem with &quot;realism&quot; is that often times the complaint is about something realistic.The problem with verisimilitude is that it is so subject to personal belief.&nbsp; Like, ok, firearms breaks your verisimilitude because you think the entire world would immidiately revolutionize, but you have no problems with castles in a setting with flying monsters, standing armies in a medieval setting, organized warfare in a setting with cloudkill, or pre-ren era economics and mercantalism in a setting with easy access to trade and mass transportation?The real problem behind &quot;verisimilitude&quot; and &quot;realism&quot; and &quot;belief&quot; is that so often it breaks down into &quot;The non-caster did something.&quot;There was a rather lengthy thread on the Paizo forums where someone had expressed disgust that a fighter could fall down tall cliff and live.&nbsp; Never mind that this happens in real life, their problem was &quot;Well a wizard can use magic to survive.&quot;People have created this weird and synthetic gap between magic and fantasy.&nbsp; This is not a magical roleplaying game.&nbsp; It is a fantasy roleplaying game.&nbsp; Characters should be fantastic, not magical.&nbsp; A character can be awesome, mythological, and fantastic without ever casting a single Magic Missile.&nbsp; This isn't even an old school vs new school thing.&nbsp; it's just that the new school follows what the game was always meant to be.&nbsp; WHen you crack open that 2e PHB, the examples for fighters are not militia or simple man with a sword.&nbsp; Beowulf, Perseus, Sigfried, Hercules - these are not characters who had to run back to their wizard before doing things, these were heroes that performed supernatural and incredible feats.Let me express this edict now: when the rule of cool/mythology and verisimilitude clash, the former should always win.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 5337252, member: 65637"] To comment on the original topic: The problem with "realism" is that often times the complaint is about something [I]realistic[/I]. The problem with verisimilitude is that it is [I]so [/I]subject to personal belief. Like, ok, firearms breaks your verisimilitude because you think the entire world would immidiately revolutionize, but you have no problems with castles in a setting with flying monsters, standing armies in a medieval setting, organized warfare in a setting with cloudkill, or pre-ren era economics and mercantalism in a setting with easy access to trade and mass transportation? The [I]real[/I] problem behind "verisimilitude" and "realism" and "belief" is that so often it breaks down into "The non-caster did something." There was a rather lengthy thread on the Paizo forums where someone had expressed disgust that a fighter could fall down tall cliff and live. [I]Never mind that this happens in real life[/I], their problem was "Well a wizard can use magic to survive." People have created this weird and synthetic gap between magic and fantasy. This is not a magical roleplaying game. It is a fantasy roleplaying game. Characters should be fantastic, not magical. A character can be awesome, mythological, and fantastic without ever casting a single Magic Missile. This isn't even an old school vs new school thing. it's just that the new school follows what the game was always meant to be. WHen you crack open that 2e PHB, the examples for fighters are not militia or simple man with a sword. Beowulf, Perseus, Sigfried, Hercules - these are not characters who had to run back to their wizard before doing things, these were heroes that performed supernatural and incredible feats. Let me express this edict now: when the rule of cool/mythology and verisimilitude clash, the former should [I]always[/I] win. [/QUOTE]

Verification