I'm currently playing a 3.5e game with a bunch of close friends, our DM however refuses to use preset loot. He relies solely on the random loot tables. His reasoning for such is that it would be unrealistic for something you want too be constantly dropping of the things you kill. This logic goes even further into like shops and such. So I dunno if im over-worrying, or not but im foreseeing some rough future encounters if our characters struggle to find equipment. Any input, or potential ways i could sway my dm's mind?
Otherwise try the "fun card"
"Hey Mr DM, I know that you find it way more realistic that everything has random stuff, and I know we can potentially sell that stuff for cash so that we can buy or craft the things that we want, and that you're auditing our Wealth Per Level to make sure that everything's where it's supposed to be, but it's not all that fun. It may be more realistic, but it's a bit of a pain in the ass to have to jump through a bunch of hoops just to come out to the same end result, and I'm worried that not having the items we need could cause some serious problems. Some of the characters are pretty gear dependant and are going to start sucking pretty bad if they fall behind, and no one really wants to play a sucky character."
Instead of just hoping to find ______? Instead of simply glossing over the "Ok, I've got x amount of gold, I buy(or make) item "x""?
Actively seek it out.
RP the gathering of information (now wether this info turns out to be true or false....) concerning who has it/where it is/what exactly it does/the gathering of components, etc.
Then go there & try & recover the item/info/componants.
But if you insist on just killing random monsters hoping it'll drop like in WoW? Or trying to "just buy it"? You shouldn't expect to ever see whatever it is.
Hey all, so I have this dilemma that's been on my mind for a few days now. I'm currently playing a 3.5e game with a bunch of close friends, our DM however refuses to use preset loot. He relies solely on the random loot tables. His reasoning for such is that it would be unrealistic for something you want too be constantly dropping of the things you kill. This logic goes even further into like shops and such. So I dunno if im over-worrying, or not but im foreseeing some rough future encounters if our characters struggle to find equipment. Any input, or potential ways i could sway my dm's mind?
You can always insist on having the items you want made for you. This shouldn't cost more than buying the stuff from a shop, so the only hassle is that you'll have some down-time while you wait for your order to be completed.
Furthermore, you can suggest that your PCs will be researching where they might actually come across certain items and insist on pursuing those kind of clues.
1. Select a specific item you want to find, e.g. a +2 Longsword. Then start research with the specific goal of uncovering named items from legends, history or even current events that match that profile. Insist on doing so until you have a more than reasonable list of potential candidates.
2. Start researching where these items might conceivably be found. Perhaps some of these are known to be carried by the PCs enemies, or perhaps they were lost in a dungeon.
Armed with this kind of information you can simply go get the item. Of course there's the possibility that the item is no longer there (note down as a candidate for further research) in which case you move down the list to the next item.
At the very least you can confront the GM: Either these items exist and can therefore be found, or they don't exist at all, in which case you might as well start the same search for a different item, e.g. a +2 shortsword or a +1 flaming longsword.
-DF
Hey all, so I have this dilemma that's been on my mind for a few days now. I'm currently playing a 3.5e game with a bunch of close friends, our DM however refuses to use preset loot. He relies solely on the random loot tables. His reasoning for such is that it would be unrealistic for something you want too be constantly dropping of the things you kill. This logic goes even further into like shops and such. So I dunno if im over-worrying, or not but im foreseeing some rough future encounters if our characters struggle to find equipment. Any input, or potential ways i could sway my dm's mind?
DMs like this always make me think "Diablo, the table top edition."
More helpfully: ask him if he thinks that dragons and magic are realistic. What about high level characters being able to swim through lava and reliably survive mile-high falls? What about the fact that the party always seems to fight enemies of just the right challenge level? If the game were realistic, some parties would find nothing more than goblins their entire careers, and never get past 4th level, while other parties would find a big dragon on day 1 and die.
Surely, if your DM sees the value in setting aside realism for the sake of appropriate monsters, he can also see the value in setting aside realism for the sake of appropriate loot?
Seriously though all of the posts above give the best responces. And if he still refuses to listen perhaps you can come to some sort of aggreement. Yes the shops might not find an item in stock immediattly but assuredly they can order it in or have it created. Theres always stopping into the local mages shop or guild and requesting the item be made as well.
