Another realism thread.

[Elfdart]

Realism is the worst kind of bullshit.

[Gronan of Simmerya]

Well, for gunpowder at least, I'd say look at 14th and early 15th century gunpowder weapons.  To call them "crude" would be flattering them.  The earliest ones were things like bombards and the like, and how much use are they to player characters?  And many of the first "gonnes" were done more out of determination to do them rather than because they were "better" than other missile weapons.

In other words, gunpowder weapons look different when you know that the M1911A1, the MG42, and the M109 exist.

[The Ent]

"Realism" is just someone's idea of versimilitude, which is the appearance of reality, and therefore a completely subjective idea depending on one's own sensibilities and the context in which they are put in play.

That's my view too.

[ggroy]

If one insists on absolute "realism", they shouldn't be wasting their time playing tabletop rpg games or even reading/watching science fiction or fantasy.  :rolleyes:

Easier to just go out into the real world, or study something like engineering or a hard science, if one wants "realism".


(With all that being said).  Whenever I was DM'ing, on the first day I usually asked the players how much they were willing to suspend disbelief.

[Dirk Remmecke]

For some reason I feel like mentioning Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind. So I did. Watch it if you haven't yet done so; it might give you some ideas.

Better: read it.

In the manga you can much better study all those little details (that I believe Arminius is relating to) like everyday household items, lost technology, new inventions that mirror things that mankind had found (and lost) other solutions for during the lost ages as they are featured more prominently.

[Bill]

Some people seem to have trouble distinguishing 'realism' from 'how I would have done it'

There is no reliable objective example of realism I am aware of.

If such exists, someone explain it to me so my Orcs will be realistic.

[arminius]

In other words, gunpowder weapons look different when you know that the M1911A1, the MG42, and the M109 exist.

Thumbs up! This is what I meant when I said the setting doesn't have to be static.

Better: read it.

In the manga you can much better study all those little details (that I believe Arminius is relating to) like everyday household items, lost technology, new inventions that mirror things that mankind had found (and lost) other solutions for during the lost ages as they are featured more prominently.

I thought the manga was cluttered visually (too much detail in B&W line drawings) and the plot meandered after the first few issues. I did like some of the greater depth of setting, but I really prefer the movie.

[Crabbyapples]

As long as realism has game trade-offs, I don't have a problem. The argument is not about balance. It's about risk matching the reward. If a game doesn't have a pay off, the idea doesn't add to the fun. The mechanics or setting elements a designer adds to his game should promote meaningful choices or channel behaviour.

Does the GM increase weapon fatigue in his new campaign? Sure, if he provides more money than expected to compensate.

The GM adds in a troll in a 1st level dungeon? Sure, just allow for better loot (or at least a chance for better treasure) in the room.

[Ravenswing]

If one insists on absolute "realism", they shouldn't be wasting their time playing tabletop rpg games or even reading/watching science fiction or fantasy.

Bit of a straw man, don't you think?  Show me a credible example of anyone who actually does.

[J Arcane]

I have a general rule.

I research what the real world/scientific option looks like, then I discard at will as I please.

Sometimes reality actually is weirder than you think, so you find fun stuff this way. But if it isn't, then I just discard it and go with what looks fun.

Some basic research can improve a lot of things, even silly things. I spent hours researching the structure of a squid's mouth just to come up with the language notes for the hovering squid in Hulks and Horrors. The monsterpedia in Arcana Rising represents weeks of research, even though it's about a 50/50 shot how much of the actual real world myth I used unaltered, and how much I revised to make for a cooler setting. Heaven's Shadow's Talvenacht basically came about entirely as a result of an unrelated Wikipedia crawl, and I think they're one of the coolest factions in the game as a result.

At the same time though? It should never, ever become a crutch. Or a ball-and-chain. Reality is there as a tool, to be used only as needed for the setting and the theme at work. Believability is not so fragile for most actual players IME, so long as the stakes and the mood are well established. The MST3K Mantra should never be forgotten.

[The Ent]

Better: read it.

In the manga you can much better study all those little details (that I believe Arminius is relating to) like everyday household items, lost technology, new inventions that mirror things that mankind had found (and lost) other solutions for during the lost ages as they are featured more prominently.

Seconded.

I got the big collector's deal (y'know the two great big books inna case) and man. It's a real classic. A wonderful manga. Great story, great storytelling, great characters, basically an SF classic worthy to stand among the great SF classics.

But then I'm a fan.