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="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9181043" data-attributes="member: 7025508">What I mean by GM's whim, is that it is not informed by the fictional reality. Think in the setting is X, but it is at GM's whim whether it uses minion-X, or normal-X or elite-X rules. The GM is not constrained by the fiction, as the rules do not represent the fiction in consistent manner.No, I think it is just genuinely more convoluted. Having objective rules-fiction conncetion is just simpler than having to separately decide what rule element to attack to the fictional element every time.Yes, agreed. It is silly that it is not part of the setting.No, not in the same way. Hit points and hit bonuses are objective and at least to me they do represent diegetic things in the setting, albeit in rather abstract manner. Minion rules are not diegetic.No, that is not only thing the stats do. They also tells us about the setting. If a NPC has low wisdom, that will affect how I portray them, even if no wisdom rolls are made, if NPC has high strength that will affect how I describe their physique, even if no strength rolls are made. But yes, a big part of what stats do is to resolve interactions like you say. And I want them to do that in consistent manner, thus portraying a consistent reality that is predictable to the players. Sure, and I'm pretty sure I said that much in this thread.I have struggled at phrasing this before as well. What I want is not simulation in a sense that we need to be super concerned about realism or accuracy of the representation, but I care about the consistency and objectivity of the representation, and want a robust rules-fiction connection. I think I've called it "broad strokes simulation" before.</blockquote>

Verification