[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (TFT) Price of new Magic Item - Paramount Armor

I'm somewhat similar. Though I wouldn't say that I'm against rules feeling realistic (or even being realistic....) as much as it is that I just find it inefficient for rules to go beyond a certain level of detail, and to get rid of a certain level of abstraction.

Within a gunfight, for example, you have countless possibilities for the exact LOS of a character, the exact location a bullet hits, etc etc.... its better for, say, a skirmish game for squad on squad combat, to abstract that aspect a bit. In doing so, they can still be realistic in the overall results of a bullet wound without having to learn exactly the hyrdostatic impact of the bullet from different angles on different specific points on the body (though perhaps more general hit location tables are useful).

I guess my point is: game design is a complex thing.
On Jan 28, 2011, at 3:38 PM, Joe Hartley wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 14:40:02 -0500
Joey Beutel <mejobo@comcast.net> wrote:
Well similar to color (with its spectrum), we have the entire rulebook
as a set of things our games have in common. Even if we ignore parts
of the rules.

On Jan 28, 2011, at 2:43 AM, Jay Carlisle wrote:
Does anybody actually know what 1 point of damage is supposed to

The conversation about abstraction vs. realism in TFT is one that's gone on for years. I'm an abstractionist, so to me one point of damage means around 1/12th of a starting character's total ability to withstand injury.

What kind of injury should that be?  What's a dagger to the gut really
worth?  What's an arrow in the arm really going to do?  These things
matter a great deal to Jay and others who are adding detail galore to
their systems. It's all pretty arbitrary to me, though.

I'm on record as having been drawn to TFT for its simplicity and its
use of multiple 6-sided dice which brings a bell-shaped curve of probability
to the game rather than the flat line a single D20 brings.

I love Jay and his maniacal research into all the aspects of the game that he brings, but it's an approach that isn't my cup of tea. With all the games I play, I find that the more realistic the game tries to be, the less into it that I am. I got into gaming through some friends that enjoyed wargaming, and have moved little stacks of cardboard chits around on a map for a long time, but after a weekend of being bored to tears with Advanced
Squad leader, I find I'd rather play Battle Cry.

It was the same for me with RPGs. I started with Melee & Wizard and expanded into ITL, and when I was asked to play in a D&D game, I was astonished to see how slow the game went, with rolls for everything. Maybe that was just a case of one DM and his desire for accurate modeling, but I saw it in every D&D game I played or witnessed, where TFT always flowed and allowed the adventure
to move forward.

So, what's one damage point?  Anything we want it to be!

      Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh@brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"