Yes, I was trying to make a similar point. If you play in a game where "humans" can withstand a meteor swarm, or a 100' long dragon's bite, or the impact of a 50 lb. mace swung by a giant 20 feet tall, don't complain because falling 20 storeys or being dropped in lava won't kill you. I agree that rules governing these things should be attempted to be written with consistency, but if they are consistent, having a level 20 character fall 200 feet won't kill him.apoptosis said:This goes back to simulationism is not realism.
The world is already fantastical, this we know almost by definition of the game.
The next question is what is the impact of fantastical elements.
WIth some it is straightforward...wizards use magic (not real)....
Otherways it could be less straightforward such as...heroes are more indestructible than non-heroes
If this is part of the "physics" of the world then it is still "real" based on the mechanics that shape that imaginary world.
That is why the use of simulationism is used vs realism. The game is not real. Many many things in the game do not resemble reality in any way, shape or form.
There is a drive for internal consistency though given that fantastical elements (whatever they are) exist.
This goes back to the falling issue. People want falling say 1000' to be lethal no matter the character level (not doing hp damage just killing the poor guy).
But being hit by an object in combat that is equivalent to falling 1000' they dont want to necessarily be lethal (just do hp damage).
Given that in both cases the guy got hit with the same amount of force, whiy should one be lethal and the other not.
Or if someone is dropped in lave (some think they should basically die instantly regardless of hp because being dropped in lava is deadly for anyone) but if a wizard creates a spell that is equivalent to being dropped in lava, very few think that instant death should be the result (regardless of hp).