The only other nuance i can give you is if he wants realism and refuses to budge then take it to the extreme. Let him enjoy the annoyance of having to describe every single book in a library on the tracking habits of the goblins of the county of arfnak. Or perhaps the exact diet program of a the local dryads. Not to mention roleplaying out making every single bed, packing up all of your nightly belongings, cooking every last morsel of food, and describing the voiding of your bowels at least once a day. After all if realism is what he is after two can play at that game. Id strongly suggest this as a last ditch effort though.
The only other nuance i can give you is if he wants realism and refuses to budge then take it to the extreme. Let him enjoy the annoyance of having to describe every single book in a library on the tracking habits of the goblins of the county of arfnak. Or perhaps the exact diet program of a the local dryads. Not to mention roleplaying out making every single bed, packing up all of your nightly belongings, cooking every last morsel of food, and describing the voiding of your bowels at least once a day. After all if realism is what he is after two can play at that game. Id strongly suggest this as a last ditch effort though.
... and if that doesn't work, hand him your "wish list" and start jumping up and down, screaming "I want it! I want it! I want it!"
After all, this is 4e and every character is ENTITLED to every item on their wish list.
< /sarcasm >
@ The OP: Two strategys come to mind. 1. Sit down with your DM and explain what item(s) you are looking for and see what he says. 2. Ask around, in character, for info on the item(s) you want. Maybe they are for sale in another town. Maybe you can discover a rumor regarding their whereabouts in a dungeon or in the possession of an evil npc. Most DMs are pretty reasonable if you give them the chance. Just because something isn't readily available doesn't always mean that it isn't available at all. Good luck. I hope it works out.
Nope, this is 3.5. Check out the OP.
-DF
Nope, this is 3.5. Check out the OP
So it is. But the whole notion of "wish lists" and entitlement is quite 4e-ish, which led to my mistake. Obviously, I'm not a fan of either notion and the suggestion to throw a tantrum to force the DM's hand was just a bit much for me.
Provided you guys are level 6 or above, pick the Leadership Feat, make your Cohort an Artificer with all necessary item creation feats, find him a nice shop to teleport to, sell all your loot and have him make what you need with your characters paying the experience. In 3.5. Magic Items are even more of a requirement than in 4th.
Wow thank you all so much. Just a recap, my dm has agreed to allow for most low/mid level magic items be for sale in major cities, but in dungeons and adventures itll still be random.
So it was a solid compromise and all is well. haha thanks again everyone.
Provided you guys are level 6 or above, pick the Leadership Feat, make your Cohort an Artificer with all necessary item creation feats, find him a nice shop to teleport to, sell all your loot and have him make what you need with your characters paying the experience. In 3.5. Magic Items are even more of a requirement than in 4th.
Wow thank you all so much. Just a recap, my dm has agreed to allow for most low/mid level magic items be for sale in major cities, but in dungeons and adventures itll still be random.
So it was a solid compromise and all is well. haha thanks again everyone.
soo it's realistic to buy what you need in town, just because they happen to have it, but it's not realistic to have somethings you want in a dungeon.
I hate when anyone pulls this isn't realistic card in any rpg. I have to pull out "This is a game, not a simluation of real life"
or
"so what your saying fighting dragons, flying magic carpets, and stealing looting treasure from someone's dungeon is realistic"
and one my new ones" You know if I want to play a game that simulates the real wold, I would go play Sims AND THAT'S NOT EVEN THAT REAL!!!"
There are quite a few items nearly any character needs in 3.5. Vendors having those stockpiled is very realistic as long as there is a sufficient demand. Venturing into the unknown and conveniently finding what you need is something else entirely.
Consider this: If you need a new kitchen knife, you go to the shop because you know the shop will have them. They will have them, because they know everyone needs kitchen knifes. In 3.5, the +x sword is basically that, a kitchen knife equivalent that sooner or later every player and NPC needs and has.
That being said, I prefer placing treasure my players can use, provided I know what they want.
The point is I never got these"it ain't realistic" arguments when it comes to DnD. We are playing a game with fantastic creatures and mysterious places, but somehow certain aspects have to be realistic. Why why why?
But then you still have all that rolling of dice. Aren't those attack rolls and skill checks used to attempt to reflect a somewhat realistic combat system or skill system? It would probably be better if characters arbitrarily decide and just tell the DM whether they hit or not, or succeed at a skill or not. Obviously, it would be more fun because there would be less realism.
