Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Starter Set Character Sheet Revealed!
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="Hussar" data-source="post: 6318986" data-attributes="member: 22779"><p>See, but that's the thing. The claim here is that something changed as we went along. That 4e suddenly made process sim a problem. And that it might be a problem in 5e because of things like Second Wind and short rests and the like. But, I've been using 3e as the example here. I could do the same thing with 2e and 1e as well just as easily.</p><p></p><p>Passing it off as a "few inconsistencies" is a bit much. When something as basic and fundamental as HP and HD are inconsistent, how can you actually have any consistency in the rest of the game? There is no process to simulate since the process is unknowable. You can't look at any part of the game and say, "Ok, we start at A, pass through B and reach C." which is a fundamental concept of process sim.</p><p></p><p>Not without ignoring vast swaths of the game. Healing overnight is a problem because it's too fast? But, healing in two nights is consistent? Really? Damage on a miss is inconsistent but not being able to actually tell how and why you missed is? We almost all agree that a miss can make contact with a target - 3e had touch AC's specifically for this idea - so, why not have an ability to allows those attacks to deal minor damage? It's not inconsistent with anything.</p><p></p><p>The problem I'm having is that people are trying to claim their personal preference as having some sort of objective value. "I don't like DoaM" is perfectly fine. No problems. But, "DoaM is inconsistent with the in game fiction" doesn't hold any water and it's demonstrable that it doesn't hold any water. "Hit points are consistent" is flat out untrue. </p><p></p><p>See, the whole "D&D as process sim" argument would be a lot more credible if it had appeared at any time BEFORE the edition wars surrounding 4e. After all, if it was simply a play style thing, 4e is hardly the first edition to be pretty bad at process sim. AD&D doesn't do process sim at all and doesn't pretend to. There's a reason we got games like GURPS and Role Master when we did and it's not because AD&D was a great process sim game. </p><p></p><p>But, the "it worked well enough for me" line is problematic because you cannot actually explain how it works for you. There's so many consistency holes, even using the 3e mechanics, that it's frankly baffling why you would even try. Sure, you could cook an egg on a radiator, but a frying pan would be a lot better and I'd never try to claim that a new radiator was bad because it doesn't fry eggs.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6318986, member: 22779"] See, but that's the thing. The claim here is that something changed as we went along. That 4e suddenly made process sim a problem. And that it might be a problem in 5e because of things like Second Wind and short rests and the like. But, I've been using 3e as the example here. I could do the same thing with 2e and 1e as well just as easily. Passing it off as a "few inconsistencies" is a bit much. When something as basic and fundamental as HP and HD are inconsistent, how can you actually have any consistency in the rest of the game? There is no process to simulate since the process is unknowable. You can't look at any part of the game and say, "Ok, we start at A, pass through B and reach C." which is a fundamental concept of process sim. Not without ignoring vast swaths of the game. Healing overnight is a problem because it's too fast? But, healing in two nights is consistent? Really? Damage on a miss is inconsistent but not being able to actually tell how and why you missed is? We almost all agree that a miss can make contact with a target - 3e had touch AC's specifically for this idea - so, why not have an ability to allows those attacks to deal minor damage? It's not inconsistent with anything. The problem I'm having is that people are trying to claim their personal preference as having some sort of objective value. "I don't like DoaM" is perfectly fine. No problems. But, "DoaM is inconsistent with the in game fiction" doesn't hold any water and it's demonstrable that it doesn't hold any water. "Hit points are consistent" is flat out untrue. See, the whole "D&D as process sim" argument would be a lot more credible if it had appeared at any time BEFORE the edition wars surrounding 4e. After all, if it was simply a play style thing, 4e is hardly the first edition to be pretty bad at process sim. AD&D doesn't do process sim at all and doesn't pretend to. There's a reason we got games like GURPS and Role Master when we did and it's not because AD&D was a great process sim game. But, the "it worked well enough for me" line is problematic because you cannot actually explain how it works for you. There's so many consistency holes, even using the 3e mechanics, that it's frankly baffling why you would even try. Sure, you could cook an egg on a radiator, but a frying pan would be a lot better and I'd never try to claim that a new radiator was bad because it doesn't fry eggs. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Starter Set Character Sheet Revealed!
Top