Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6160823" data-attributes="member: 27160">I think you are conflating two steps into one. Things have properties both in the real world and in a fantasy world (step 1) and those properties are explained by the (meta)physics of the world they are in (step 2).We generally assume that common items (and, to some extent, creatures - although the properties of these tend to be imperfectly known to many RPGers) have the properties they are generally observed to have in the real world. This is our "simplifying assumption" as far as knowing how the fantasy world looks goes. But this does not mean that the underlying "physics engine" of the world is the same as for the real world. Since we only have an imperfect understanding of the real world 'underlying mechanism', in fact, that would be impossible in practice, anyway.So we use "step 1" as a matter of course to make the game world easier to relate to and simpler to describe. Stuff that has more earth element than air fall toward the earth (and things with more air than earth tend to drift toward the sky/upper air). Fire interacts with flammable stuff, releasing the fire within it and sublimating the watery parts, releasing the airy parts and leaving the earthy parts behind. Things like wood have properties like brittleness, hardness, strength and so on - as well as sometimes properties that do not exist in the real world but apply to certain elements of the fantasy world, such as insubstantialness, incorporeality, undeadness, magicality - that are either expected from the common meaning of the word for them ("wood", "sword" and so on) or are defined by the game system.Step 2, however, is a "step too far". It might be amusing to speculate about is from time to time, but we don't really need it, in general, to play the game. In my capacity as an engineer, I have very often been able to do my work using just the properties of the materials I have been working with. The actual science underlying why those materials have those properties might be interesting, but I don't actually need to know it in order to use the material. Playing an RPG is a bit like engineering, in this respect; to resolve almost all character actions, you don't need to know the underlying 'science' of the world - you just have to know the properties of things.Once in a while, of course, the underlying mechanisms will become relevant. What to do then? Well, my experience is that trying to understand the matter by resorting to real world physics and chemistry is unhelpful. It leads to biases for magic-using characters (because we are forced always to give magic a "free pass"), it leads to assumption clash (because all of us - no exceptions - have an incomplete or flawed model of real world mechanisms, and sometimes they clash) and it is seldom "fun".What should we use, then? Start with the game rules. Structures like keywords and magic system divisions are especially useful. And look for analogies. Things that spells and fantastical beasts can achieve must be explainable by the mechanisms underlying this (game) world. What does that tell us about the current situation?And, if all else fails, discuss it as a group and choose a set of "facts". We often do this on a pro tem basis - we select a way things work to run with for now, and then review it later in more depth.So, for instance, can a human fighter develop the strength of a giant? Well, sure - even if their size may not let them leverage it in quite the same way. Whatever mechanism operates in the giant's muscles, sinews and bones could be incorporated into those of the fighter somehow. How? Well, that's for the players to figure out.</blockquote>

Verification