Actually a good rule of thumb for a DM is to give the players something that is about as good, but far better in specific circumstances. Like giving them something with Golem bane if they are planning on fighting golems. Or give them a rod of cure spells if they are going to be fighting hordes soon.
my point with this is that D&D is not about being realistic (if you want that try RAW D20 Modern) so GM's shouldn't push realiaty into fantasy.
I also try not to skew the bad guy ratio too hard, so that the party has sixteen belts of giant strength before they get one headband of wisdom, or visa versa.
This means varying the enemies encountered, even if I have to place one out of place archetype in the adventure. A lone wizard studying in the evil cult's basement, or an evil monk assassin seeking out the party in the sorceror's demense. That tends to make it more interesting than make it nonsensical-- "why are they there?" gives me more adventure ideas than you'd think.
I'm just amused that some people think it's "realistic" for an ogre barbarian to bust in on the scene wielding a +1 ghost touch spiked gauntlet with a +3 bashing heavy shield and wearing a folding boat or something.
Perhaps at the end of every encounter, a chest should appear and instead of having the DM describe what's in it maybe each player should reach in, pull out one item and tell the DM what it is. That way every player gets whatever he wants and there's no hint of realism.
But then you still have all that rolling of dice. Aren't those attack rolls and skill checks used to attempt to reflect a somewhat realistic combat system or skill system? It would probably be better if characters arbitrarily decide and just tell the DM whether they hit or not, or succeed at a skill or not. Obviously, it would be more fun because there would be less realism.
While I agree with the point you're trying to make, I'm still going to call troll due to the random "4e sucks" comment in a 3.5 thread and the strawman argument.
Example:
Fighter McDwarfguy: "I really want a Flaming Halberd. You are in the business of information, Gharlan, and you don't come too cheap, so I expect results."
*after some other adventure*
Gharlan: "You never would believe what a Hobgoblin Chieftain has in his possession. Here's what I know about their defenses, the rest is up to you."
NOTHING about that is edition specific, so go hogwild. There are no bad editions, only bad players/DMs.
While I agree with the point you're trying to make, I'm still going to call troll due to the random "4e sucks" comment in a 3.5 thread and the strawman argument.
Technically, it wasn't a "4e sucks" comment. It was a "the wish list / entitlement mindset that 4e fostered, sucks" comment, which essentially is what this thread is about as well.
Obviously people on opposite sides of the fence on this issue will never convert the others so I'll try to just sit on my opinions about "wish list" treasure for a while.
Technically, it wasn't a "4e sucks" comment. It was a "the wish list / entitlement mindset that 4e fostered, sucks" comment, which essentially is what this thread is about as well.
As I read it, this thread isn't about wishlists. It's about random treasure. It doesn't matter so much whether or not its the exact item you wanted, so much as if its something you're party can actually use. If the party consists of a Swordmage, a Rogue and a Wizard, then walking away from encounters with loads of Chainmail, Shields and Battleaxes is going to get frustrating eventually.
You don't have to give characters exactly what they want, but you should at least give them something they can use. I don't know about 3E, but in 4E the economy is skewed to such a degree that you need to sell five items you can't use in order to get one you can, which will put you way behind the eight-ball.
I don't agree with wish lists, but there are plenty of ways around it. Want a specific sword? Hunt for it. Hire a detective, keep your eyes open, but find who has that sword, and go for him. Gives the player what they want, the DM could have a lot fun with it, and you get a quest out of it. You get your fantasy AND you get your realism.
Example:
Fighter McDwarfguy: "I really want a Flaming Halberd. You are in the business of information, Gharlan, and you don't come too cheap, so I expect results."
*after some other adventure*
Gharlan: "You never would believe what a Hobgoblin Chieftain has in his possession. Here's what I know about their defenses, the rest is up to you."
NOTHING about that is edition specific, so go hogwild. There are no bad editions, only bad players/DMs.
Well this still is the "wish list" You know what the player wants, and want to give him. The Wish list never tells you how to give them.
A wish isn't "give me a list and I will give you the stuff" It's there as a guideline to what treasure you may want to put in the adventure. How you give it to them is up to you
I don't agree with wish lists, but there are plenty of ways around it. Want a specific sword? Hunt for it. Hire a detective, keep your eyes open, but find who has that sword, and go for him. Gives the player what they want, the DM could have a lot fun with it, and you get a quest out of it. You get your fantasy AND you get your realism.
Example:
Fighter McDwarfguy: "I really want a Flaming Halberd. You are in the business of information, Gharlan, and you don't come too cheap, so I expect results."
