From an old blog post of mine:  

QuoteThe common RPG assumption that characters will automatically succeed at mundane tasks is a damned lie.

I fail at basic shit like putting on my pants every day of the week.

Now, I understand why this is so, a game of endless rolls would get old fast, but it's kinda funny nonetheless.

In another recent thread, I noted the oddity that so many games and players seem to assume that all fights are "to the death", despite that rarely being in the case in real life.  

So what are some other wierd ideas that seem to be accepted, for good or ill, but don't actually make any sense?

That groups of totally disparate people - including folk of different species  - will hang out together and basically go to the bathroom together for no apparent reason.

The concept of the party may be essential for practical reasons, but for me is often the biggest barrier to suspension of disbelief. Especially as someone always wants to play the "exotic" race in the game. There are fixes and rationales, but it's still a recurring issue.

TheShadow

Here's a question: How do you integrate one of these every day failures? I mean we all have them right? I mean just the other day I broke a vase while washing it. So shit happens-how do you represent that  in your game with out seeming malicious?

Quote from: Serious PaulHere's a question: How do you integrate one of these every day failures? I mean we all have them right? I mean just the other day I broke a vase while washing it. So shit happens-how do you represent that  in your game with out seeming malicious?

"For every one thing that goes right, two things will go wrong."
An Alternate rule for D20.

Characters may, at any time, take a bonus to their rolls of +10 for a given task.  However, on doing so, the character recieves two Karma Hates You points.  These KHY points must be burned off before the end of the session, or they give a corresponding XP penalty of 100 x Current KHY.  A KHY point is burned by willingly declaring a failure on a task, regardless of how trivial.  

Example:  Chef Andres Simone is preparing a gourmet meal for a party of very influential food reviewers.  He is determined to impress them with his particular house specialty, a 7-herb Cabernet souffle.  He declares he will take what Karma can give him, and gets a +10 to his Craft(Cooking) roll, and the food critics are immensely impressed, promising him a great review in the next restaurant guide.  He is then left with two KHY points.  The first he spends later while in the kitchen, when he accidentally sets fire to his new chef's coat while trying to make a simple omelette.  The second he spends after work, as he is trying to leave, when he spends 15 minutes becoming increasingly irate at his inability to gain entry to his own car, only to realize that he was using the wrong key.

That equipment never wears out or breaks. One time, i decided that the PCs had been galloping all over the world for years and that some equipment was worn out. I rolled randomly to see who's cinch strap broke on their saddle. It happened and i nearly got lynched! Boo! GM abuse! Stuff breaks and wears out, deal with it! The PC either had to walk his horse or go bareback. He decided to walk. One day later a shiny new saddle, no biggie. But it was interesting to see a reaction i would have expected if i had told him that he had randomly broken his leg or 'rocks fall, you die'. Now i just make them spend a few gold every now and then for maintenance of equipment.

That serious physical disabilities or character flaws are "balanced out" by secret superpowers.

The topic of this post really seems to be "assumptions about the game world that aren't so in real life", but when I read the topic, I was think "assumptions about players or gameplay that don't pan out in actual play."

Things like "more choice always makes for a better game" or "all players want to make minute decisions about their characters" or "if your players have a problem with a game, it is easier to replace the players than the game". That sort of falsehood.

Here's another one that I've been thinking about:  An axe is an axe is an axe.

The idea that a given type of weapon can be genericized in the form of "An axe does 1d8 damage, a spear does 1d6, and SMG does 2d6".

In actuality, there are so many factors in the design of a given weapon, n it's maintenance, who's hands it's in, and so forth, that in actual point of fact it's entirely relative.

Traveller does it.  Storyteller did it.  D&D does it.  I have similarly considered doing it for my own game, though I'm moving away from that in my mind, in part to circumvent my hatred of writing lists.

If you assume that point-buy character generation is automatically more fair than random character generation, then my suggestion works both ways.

Quote from: J ArcaneHere's another one that I've been thinking about:  An axe is an axe is an axe.

The idea that a given type of weapon can be genericized in the form of "An axe does 1d8 damage, a spear does 1d6, and SMG does 2d6".

That would be the difference between a game concerned with detail and one not concerned with detail.

FWIW, Spycraft 2.0 has weapon qualities and a damage scale that factors in the energy of the round, so an Uzi is different from a MAC 10.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadThat would be the difference between a game concerned with detail and one not concerned with detail.

FWIW, Spycraft 2.0 has weapon qualities and a damage scale that factors in the energy of the round, so an Uzi is different from a MAC 10.

Well like, even two of the same gun can wind up being different depending on how they were when you found them.

Since I'm doing a PA game, I'm finding myself leaning more towards a randomized system, where it's essentially a set of random qualities, designed to imply the variability of weapon quality, level of wear, design, etc., by simply adding together the usual weapon stats more or less at random chance.

Quote from: J ArcaneWell like, even two of the same gun can wind up being different depending on how they were when you found them.

Yup. That's why cheap, crappy guns will often get things like a larger error range and possibly the addition of traits like unreliable.

But I forget. It's a non-D&D d20 derivative, so it couldn't possibly be different than D&D.

Gold pieces are valuable! In an economy based on a gold standard, gold pieces are no more valuable than paper dollars are in the current US economy (i.e., you'd have to amass millions of them to be considered independently wealthy by society's standards).

Quote from: jdrakehGold pieces are valuable! In an economy based on a gold standard, gold pieces are no more valuable than paper dollars are in the current US economy (i.e., you'd have to amass millions of them to be considered independently wealthy by society's standards).

The Spanish built some of the biggest damn ships in the ocean simply because they needed that much room to haul all the goddamn gold around.

Quote from: J ArcaneThe Spanish built some of the biggest damn ships in the ocean simply because they needed that much room to haul all the goddamn gold around.

Yep. And at the time, they were considered insanely wealthy. Ditto the Templars, the English Crown, and pretty much anybody else who hoarded gold and/or other precious metals. In fantasy games with a GP standard economy, a galleon full of gold pieces isn't actually all that impressive.