Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ExploderWizard" data-source="post: 6257512" data-attributes="member: 66434">The age old debate of simulation vs abstraction is forever muddied by those who want both to exist simultaneously. These processes are like oil and water and don't mix well. The roots of D&amp;D are in abstraction. IMHO so long as we want to leave the core assumptions of the game intact then abstraction should be fully embraced. This means that HP are kind of nebulous and that an &quot;attack&quot; roll is NOT a swing of a weapon per se. This also means doing away with 2 &quot;attacks&quot; simply because one is holding two weapons. If an &quot;attack&quot; is not mapped to a swing then it follows that allowing 2 &quot;attacks&quot; due to the presence of 2 weapons is sheer folly.&nbsp; This is, by the way, the point at which many who argue for the vagueness of HP want to get off the abstract bus. They want their cake and eat it too.&nbsp; They want an attack to map to a specific swing yet DON'T want damage from that attack to be mapped to that attack! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused&nbsp; &nbsp; :confused:"&nbsp; data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />Abstraction and simulation are like karate as described by Miyagi. Walk abstract side of road-good, walk simulation side of road-good. Walk middle of road &lt;squish!&gt; just like grape.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ExploderWizard, post: 6257512, member: 66434"] The age old debate of simulation vs abstraction is forever muddied by those who want both to exist simultaneously. These processes are like oil and water and don't mix well. The roots of D&D are in abstraction. IMHO so long as we want to leave the core assumptions of the game intact then abstraction should be fully embraced. This means that HP are kind of nebulous and that an "attack" roll is NOT a swing of a weapon per se. This also means doing away with 2 "attacks" simply because one is holding two weapons. If an "attack" is not mapped to a swing then it follows that allowing 2 "attacks" due to the presence of 2 weapons is sheer folly. This is, by the way, the point at which many who argue for the vagueness of HP want to get off the abstract bus. They want their cake and eat it too. They want an attack to map to a specific swing yet DON'T want damage from that attack to be mapped to that attack! :confused: Abstraction and simulation are like karate as described by Miyagi. Walk abstract side of road-good, walk simulation side of road-good. Walk middle of road <squish!> just like grape. [/QUOTE]

Verification