*after some other adventure*
Gharlan: "You never would believe what a Hobgoblin Chieftain has in his possession. Here's what I know about their defenses, the rest is up to you."
NOTHING about that is edition specific, so go hogwild. There are no bad editions, only bad players/DMs.
Well this still is the "wish list" You know what the player wants, and want to give him. The Wish list never tells you how to give them.
A wish isn't "give me a list and I will give you the stuff" It's there as a guideline to what treasure you may want to put in the adventure. How you give it to them is up to you
True, it's sort of like it, but I mean that I am not a fan of wish lists where it's like "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that." It'd be them asking for an item, as a character, and getting it as one, as well.
I don't agree with wish lists, but there are plenty of ways around it. Want a specific sword? Hunt for it. Hire a detective, keep your eyes open, but find who has that sword, and go for him. Gives the player what they want, the DM could have a lot fun with it, and you get a quest out of it. You get your fantasy AND you get your realism.
Example:
Fighter McDwarfguy: "I really want a Flaming Halberd. You are in the business of information, Gharlan, and you don't come too cheap, so I expect results."
*after some other adventure*
Gharlan: "You never would believe what a Hobgoblin Chieftain has in his possession. Here's what I know about their defenses, the rest is up to you."
NOTHING about that is edition specific, so go hogwild. There are no bad editions, only bad players/DMs.
Well this still is the "wish list" You know what the player wants, and want to give him. The Wish list never tells you how to give them.
A wish isn't "give me a list and I will give you the stuff" It's there as a guideline to what treasure you may want to put in the adventure. How you give it to them is up to you
True, it's sort of like it, but I mean that I am not a fan of wish lists where it's like "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that." It'd be them asking for an item, as a character, and getting it as one, as well.
That's why they call it a "wish" list, not a "demand" list. These are things the caracter wishes to have.
I don't agree with wish lists, but there are plenty of ways around it. Want a specific sword? Hunt for it. Hire a detective, keep your eyes open, but find who has that sword, and go for him. Gives the player what they want, the DM could have a lot fun with it, and you get a quest out of it. You get your fantasy AND you get your realism.
Example:
Fighter McDwarfguy: "I really want a Flaming Halberd. You are in the business of information, Gharlan, and you don't come too cheap, so I expect results."
*after some other adventure*
Gharlan: "You never would believe what a Hobgoblin Chieftain has in his possession. Here's what I know about their defenses, the rest is up to you."
NOTHING about that is edition specific, so go hogwild. There are no bad editions, only bad players/DMs.
Well this still is the "wish list" You know what the player wants, and want to give him. The Wish list never tells you how to give them.
A wish isn't "give me a list and I will give you the stuff" It's there as a guideline to what treasure you may want to put in the adventure. How you give it to them is up to you
True, it's sort of like it, but I mean that I am not a fan of wish lists where it's like "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that." It'd be them asking for an item, as a character, and getting it as one, as well.
No one is making you play that way, so I wouldn't worry about how some games are ran
You just run how players get there items differnt from other groups.
At the end of the day there are some magic items a player needs. If the player took the weapon proficeny mordinkrad I would sure hope he would get a magical mordinkrad and not a maul
I'd call that a failing on the DM's part if he's so utterly lacking in imagination that he can't come up with even a one-sentence story explaining why the wight had it.
> "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that." I'd call that a failing on the DM's part if he's so utterly lacking in imagination that he can't come up with even a one-sentence story explaining why the wight had it.
For mash potatoes...god why else would a wight want it...
> "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that." I'd call that a failing on the DM's part if he's so utterly lacking in imagination that he can't come up with even a one-sentence story explaining why the wight had it.
For mash potatoes...god why else would a wight want it...
Mordenkrad industries is pleased to announce it's new incentives program. Sales associates will now earn one free Bucket 'o Brains (TM) for each set of Mordenkrad sold through the month of June. All you Wights out there, stock up now and start selling Mordenkrads so you can get your Bucket 'o Brains today!
There are always other reasons
everyone pulls out the "D&D isn't realistic" argument, but it's obvious that certain realistic elements have to be maintained. dungeons and dragons (at least in all the common settings; i make no promises about crazy homebrew worlds) is a universe that is as close as it can get to ours, if we had magic. causality, probability, physics, etc. all work in roughly the same way. just because certain elements of the world aren't realistic doesn't mean that all aspects have to be. props to OldGuyGaming for taking the antirealism stance to its conclusion, saving me the keystrokes.
