NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 6318103" data-attributes="member: 11821">Why not? It's the simplified rules which make a playable RPG, not a physical model of the universe.Where we part ways is that the rules are an imperfect and incomplete model of a fictional reality and thus unsuitable for modeling everything in it. We work with the rules - whatever they may be, and remember that different rule sets have different focuses - because they're the way you play the game and resolve those interactions.When you try and model the whole game world using the game rules, it becomes less consistent and relatable, not more.  For example, upthread you mentioned that broken legs don't slow you down. I know in another thread, you said there are no veterans who lost their arms and legs in a war. That, to me, is a result of taking a necessarily flawed and incomplete model, and declaring it actually complete.I mean, I consider my game world to be very internally consistent. It works with an internal narrative logic. I don't need to game it out in my head for it to be so. It's relatable because there might be sickness and infection. Veterans (heck, farmers) might have lost limbs in a war or accident. People might have special talents the PCs might be unable to achieve - and vice versa. Nothing wrong with any of this, unless you have switched your philosophy from "I want my game rules to model reality" to "My game rules are the complete and total sum of reality."If they have a fight, the Fighter gets a new surge of adrenaline from it. I don't see the problem. An hour of rest, a fight, then another hour of rest is a totally different situation than just sitting around for two hours and should be treated differently.</blockquote>

Verification