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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6050812" data-attributes="member: 58416">I think there are a few parts to your post which highlight what I feel is a problem with the conversation: too many absolutes.  Some of the people who want more realism (myself included) do not require perfect realism.  Like many other aspects of a rpg or rules system, I tend to view realism more like a sliding bar rather than a binary thing.  Wanting more realism doesn't necessarily mean I want perfect realism.Bringing up naval combat is something I find interesting too because it highlights an area of play which prompts me to want more realism.  Yes, I do agree that the time scale of a naval battle might be boring.  However, the other end of the spectrum --the one in which a D&D druid can quite literally defeat an entire navy by himself while barely breaking a sweat- is something which ruins my fun.  It ruins my fun because I want to be able to have cool ship battles; swashbuckling adventures, and other such things.  It's a little tough to do that when one PC has the capability of making an entire ship obsolete.  I also find that your view (which I in no way feel is wrong; just different than my own) brings me to a question: why is it that all game time must play out in combat rounds or similar time?  If it's going to take several months to heal, what's wrong with the GM explaining to the players how much time they have, and then asking them what they'd like to do during that time?  That would seem to me to be an excellent time to allow players to explore things like item creation, castle building, political machinations, and plenty of other in-game activities which require time to complete.</blockquote>

Verification