Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8675095" data-attributes="member: 16814">Oh, I don't have any problems at all.&nbsp; Because I'm not trying to defend that dragons in D&amp;D are remotely close to simulation.&nbsp; I'm perfectly fine with &quot;look, actually massive footprints are a pain to play the game with, so we're going to arbitrarily make this fictionally massive things take up a convenient amount of space and just ignore that it would have to be wrapped up in a fetal ball to get anywhere close to that space.&quot;&nbsp; I'm also perfectly fine with the genre logic of going toe-to-toe with a dragon, and am not suggesting that this is remotely a simulation of anything other than a cool flight of fancy.It's you that's making arguments that these things are simulation-y, and you that has the burden of reconciling all of these things.&nbsp; And I think the main thing happening is that there's post-hoc rationalization going on, where you imagine some details to reconcile the game events and then say that the game events were attempting to simulate those details.&nbsp; It's exactly backwards, and it shows in how you (and [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER]) have approached this topic by finding a thing to support your current argument and then immediately abandoning it for the next if it's inconvenient.&nbsp; Like the evolution of the dragon thing, were it started by claiming that dragons are like mammoths, then when size came up it was dismissing the sizes, and then it latched onto 'it fits in a 20'x20' cube,' and then it was 'but it sticks out, really far, when it needs to.'&nbsp; Which, inconveniently, ends back up at the initial problem where dragons are actually really big, and it's ludicrous to compare them to mammoths.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8675095, member: 16814"] Oh, I don't have any problems at all. Because I'm not trying to defend that dragons in D&D are remotely close to simulation. I'm perfectly fine with "look, actually massive footprints are a pain to play the game with, so we're going to arbitrarily make this fictionally massive things take up a convenient amount of space and just ignore that it would have to be wrapped up in a fetal ball to get anywhere close to that space." I'm also perfectly fine with the genre logic of going toe-to-toe with a dragon, and am not suggesting that this is remotely a simulation of anything other than a cool flight of fancy. It's you that's making arguments that these things are simulation-y, and you that has the burden of reconciling all of these things. And I think the main thing happening is that there's post-hoc rationalization going on, where you imagine some details to reconcile the game events and then say that the game events were attempting to simulate those details. It's exactly backwards, and it shows in how you (and [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER]) have approached this topic by finding a thing to support your current argument and then immediately abandoning it for the next if it's inconvenient. Like the evolution of the dragon thing, were it started by claiming that dragons are like mammoths, then when size came up it was dismissing the sizes, and then it latched onto 'it fits in a 20'x20' cube,' and then it was 'but it sticks out, really far, when it needs to.' Which, inconveniently, ends back up at the initial problem where dragons are actually really big, and it's ludicrous to compare them to mammoths. [/QUOTE]

Verification