No. No no no no no no no.
Realism in a fantasy game can go get bent over and [surprise butt secksed]. There doesn't need to be realism in game, just a sense of believability. And there is no way the D&D world resembles our own. At all. Trying to think that it works even remotely the same way as ours is the cause of many, many problems between DMs and their players.
This idea, that "The D&D world is close to ours, except it has magic" is FALSE. There aren't just a few differences...the magic inherent in the universe changes every single facet of reality. Magic IS the physics of D&D, and it's such a fundamentally different force from normal physics, causality, and probability that it allows giant flying lizards to belch fire, giants the size of skyscrapers to look remotely human and still pump blood to their brains, breaks dimensional barriers to fairy lands and dark shodw refections of the land you're standing on, causes mountains to fly, generates the evolution of dozens of sentient species in a single biosphere, allows people to sail the stars in sailing ships, and grants the ability to let normal people develop the skills and durability to survive the hazards and eventually become kings, gods, prophets, and have their legends woven into the fabric of the world for all time.
At no point does this resemble our world, not even a little bit, and if the magic were taken away the universe would collapse in on itself and cease to function.
The question isn't "where does realism fit in?"
It's "How is this element believable in this world, given the variables that make it the way it is?"
This fits in just as well with this situation. Sure, this is fantasy, but it still has to make sense. If your DM just has magic items start raining from the sky, and every citizen of the town just says "kthxbai" and commit suicide, and the king says "YOU ARE THE CHOSEN ONES. EAT MY HAND"... then you would just say "WTF, DM?" That would be bad DMing since it doesn't make any sense.
Similarily, it's bad DMing to just throw treasure onto random enemies that the party fights that wouldn't make any sense to have. From time to time, sure, throw a Belt of Giants Strength on a Sorcerer and have the party wonder where it came from (maybe he killed an invader of his dungeon earlier who had it). MOST of the time, though, the enemies should have items that make sense to have, like an armlet of +2 CHA for a Sorcerer. Furthermore, throwing an enemy who has the treasure that a player wants out of no where all the time, also makes no sense. If you give them what they want too quickly and too "oh look, this just happens to be a Sorcerer with the item I wanted", then you have a problem.
Some liberties must be taken, of course. Gameplay is just as important as practicality. If you continually drop items that the PCs can't even use, they'll get pissed off for good reason. If the party Halfling keeps missing on every attack, you should throw in a small sized +1 Whatever Weapon He Likes eventually. But when you do this, you have to try your hardest to make it make sense, and preferably make it something that the party hunts after, rather than something that pops up. Perhaps have a man screaming for help in the middle of the road, saying that an insane Goblin was destroying his village with a magical Greataxe. If the party goes to the village, stops the goblin, and gets the axe the Halfling player will think, "Sweet, I just stopped a crazy, murdering goblin and got a new weapon because I'm awesome" rather than "Oh yay, my DM gave me the item I wanted".
Try to help your players, but make sure you do it in a way that makes sense.
In our game we fought some undead creatures( can't remember what kind) and there were bodies of previous adventures in this room. After looking around we found a maul..a magical maul, hey I am a barbarian and can use that.
We submitted wish list at the begining of the game and that is how one treasure was put in there
I think a misconception of wish list is like this, The PCs( not the players but there characters) don't say at the beginning of there adventure
"Well Zantar I think we should have adventure and I will find a +2 longsword"
"Well Thuddrock, I will find my +2 platemail on this one...AWAY WE GO!!"
The wishlist is giving the players some control of the story. They want the PCs to find this treasure, but the PCs really have no idea what there going to find. They just find what is in there room with no knowledge of whats in there.
The Player and the PC are two different things. Often knowledge from one is not transfered to the other.
A player knows how many HPs there PC have, but the PC have no conception of PC. They just know there hurt.
A PC with knowledge skills knows things that the PC doesn't know he knows. Not until it becomes relevant( when he makes a knowledge roll)
I don't agree with wish lists, but there are plenty of ways around it. Want a specific sword? Hunt for it. Hire a detective, keep your eyes open, but find who has that sword, and go for him. Gives the player what they want, the DM could have a lot fun with it, and you get a quest out of it. You get your fantasy AND you get your realism.
Example:
Fighter McDwarfguy: "I really want a Flaming Halberd. You are in the business of information, Gharlan, and you don't come too cheap, so I expect results."
