Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6299221" data-attributes="member: 6775031">Right. That's what I like. The mechanics of the game are supposed to (relatively) accurately model what the thing actually is within the world. Kobolds and rats are generally weaker than orcs and wolves.Superman is kind of a ridiculous example, but I would rather have Spider-Man spending most of his time fighting random goons and low-level crime bosses with only an occasional super-villain, than have every fight be against something supposedly as amazing as he is. If you constantly defeat super-villains, then it only serves to establish that you were more powerful than previously believed - or at least that the villains are less powerful. You can't consistently win against even odds. (Insert the coin-flipping scene.)Which is probably the single most anti-sim thing in the entire game. The mechanics for the creature do not represent its actual abilities, but rather, its place within the plot. That is what I would refer to as "narrative bias" - the game mechanics have an agenda, to promote the desired outcome of the heroes easily defeating the creature, rather than sitting by and observing what the outcome would be.I don't even know that it's possible to create an objective frost giant within 4E, because it's only even supposed to exist relative to its place in the story.Unfortunately, as a meta-game mechanic, I can't even begin to address the concept of any sort of plot points. Since they don't represent anything which actually exists within the game world, they already have no place within a sim game. Is it somehow "less sim" for plot points to operate unequally between sides? Is it wetter underwater, if you're there when it rains?Merit, in this case, would be an objective measure of abilities. This is the reality of what you are within the game world. Based on their merits, an orc could probably beat a kobold in a fight. A wolf is stronger and faster than a rat, while the rat may be more agile.The actual merits of Spider-Man include his superior strength, speed, intelligence, creativity, etc. If he wins against Thanos, then it's probably based on some unlikely contrivance of the plot rather than because he really deserved to win.System bias is when the game tries to play sides, and stops being objective. If you (as the GM) place a diamond in the treasure hoard specifically because one of the PCs died, and everyone knows that you can use this to cast Raise Dead, then that's you trying to promote an outcome. The objective alternative is that the diamond is either there, or is not there, based on other factors involving the monster and past activity within the region (which can usually be simplified down to a percentile roll, rather than explicitly modeled).If you have something like encounter guidelines, which exist to make sure that the number and type of monsters encountered is roughly within the capabilities of the adventuring party, then that is definitely system bias - you're trying to promote the desired outcome of the party winning, rather than objectively representing the world as it actually is. Of note, AD&D didn't really have encounter guidelines, but rather just told you how many of a creature you were likely to find at once, given various circumstances. From that point, it was up to the PCs to not get themselves in over their heads.</blockquote>

Verification