Extensive Character Sheets Are GM Oppression

Thomas Shey said:

Though I agree with this in general (and thought your post was well explained) I sometimes think this is used to reduce detail below the level that's desirable in games.

Click to expand...

There is a broad sweet spot for granularity in the market where desirability drops off very quickly on either side side. Venture beyond it and you become a dreaded "niche" game. Anathema to Hasbro Inc.

Thomas Shey said:

I realize some people don't care, but if you want, for example, playing a fencer to feel like a fencer, you need a system that drills down a bit farther than simple rolls to hit.

Click to expand...

As fate would have it, I was in a "historic combat fencing" club in college (sponsor was in the local SCA). One of the fencers was ranked in the top twenty nationally in foil but peaked between Olympics, much to his coach's dismay. We had video footage (vhs) of the him and the next best SCA fencer using paired epees. In one leap attack, every couple of frames one of the four epees attacked and was parried. Between them, every sword attacked at least once and there were five separate attacks/blocks in around a second. (Fwiw, I was running the camera. I am a schlub, not a 0.1% level athlete)

I have zero idea how to model that without descending into "Champions-level of complexity" action phases or getting into d&d 3e + Tome of Battle rules where a fighter can get 5 attacks each round and do stunts.

Most people don't want that, simply based on market share. Plus most people already find d&d a "slow" game once you leave tier 2. Adding more granularity will slow the game further.

pemerton said:

I think my usage is standard (as per how the word is used in other fields). Your usage deprives "abstraction" of its meaning.

Click to expand...

I quite disagree. The usage you're applying is arbitrary and does not look at the function being made.

pemerton said:

I can think of plenty of abstractions in RPG combat rules: RQ hit locations (the multiplicity and complexity of striking a body with a weapon is abstracted, regimented and simplified); D&D injury rules, according to which you're either uninjured or you're unconscious and possibly dying (all the other possible intermediate states are abstracted away); rules about how many character can fit in a certain space, or surround another character (which abstract away the details of particular body shapes, positioning, etc).

But turn-taking in D&D is not an abstract representation of the simultaneous interaction of the beings whose "controllers" are taking turns. It's a game play device used to work out what happens to those beings.

Click to expand...

Then you should be able to explain why its not an abstraction, when there are specific mechanics like Readies, Delays and AoOs that are designed to patch over the limits of that abstraction. If it was a raw game structure, it wouldn't need those after all.

kigmatzomat said:

There is a broad sweet spot for granularity in the market where desirability drops off very quickly on either side side. Venture beyond it and you become a dreaded "niche" game. Anathema to Hasbro Inc.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure for general discussion I care about that all. This thread is not about just D&D and is not in one of the D&D specific areas.

kigmatzomat said:

As fate would have it, I was in a "historic combat fencing" club in college (sponsor was in the local SCA). One of the fencers was ranked in the top twenty nationally in foil but peaked between Olympics, much to his coach's dismay. We had video footage (vhs) of the him and the next best SCA fencer using paired epees. In one leap attack, every couple of frames one of the four epees attacked and was parried. Between them, every sword attacked at least once and there were five separate attacks/blocks in around a second. (Fwiw, I was running the camera. I am a schlub, not a 0.1% level athlete)

I have zero idea how to model that without descending into "Champions-level of complexity" action phases or getting into d&d 3e + Tome of Battle rules where a fighter can get 5 attacks each round and do stunts.

Click to expand...

You apparently are under the impression I consider "Champions level complexity" undersirable. When trying to get a good feel for some types of combat, in fact, I consider it one of the better choices for it.

kigmatzomat said:

Most people don't want that, simply based on market share. Plus most people already find d&d a "slow" game once you leave tier 2. Adding more granularity will slow the game further.

Click to expand...

Again, I don't really consider what "most people" want particularly relevant in the context of what I was discussing. As I said, we're not just talking D&D here. D&D is fine when you want certain sorts of things. A decent combat emulation is not one of them.