*after some other adventure*
Gharlan: "You never would believe what a Hobgoblin Chieftain has in his possession. Here's what I know about their defenses, the rest is up to you."
NOTHING about that is edition specific, so go hogwild. There are no bad editions, only bad players/DMs.
Well this still is the "wish list" You know what the player wants, and want to give him. The Wish list never tells you how to give them.
A wish isn't "give me a list and I will give you the stuff" It's there as a guideline to what treasure you may want to put in the adventure. How you give it to them is up to you
True, it's sort of like it, but I mean that I am not a fan of wish lists where it's like "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that." It'd be them asking for an item, as a character, and getting it as one, as well.
No one is making you play that way, so I wouldn't worry about how some games are ran
You just run how players get there items differnt from other groups.
At the end of the day there are some magic items a player needs. If the player took the weapon proficeny mordinkrad I would sure hope he would get a magical mordinkrad and not a maul
Agreed with you, I guess maybe I'm being a bit unfair.
"> "Oh, this wight just happens to have that Mordenkrad you wanted. Imagine that."
I'd call that a failing on the DM's part if he's so utterly lacking in imagination that he can't come up with even a one-sentence story explaining why the wight had it. "
I imagine they would try harder than that. Probably say that the wight killed an adventurer who had one, or something. Understandable, but if you're interested in the hunt of an item, it might be a bit too convenient for your taste. Or he liked to make mashed potatoes, of course.
The question isn't "where does realism fit in?"
It's "How is this element believable in this world, given the variables that make it the way it is?"
Have I told you, lately, that I love you?
everyone pulls out the "D&D isn't realistic" argument, but it's obvious that certain realistic elements have to be maintained. dungeons and dragons (at least in all the common settings; i make no promises about crazy homebrew worlds) is a universe that is as close as it can get to ours, if we had magic. causality, probability, physics, etc. all work in roughly the same way. just because certain elements of the world aren't realistic doesn't mean that all aspects have to be. props to OldGuyGaming for taking the antirealism stance to its conclusion, saving me the keystrokes.
No. No no no no no no no.
Realism in a fantasy game can go get bent over and [surprise butt secksed]. There doesn't need to be realism in game, just a sense of believability. And there is no way the D&D world resembles our own. At all. Trying to think that it works even remotely the same way as ours is the cause of many, many problems between DMs and their players.
This idea, that "The D&D world is close to ours, except it has magic" is FALSE. There aren't just a few differences...the magic inherent in the universe changes every single facet of reality. Magic IS the physics of D&D, and it's such a fundamentally different force from normal physics, causality, and probability that it allows giant flying lizards to belch fire, giants the size of skyscrapers to look remotely human and still pump blood to their brains, breaks dimensional barriers to fairy lands and dark shodw refections of the land you're standing on, causes mountains to fly, generates the evolution of dozens of sentient species in a single biosphere, allows people to sail the stars in sailing ships, and grants the ability to let normal people develop the skills and durability to survive the hazards and eventually become kings, gods, prophets, and have their legends woven into the fabric of the world for all time.
At no point does this resemble our world, not even a little bit, and if the magic were taken away the universe would collapse in on itself and cease to function.
The question isn't "where does realism fit in?"
It's "How is this element believable in this world, given the variables that make it the way it is?"
the problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores many of the pervasive similarities between our world and d&d. gravity, magnetism, electricity, mass, basic biological needs of most humanoid species, physics, etc. all work in the same way as our world (unless, of course, they're being magicked about). if you want a world where realism can get buttsecksed, i'll DM a campaign for you where nothing happens because gravity is suddenly turned off and all matter in the multiverse disintegrates into plasma. or one where light stops behaving as a wave and the animals with tremorsense and blindsight take over. actually, that last one sounds pretty badass.
the problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores many of the pervasive similarities between our world and d&d.
It doesn't, actually. It doesn't at all.
the problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores many of the pervasive similarities between our world and d&d.
It doesn't, actually. It doesn't at all.
I love it when a well-reasoned, thought-out response is countered with "nu uh".
the problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores many of the pervasive similarities between our world and d&d.
It doesn't, actually. It doesn't at all.
I love it when a well-reasoned, thought-out response is countered with "nu uh".
oh no you didn't
The question isn't "where does realism fit in?"
It's "How is this element believable in this world, given the variables that make it the way it is?"
