it reminds me just how young i am compared to most of you when i realise you would all be thinking of the original not the remake that i would first consider

As has been stated, I do like internal consistency; it makes the world more easily digested.

Realism for me is not necessarily an all-encompassing facet of a game. I'm fine with certain aspects being more fantastic than realistic. I like many elements of "classical" fantasy/fairy tale in the game. I'm mostly a realism stickler when it comes to relatively ordinary type stuff such as objects, animals, social structure, and glaring anachronisms in the context of what existed in the medieval world despite being on a different planet in a different reality.

"Realism" is meaningless in the context of RPGs.  It's emulation that matters.

Quote from: RPGPundit;805523"Realism" is meaningless in the context of RPGs.  It's emulation that matters.

One of the things I like is games that emulate reality. Realism seems like a really meaningful way to describe that.

Quote from: Bren;805557One of the things I like is games that emulate reality. Realism seems like a really meaningful way to describe that.

Emulation of reality is not the same as reality; I assume that your preferred game doesn't include rules governing how full your character's bladder is, for example.

Quote from: RPGPundit;806157Emulation of reality is not the same as reality; I assume that your preferred game doesn't include rules governing how full your character's bladder is, for example.

No fucking duh. That's why it's called an emulation of reality and not reality itself.

Degree of "realism" depends wholly upon the setting and genre.  If I'm playing a Western or pirate RPG, I like it to be fantasy-free and fairly realistic feeling (key word is feeling). If I'm playing Toon, reality goes out the window. In between is where I like my super hero games: the world is basically our own but obviously there are fantastic elements allowing for super beings to exist, much like early Marvel comics.

Quote from: Matt;806284Degree of "realism" depends wholly upon the setting and genre.  If I'm playing a Western or pirate RPG, I like it to be fantasy-free and fairly realistic feeling (key word is feeling). If I'm playing Toon, reality goes out the window. In between is where I like my super hero games: the world is basically our own but obviously there are fantastic elements allowing for super beings to exist, much like early Marvel comics.

This is what some of us have been saying.  
In the case of this super hero 'genre', like early marvel, since you are playing in an analogue of the 'real world', the term 'realism' has some traction.  Similarly, if it is a pirate game in our own world, the term still holds muster.

It loses me in any fantasy setting.

Quote from: Bren;806237No fucking duh. That's why it's called an emulation of reality and not reality itself.

Exactly.

For example, there are many wargames and scientific/technical simulations that are realistic in that they are used to teach real-world skills and/or predict real-world outcomes. These are obviously not reality itself, and never have bladder-emptying rules, but it is proper to call them realistic.

My simple terminology:

If you consult fiction sources for input on your rules, then you are working on genre emulation.

If you consult non-fiction sources for input on your rules, then you are working on realism. This could also be termed "emulation of reality", but that's just using an alternate term for the same thing.

Generally, I like tangible stuff to appear to obey the laws of science, with magic able to tell those laws to go fuck off for a while.

I've noticed that some D&D players that come into a sci-fi game will think that all the tech used is done by magic. A lot of these players don't drive cars, and think light rail is powered by... well, magic.

Good thing the games are just one-shots.

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;806536I've noticed that some D&D players that come into a sci-fi game will think that all the tech used is done by magic. A lot of these players don't drive cars, and think light rail is powered by... well, magic.

Good thing the games are just one-shots.

Are these gamers...hobos?

"Sufficiently advanced" may simply mean beyond someone's education to understand - just as in a more materially primitive society much that we would call magic might be regarded as just another tool because people have a comfortable theoretical basis for how it supposedly works.

Computer programming for instance might as well be magic for all many people can make sense of the invocations, and scientists a priesthood.

Quote from: jibbajibba;804276Internal consistancy over realism

I agree totally. Actually consistency is what I would call "realism" in a fantasy world context. In a D&D world we migth decide that spectres exist. Then I would accept them as realistic. But if they are close to invisible, fly faster than a running horse, can only be killed by magic weapons, can kill a normal human instantly with a single touch (double energy drain) (and presumably would want to) and the victims rise the next night as spectres, then I find it highly unrealistic (internally inconsistent) that not all humans have been replaced by spectres.

The D&D game is filled with these ridiculous inconsistencies. The above example is from the Expert Rules. I have considered starting a thread where we could collect examples of such ridiculous inconsistencies.

Quote from: RPGPundit;806157Emulation of reality is not the same as reality; I assume that your preferred game doesn't include rules governing how full your character's bladder is, for example.

See, that's the kind of straw-man bullshit that breaks reasonable discussions down to, well, bullshit.  Are you really attempting to couple realism with rules for urination, or are you just trying to push people's buttons?

Hence my classic sticky:  R-E-A-L-I-S-M: The Hated Word