Martial Dailies - How so?

[marune]

-I like my crunchy bits.
-I enjoy having a solid mechanical basis for actions characters take.

That's your "sandbox" style rules (the core of your game).

However, that doesn't to be enough for your system... because you don't want the game to be completly open-ended.

I'll think about it and add more later.

DM fiat does not, IMO, a consistent world make.

Of course not, the point where many disagree (including me, but that's not the point here) is that a consistent world is a good thing to have in a RPG.

 

[marune]

After careful study, I have come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as simulationist play. (There is simulationist thinking about play, but that's not the same thing.)

Care to explain that ?

 

[Ondo]

Thus it's perfectly okay to have both, even if they're supposed to "simulate" the same thing.

I'm not disputing that. However, I think crits simulate significant athletic accomplishments better, so those are not a good argument in favor of 1/day abilities being simulationist.

Daily's allow for better balance, and allow for better player control

These are nice things to have, but absent from real life athletics. An athlete doesn't decide when to do a great play, nor is he significantly less likely to do another one if he's already done one that day, or more likely if he hasn't done one in a while.

 

[Triangleman27]

Martial dailies are not new. Barbarian Rage was one.

 

[pawsplay]

I don't buy the "lucky shot" argument simply because I have a hard time seeing someone getting a good night's sleep and lining up another perfect shot.

 

[Li Shenron]

As for the boxing refference, I seem to remember Mike Tyson doing that very thing, walking in, throwing one punch, and winning.
So yes, it does make sence.


More examples:
Bruce Lee: How many times did he jump on someones back in a day? Once
Wrestling: Unless the "story" calls for it, finishing moves are only used once
Kill Bill: The 5 point palm exploding heart technique: Once
300: Hucking a non-magical spear and wounding a God: Once
Troy: Shooting an arrow into a god-like beings ancle: Once

there are far too many examples of the way things are seen in todays world that can justify per-day abilities, maybe you should look harder... Or did you use that ability on somthing elce today?

I have to say that all these example make no sense at all to me.

These example "seem" to work, but the fact is that they were used only once because that was enough to end the encounter. After using them (successfully) there was no more enemy to defeat, god to wound or achilles to kill. But if there had been two at the same time, all these examples would fall apart.

 

[Mallus]

So you're choosing to intepret the game in a way that makes trouble for your ability to enjoy the game? That seems like a poor choice to me.

Sage advice, this is.

Why spend time and energy looking for ways to make D&D not work? If something doesn't make sense to you, apply a few quick rationalizations and then get back to saving the kingdom, or razing it, if you prefer.

Demanding rigorous and logical consistency, plus real-world sim aspects (someone brought up a desire for a realistic economics, now really...) is merely setting oneself up for dissapointment.

 

[pemerton]

After careful study, I have come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as simulationist play. (There is simulationist thinking about play, but that's not the same thing.)

If "simulationism" here is meant to have the Forge meaning, then I don't think I agree.

I think I have engaged in Forge-style purist-for-system simulationism (using Rolemaster as the system). Over time it has sort-of morphed into an extremely vanilla narrativism, I think, but the simulationism is still there as a chassis (and the narrativism also collapses into simulationist exploration of pre-determined thematic material from time to time).

 

[howandwhy99]

Honestly Gnomeworks, I would look for other sources of inspiration for your game. 4th edition's priorities do not put roleplaying first. And given your predilections, it's not likely to have much in the way of rules for you to use. Lots of description and campaign design? Yes, but not so much in the rules department. I wouldn't press the issue.

 

[Satori]

Doh, I thought I might have hit the nail on the head regarding GnomeWork's issues.