Have I told you, lately, that I love you?
That's it. Stroke that ego!the problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores many of the pervasive similarities between our world and d&d. gravity, magnetism, electricity, mass, basic biological needs of most humanoid species, physics, etc. all work in the same way as our world (unless, of course, they're being magicked about). if you want a world where realism can get buttsecksed, i'll DM a campaign for you where nothing happens because gravity is suddenly turned off and all matter in the multiverse disintegrates into plasma. or one where light stops behaving as a wave and the animals with tremorsense and blindsight take over. actually, that last one sounds pretty badass.
The trouble with that is that no matter how similar the rules may seem to be to the rules of our reality, they aren't actually the rules of our reality.
There's a concept in language studies called "False Friends," where certain words in one language look similar to words in another, but mean totally different things. For instance, the word "exito" in Spanish doesn't mean exit, it means success.
This is what's happening in the D&D world compared to our own, except that instead of languages, the False Friends are the fundamental laws of reality. What seems to be gravity, electromagnetism, mass, and biology have very different causes and outcomes.
D&D doesn't run on science. It runs on Rule of Cool, Contrived Coincidence, Rule of Drama, the Theory Of Narrative Causality, and the Willing Suspension of Disbelief. Acceptable Breaks From our Reality are par for the course.
Anything that you think needs to make sense in your game needs to do so on the merits of the reality presented in the game world itself, not because it would do so in our reality. Dragons, especially gargantuan ones, would never be able to fly in our reality because of the ratios of mass to lift, and they certainly wouldn't ever be able to breathe fire, puke lightning, or belch chlorine gas. A halfling wouldn't be able to force a dragon to move 5, 10, or even 20 feet with a simple application of force.
There are no laws of gravity or mass or thermodynamics that formed the D&D cosmology. People only stay attached to the ground because that's the way the Gods wanted it to work when they took over reality from The Primordials during the Dawn War. It really is that simple.
The question isn't "where does realism fit in?"
It's "How is this element believable in this world, given the variables that make it the way it is?"
Have I told you, lately, that I love you?the problem with this line of thinking is that it ignores many of the pervasive similarities between our world and d&d. gravity, magnetism, electricity, mass, basic biological needs of most humanoid species, physics, etc. all work in the same way as our world (unless, of course, they're being magicked about). if you want a world where realism can get buttsecksed, i'll DM a campaign for you where nothing happens because gravity is suddenly turned off and all matter in the multiverse disintegrates into plasma. or one where light stops behaving as a wave and the animals with tremorsense and blindsight take over. actually, that last one sounds pretty badass.
The trouble with that is that no matter how similar the rules may seem to be to the rules of our reality, they aren't actually the rules of our reality.
There's a concept in language studies called "False Friends," where certain words in one language look similar to words in another, but mean totally different things. For instance, the word "exito" in Spanish doesn't mean exit, it means success.
This is what's happening in the D&D world compared to our own, except that instead of languages, the False Friends are the fundamental laws of reality. What seems to be gravity, electromagnetism, mass, and biology have very different causes and outcomes.
D&D doesn't run on science. It runs on Rule of Cool, Contrived Coincidence, Rule of Drama, the Theory Of Narrative Causality, and the Willing Suspension of Disbelief. Acceptable Breaks From our Reality are par for the course.
Anything that you think needs to make sense in your game needs to do so on the merits of the reality presented in the game world itself, not because it would do so in our reality. Dragons, especially gargantuan ones, would never be able to fly in our reality because of the ratios of mass to lift, and they certainly wouldn't ever be able to breathe fire, puke lightning, or belch chlorine gas. A halfling wouldn't be able to force a dragon to move 5, 10, or even 20 feet with a simple application of force.
There are no laws of gravity or mass or thermodynamics that formed the D&D cosmology. People only stay attached to the ground because that's the way the Gods wanted it to work when they took over reality from The Primordials during the Dawn War. It really is that simple.
the cause of the similarities is irrelevant. where the law of gravity comes from doesn't matter, it only matters that it exists. it all comes back to the concept you mentioned, suspension of disbelief. this only works so far. if the game world strays too far from our own, we won't be able to suspend disbelief because the world won't make sense. the game has to follow certain rules that our own world does. fortunately for creativity, these rules are pretty much just background rules that we can safely just ignore and focus on changing more interesting things. getting back to the point of the thread, the placement of loot is one of those things. it works fine to put whatever loot the players want into the dungeons, until someone actually thinks about it. once that happens, they have to accept that in this game world, the loot had to come from somewhere, and since "a wizard did it" is a pretty shoddy excuse, a DM is encouraged to give a likely source. thus, the random loot.
