Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Raise Dead: A nice big bone to the simulationists
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="Clawhound" data-source="post: 4122307" data-attributes="member: 63041"><p>When I set forth my "why don't people do these other things..." examples, the point was not to say they were bad. My point was to show that there are many logical implications that we leave sitting on the table because to follow every logical implication in every direct leaves us with something that looks like nothing that we wanted.</p><p></p><p>In playing a setting, the DM sets forth a feel or an ideal of how the setting works. There are some things that he will allow, and there are some things that his internal sense of his game won't allow, no matter what the logic. There are some directions that the players see that they can go, but others that the players refuse to go because that direction does not fit their idea of the game that they are playing.</p><p></p><p>The advantage of a system where all directions are possible is that all directions are possible. However, not all directions are equally desirable.</p><p></p><p>For instance, I may choose to including Vikings in my 3e game. Naturally, by looking at what is optimal for my nature warriors, my Vikings should all go in the direction of druid/bears with tripping wolf companions because that would be the most optimal path for them to take. Yet, if they do that, I no longer have the Vikings that I wanted in the first place. Which do I choose? Do I choose the guys with axes or the guys with claws? There's no right answer there, but for any game, one is a better answer than the other. The unfavored answer will be left on the table. That unfavored answer may be possible for the players, but the game world won't follow it. The DM may make up a fluff reason to explain it, but the answer comes down to DM fiat.</p><p></p><p>Raise Dead works the exact same way. How it acts in the game is ultimately not an exercise in logic, but a decision by the DM about how the game world will act. The fiat may be overt or covert, but the answer is still DM fiat. Once that decision is made, then logic follows.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Clawhound, post: 4122307, member: 63041"] When I set forth my "why don't people do these other things..." examples, the point was not to say they were bad. My point was to show that there are many logical implications that we leave sitting on the table because to follow every logical implication in every direct leaves us with something that looks like nothing that we wanted. In playing a setting, the DM sets forth a feel or an ideal of how the setting works. There are some things that he will allow, and there are some things that his internal sense of his game won't allow, no matter what the logic. There are some directions that the players see that they can go, but others that the players refuse to go because that direction does not fit their idea of the game that they are playing. The advantage of a system where all directions are possible is that all directions are possible. However, not all directions are equally desirable. For instance, I may choose to including Vikings in my 3e game. Naturally, by looking at what is optimal for my nature warriors, my Vikings should all go in the direction of druid/bears with tripping wolf companions because that would be the most optimal path for them to take. Yet, if they do that, I no longer have the Vikings that I wanted in the first place. Which do I choose? Do I choose the guys with axes or the guys with claws? There's no right answer there, but for any game, one is a better answer than the other. The unfavored answer will be left on the table. That unfavored answer may be possible for the players, but the game world won't follow it. The DM may make up a fluff reason to explain it, but the answer comes down to DM fiat. Raise Dead works the exact same way. How it acts in the game is ultimately not an exercise in logic, but a decision by the DM about how the game world will act. The fiat may be overt or covert, but the answer is still DM fiat. Once that decision is made, then logic follows. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Raise Dead: A nice big bone to the simulationists
Top