Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
More DMing analysis from Lewis Pulsipher
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6342323" data-attributes="member: 27160"><p>If the mechanical system gives those outcomes in game-world-physical terms, then that describes the world physics. Physics in general need not be limited to the forms we observe in the real world. Of course, in the real world it seems to hold fast to those forms - naturally, since that is the way the real world works and we have spent a great deal of effort identifying the ways in which it works (so we have many of them well identified). But there is nothing inherent to the range of possible realities that says this is how it <em>must</em> work - the single example we have may work that way, but it's only one example.</p><p></p><p>Just for clarity, the reason I said PrimeTime Adventures <em>et al</em> don't work this way, earlier, is that they don't generate imagined physical outcomes - they simply define who will describe those outcomes. That is not a "world physics". Characters losing a quantised amount of "plot energy" (hit points), on the other hand, could be.</p><p></p><p></p><p>If I imagine a cartoon world I imagine it having causal processes, ergo it has "world physics" as I envision it. They are not much like real world causal processes or physics, but I don't regard that as the slightest obstacle to them existing. What is more, if other people didn't view them in much the same way, I don't see how the genre "cartoons" could exist. Unless there is a clear(ish) model of how cartoons work, how can expectations about how events will transpire in a "genre appropriate way" be formed?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Right - but genre generates expectations, which implies some expected model of how the genre world works, surely? And physics is nothing more or less than a model of how the (physical) world works.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I understand the game mechanism, sure, but nothing in the <em>rules of the game</em> suggests that the item so passed gains momentum from its journey. Generally, the range and damage of the item if thrown by the last in line will be unaffected by how far it might have travelled in the turn it is cast. To get the idea of "momentum" we have to additionally impose an artifact of real world physics. We are free to do this, of course, but (a) it's not the same as following the rules as "world physics" and (b) if it causes problems with the rest of the rules it doesn't mean that the rules themselves create an inconsistent or flawed world - simply that mixing the game-world's physics with real-world physics doesn't work out well (surprise, surprise!)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Exactly - if the GM ignores the game rules to impose a partial implementation of real-world physics alongside game-world physics then things break. This should not really be surprising. If one does thought experiments changing the laws of physics (as we understand them) only slightly, but then say that our change does not apply to specific exceptions, one gets bizarre consequences and should expect to do so. Trying to apply specific exceptions to the laws in the real universe works pretty much the same way, most of the time (but, since we know that we are missing certainty on such basics as where most of the universe's mass is hiding, we have to be careful since our models are undoubtedly flawed to some extent, anyway).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 6342323, member: 27160"] If the mechanical system gives those outcomes in game-world-physical terms, then that describes the world physics. Physics in general need not be limited to the forms we observe in the real world. Of course, in the real world it seems to hold fast to those forms - naturally, since that is the way the real world works and we have spent a great deal of effort identifying the ways in which it works (so we have many of them well identified). But there is nothing inherent to the range of possible realities that says this is how it [I]must[/I] work - the single example we have may work that way, but it's only one example. Just for clarity, the reason I said PrimeTime Adventures [I]et al[/I] don't work this way, earlier, is that they don't generate imagined physical outcomes - they simply define who will describe those outcomes. That is not a "world physics". Characters losing a quantised amount of "plot energy" (hit points), on the other hand, could be. If I imagine a cartoon world I imagine it having causal processes, ergo it has "world physics" as I envision it. They are not much like real world causal processes or physics, but I don't regard that as the slightest obstacle to them existing. What is more, if other people didn't view them in much the same way, I don't see how the genre "cartoons" could exist. Unless there is a clear(ish) model of how cartoons work, how can expectations about how events will transpire in a "genre appropriate way" be formed? Right - but genre generates expectations, which implies some expected model of how the genre world works, surely? And physics is nothing more or less than a model of how the (physical) world works. I understand the game mechanism, sure, but nothing in the [I]rules of the game[/I] suggests that the item so passed gains momentum from its journey. Generally, the range and damage of the item if thrown by the last in line will be unaffected by how far it might have travelled in the turn it is cast. To get the idea of "momentum" we have to additionally impose an artifact of real world physics. We are free to do this, of course, but (a) it's not the same as following the rules as "world physics" and (b) if it causes problems with the rest of the rules it doesn't mean that the rules themselves create an inconsistent or flawed world - simply that mixing the game-world's physics with real-world physics doesn't work out well (surprise, surprise!) Exactly - if the GM ignores the game rules to impose a partial implementation of real-world physics alongside game-world physics then things break. This should not really be surprising. If one does thought experiments changing the laws of physics (as we understand them) only slightly, but then say that our change does not apply to specific exceptions, one gets bizarre consequences and should expect to do so. Trying to apply specific exceptions to the laws in the real universe works pretty much the same way, most of the time (but, since we know that we are missing certainty on such basics as where most of the universe's mass is hiding, we have to be careful since our models are undoubtedly flawed to some extent, anyway). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
More DMing analysis from Lewis Pulsipher
Top