however, that was a very well reasoned argument, and forced me to look at the issue a different way. i personally still prefer to look at the game world (or, at least, my own homebrew worlds) as a different version of our own, but i have to admit that your version is just as valid.
the cause of the similarities is irrelevant. where the law of gravity comes from doesn't matter, it only matters that it exists. it all comes back to the concept you mentioned, suspension of disbelief. this only works so far. if the game world strays too far from our own, we won't be able to suspend disbelief because the world won't make sense. the game has to follow certain rules that our own world does. fortunately for creativity, these rules are pretty much just background rules that we can safely just ignore and focus on changing more interesting things. getting back to the point of the thread, the placement of loot is one of those things. it works fine to put whatever loot the players want into the dungeons, until someone actually thinks about it. once that happens, they have to accept that in this game world, the loot had to come from somewhere, and since "a wizard did it" is a pretty shoddy excuse, a DM is encouraged to give a likely source. thus, the random loot.
however, that was a very well reasoned argument, and forced me to look at the issue a different way. i personally still prefer to look at the game world (or, at least, my own homebrew worlds) as a different version of our own, but i have to admit that your version is just as valid.
I would posit that the cause isn't irrelevant, because if you change the cause you can then make changes to what the outcome can and what different circumstances allow for. The more detail you have, the easier it is to achieve Suspension of Disbelief. This is why worlds like the Harry Potter series, Discworld, and Star Wars detail their magic systems (or the Force, in Star Wars' case) - once you can answer questions about its use, and keep the rules that govern them consistent, you can achieve Suspension of Disbelief easier.
I do happen to agree on the Random Loot point, though. For all my long-winded posting on the subject, I actually do think that "just giving the players everything they want" isn't good for maintaining a consistent game setting. I hate how 4e handles treasure, though I like most everything else about it. They treat gold coins as "magical item upgrade points" instead of actual currency, which is a bit of gamism that hurts my own suspension of disbelief. I've taken to using Inherent Bonuses specifically so I'm not harming my players by handing out fewer magic items per level, and I allow the players to upgrade their existing equipment in preference to finding a newer, better weapon every 5 levels. (I loved the 3.5 "weapons of legacy" concept and was sorry to see it not implemented in 4e). It's my belief that the game would be better if items didn't offer enhancement bonuses at all and didn't have to be factored into the math of leveling so that weapons, armor, and neck slots could return to the "nice but not required" status they had in early editions of the game.
I've done a few things in my own game to address the treasure issue:
* I've given them access to a magical item crafter's guild, which currently owes them some major favors, as a way of awarding them specific items on their wish lists. (My game world is in the process of developing Eberron-esque magitech)
* I level up items the party already has in preference to handing out new ones, with story-based explanations for why these items are growing more potent (such as the symbiotic wand one of my players has - it grows stronger because it's feeding off her as she grows stronger)
* I've given out "potential parcels," items that aren't enchanted but can be used with the enchant magic item ritual to become enchanted without the component cost (for instance, one of the party members took a beholder's central eye with the intention of getting it enchanted as an amulet, so I gave him a GP limit and allowed him to use his ritual on it to "bring the magic out of it" for no cost)
* When I hand out treasure after an encounter, I stick with items that the creatures they were fighting would reasonably have, but which could be useful to one or more of the characters (not necessarily one on the wish list, but useful).
* Sometimes I had out magic items that I expect them to sell off, based on a 20% gp value instead of a full parcel. For instance, I once handed out four +2 daggers that a foulspawn mangler was carrying (my part is starting Paragon Tier, so +2 weapons with no other properties aren't very special). If they keep them, they have a magic back up weapon; if not, they can sell or disenchant them as they like.
I love it when a well-reasoned, thought-out response is countered with "nu uh".
I apologize! I had assumed that by re-reading both posts, the lack of conflict would be obvious, but apparently not, so I'll clarify.
That line of thinking does NOT ignore the differences, and in fact, includes them by default. The question "How is this element believable in this world, given the variables that make it the way it is?" very specifically includes any similarities between this world and ours, without giving them undue weight by virtue of being similar.
In other, fewer words: no, it actually doesn't.