Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kraydak" data-source="post: 4074610" data-attributes="member: 12306">One given example of a paladin mark was one that hurt the markee if he attacked someone other than the paladin.&nbsp; If the mark does little enough damage that the markee doesn't care, it won't protect the rest of the party.&nbsp; If it does enough damage that the markee cares, you can use it to *kill* the markee (but only if you avoid combat).Lemme try to explain more clearly.&nbsp; Suspension of disbelief is aided by simulationist rules.&nbsp; Conversely, inadequately simulationist rules endanger suspension of disbelief.&nbsp; Once you lose suspension of disbelief, people will give up any semblance of treating rules as intended as opposed to RAW.&nbsp; Now, while gamist design is not strictly exclusive of simulationist design, a gamist design approach does generally lead to a reduction of simulationism.As noted above, if you have suspension of disbelief, people will tend to metagame against RAW in favor of RAI.&nbsp; If you lose it, people will tend more strongly towards RAW because, after all, without suspension of disbelief it isn't a fantasy world, but rather it is *just* a game.&nbsp; The mark system threatens to strongly divide RAI and RAW which in turn threatens DnD's existence as a roleplaying game as opposed to a rollplaying one.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kraydak, post: 4074610, member: 12306"] One given example of a paladin mark was one that hurt the markee if he attacked someone other than the paladin. If the mark does little enough damage that the markee doesn't care, it won't protect the rest of the party. If it does enough damage that the markee cares, you can use it to *kill* the markee (but only if you avoid combat). Lemme try to explain more clearly. Suspension of disbelief is aided by simulationist rules. Conversely, inadequately simulationist rules endanger suspension of disbelief. Once you lose suspension of disbelief, people will give up any semblance of treating rules as intended as opposed to RAW. Now, while gamist design is not strictly exclusive of simulationist design, a gamist design approach does generally lead to a reduction of simulationism. As noted above, if you have suspension of disbelief, people will tend to metagame against RAW in favor of RAI. If you lose it, people will tend more strongly towards RAW because, after all, without suspension of disbelief it isn't a fantasy world, but rather it is *just* a game. The mark system threatens to strongly divide RAI and RAW which in turn threatens DnD's existence as a roleplaying game as opposed to a rollplaying one. [/QUOTE]

Verification