What Does "Simulation" Mean To You? [+]

[The Firebird]

If it's not fun it's not a good game. And I you've put your finger on an issue with simulationism - all we have is guesses backed by some research.

I agree. I was thinking, if we can get an objective standard, then we can play around with mechanics to see the trade off between gameability and accuracy. But I don't think we really have that, at least for weapon and armor tables. What should the crit chance be for a moderately skilled club user vs chain?

I guess my preference is, simulate well and simulate cleanly the things you know how to simulate (rivers flow downhill and generally join as they approach the sea). But if it's hard to say how you should simulate it, it doesn't matter as much to me.

 

[Maxperson]

@AnotherGuy 's response to me reflects that, their reasoning is because it 'doesn't make sence' even though there's nothing in the rules that prevents me from depicting an attack roll that didn't overcome my AC as me glaring at the Ogre as its club sends splinters of woods from hitting my gloriously solid body. But since their table's/'game world' doesn't fit that kind of depiction because of verisimilitude(A non simulationist denial of the same thing could be that since I'm a Fighter is should describe it by expression of skill because the Fighter is meant to represent a 'skilled warrior', or that it's too goofy and not cool enough)

In 5e the rules say this...

"you typically show no signs of injury. When you drop below half your hit point maximum , you show signs of wear, such as cuts and bruises. An attack that reduces you to 0 hit points strikes you directly, leaving a bleeding injury or other trauma, or it simply knocks you unconscious."

The attack you describe above could only be one that dropped you to 0, since the attack that drops you to 0 is the one that strikes you directly. 5.5e says that the 5e rules are still in effect unless a new rule specifically changes it. The hit points in 5.5e don't say contradict the 5e rules about hits, only really adding the bloodied condition that corresponds to 5e's "When your current hit point total is half or more of your hit point maximum, you typically show no signs of injury."

 

[zarionofarabel]

In 5e the rules say this...

"you typically show no signs of injury. When you drop below half your hit point maximum , you show signs of wear, such as cuts and bruises. An attack that reduces you to 0 hit points strikes you directly, leaving a bleeding injury or other trauma, or it simply knocks you unconscious."

Well that's neat. I never read the 5e rules myself, but I think it's cool that they actually specifically state, in a roundabout way, that HP aren't indicative of physical injury until at least half are gone. Cool!

 

[GobHag]

In 5e the rules say this...

"you typically show no signs of injury. When you drop below half your hit point maximum , you show signs of wear, such as cuts and bruises. An attack that reduces you to 0 hit points strikes you directly, leaving a bleeding injury or other trauma, or it simply knocks you unconscious."

The attack you describe above could only be one that dropped you to 0, since the attack that drops you to 0 is the one that strikes you directly. 5.5e says that the 5e rules are still in effect unless a new rule specifically changes it. The hit points in 5.5e don't say contradict the 5e rules about hits, only really adding the bloodied condition that corresponds to 5e's "When your current hit point total is half or more of your hit point maximum, you typically show no signs of injury."

So? I don't respect an actual person's desires for believability or verisimilitude, why would I respect a book's? That 'rule' in of itself is bizzare considering spells or effects like dragon's breath do genuinely hit me. 5e and it's playerbase doesn't enforce it enough to make me even consider it.

 

[Reynard]

First Rolemaster is second in my sim game list (behind, of course, GURPS) and is definitely underappreciated. But the problem it has in terms of complexity is that due to the required tables for the combat you can not master Rolemaster to the point you can run without looking things up in the books. And there are far too many weapon attack tables to stick them on a GM screen equivalent. The level of difficulty to not have the other players not have to carry you is low - but the level of difficulty for system mastery is probably inhuman. And that's why it's deservedly considered complex and other games don't try to emulate its method.

For illustration the Arms Law table from the 1989 edition for clubs. There are separate ones for fists, warhammers, maces, morning stars, and whips - and that's just in the one handed concussion group.
View attachment 424322

I really like rolemaster. The Arms Law stuff is not that big a problem if you photocopy (or these days simply print) the tables the players need.

 

[Maxperson]

Well that's neat. I never read the 5e rules myself, but I think it's cool that they actually specifically state, in a roundabout way, that HP aren't indicative of physical injury until at least half are gone. Cool!

Yes, and they do say that typically that's the case, which leaves open say a giant scorpion stinger attack to scratch you when above 50% in order to actually cause a poison save.

 

[Maxperson]

So? I don't respect an actual person's desires for believability or verisimilitude, why would I respect a book's? That 'rule' in of itself is bizzare considering spells or effects like dragon's breath do genuinely hit me. 5e and it's playerbase doesn't enforce it enough to make me even consider it.

You don't have to. I don't know if it was you, and I think it probably wasn't since I think it was from before 2023 when you joined the site, but someone once said they liked running hit points like Dragonball Z. That's perfectly fine and can be lots of fun.

My position is coming from a default rules standpoint, and absolutely not from a standpoint of DMs being unable to change rules for his game. I house rule all the time. My house rules are just not how the game is written.

 

[Reynard]

Yes, and they do say that typically that's the case, which leaves open say a giant scorpion stinger attack to scratch you when above 50% in order to actually cause a poison save.

And this is why HP are not a sim tool: they change what they represent from moment to moment, monster to monster, encounter to encounter. They are just a measuring tool: how close am I to going down?

 

[Maxperson]

And this is why HP are not a sim tool: they change what they represent from moment to moment, monster to monster, encounter to encounter. They are just a measuring tool: how close am I to going down?

I disagree. They are abstract only in the sense that they aren't specified until you use them, but all uses are sim. A giant scorpion attack that scratches you and inject poison simulates that experience. A sword swing that is parried a fraction of an inch before going through your throat simulates a hit that does skill damage. And so on.

Hit points are abstract in that way so that they CAN simulate all the different ways you could be damaged and not be constrained to Dragonball Z type hit points where everything bounces off your face until you fall unconscious.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Can a high level D&D fighter voluntarily submit to execution at the hands of an ordinary axe-wielding executioner?

Gygax's hp rules don't answer this question, because I don't think he thought it would ever come up.

According to Mornard, the prevailing logic was that, (for example) there were no
coup de grâce rules in oD&D because 'no one thought that it had to be mentioned that a knife to the throat of a sleeping PC was fatal no matter their level' and that HP were for combat (and dungeon traps, apparently) situations and the DM was supposed to figure out what happens in other situations.

I don't particularly believe what Gary did in his own groups matters all that much if it wasn't then communicated to the rest of the gaming community, but it is a pretty good explanation for the mindset of the rules we did get. So, the situation would come up, but the DM was empowered and expected to make situational adjudication to resolve such questions.