| From: | David Hinkley dhinkley@***.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Game World Realism was REVIEW- Cannon Companion |
| Date: | Wed, 12 Apr 2000 19:16:36 -0700 |
complete. That is that the background or setting information does not answer
all possible questions that the players or the GM might ask. Nor do the rules
address all possible situations and how they are to be resolved. It is also
unreasonable to expect that they do so.
But, no matter how carefully you stick to the basic rules, stay within the
published settings and avoid pushing the envelope, this short-coming will
raise its ugly head. Usually it is a minor matter,such as how much is a pad
and paper, where can I get a power drill (or other normal object), how far to
the wall plug, is it 110 or 220. But sometimes it is not so minor, for example
the PC in the elevator decides to override the penthouse lockout, or climb a
top the elevator car or do something else that is not described in the rules
and is important to the play of the game. Either way the GM will fall back on
his knowledge of both the real and game world and come up with an answer.
Depending on the game the "real world" may be, an historical era, (i.e.
Medieval Europe, the Roaring Twenties, the Wild West or Ancient Briton) the
present day, an extension of current trends (near future) or just the basic
laws and rules of Science. Regardless it provides a source of answers to the
questions unanswered by the game and its background materials. The
"accuracy" of these answers depends on a number of factors. The more
important ones being the games system's internal consistency, and how
closely it mirrors the closest "real world". And then there is the individual
GM's personal knowledge or lack there of that pertains to the question at
hand.
When creating a game world the games development team must insure that
the final product is internally consistent, that it is clear how that game world
relates to the "real world" and where it has deviated from it. This is not to
say
that they must model a real world, for in many cases the deviation and/or
additions are the game (i.e. monsters and magic in D&D) but rather they
need to provide a frame of reference through which other material can be
introduced in to the game. Take for example a players inquiry as to the cost
of a bucket of black paint, the GM makes a guesstimate of today's cost and
the relationship of that price to items that are listed in the game and comes
up with the cost. The existing gear list and prices provided the frame of
reference for determining the price of the bucket of paint.
A simple straight forward example, now lets stretch the envelope a lot, Striker
(a Traveller based miniature game) contained rules for grav belts with top
speed limit, it also contained rules for grav-vehicles that provided for faster
speeds, one of my more imagitive fellow players came up with the idea of
towing grav belted troops on tow lines behind the vehicle like water skiers,
then some else went on step further and asked if the vehicle makes a sharp
turn and as the troops whip by they let go, how far will they travel? As the
physics of that game world were the same as ours it was calculatable and a
few reasonable difficulties added in (what happens when the troopers course
intersected solid objects such as rocks and trees) and the game continued.
The commallity of the rules of physics providing the frame of reference.
Another game, this time Star Trek, did not fair so well, some bright person
figured out how to turn the transporter in to an offensive weapon (have it
remove the flight deck crew of the pursuing vehicle) the GM could not come
up with a good reason why this would not work that also did not adversely
effect the rest of the game so that ships transporter "went down" for the
remainder of the short lived campaign. The limits placed on the show's writers
reflected themselves in the lack of a frame of reference for the use of the
equipment that could be applied when used by individuals without those
outside imposed limits.
If this was not a big enough problem in itself just add the various levels of
realism, demands for accuracy and detail that the different GMs and players
ask of or expect in a game and it is multiplied at least tenfold. And for games
with a contemporary or near contemporary setting (i.e. Spies and private
Eyes, TW2000, and Shadowrun) there are the effects of unexpected
political and technological changes. Then add in the page limit of a basic
game book and the designers/developers have a real headache.
Headache or not they still need to deal with the problem. Some parts can be
easier then others. Take Magic in SR, they provide a reason why it exists
then and not now that separate it from outside 'real world" references. It
works because it does and in the manner described. Weapons are another
matter entirely, the original SR combat model did not accurately reflect "real
world' weapons effects in a game that included "real world" weapons.
Unfortunately this area is one the SR system's weak points that the
developers decided not to address during the third edition revisions. As a
result there are a set of recurring problems particularly when more futuristic
weapons are introduced that push the envelope. So basicly when it comes up
we get to bite the bullet and soldier on. The good news is that taken in its
entirety the system works well enough and the setting and background
material compensates for the short fall.
To return to the thread, all game systems have a problem with realism. It is
not possible to develop a game with models detailed enough to provide for
total realisim and still be playable. While there is benefit to identifying the
flaws in the basic model underlying the game, there is little to gain in beating
up the developers everytime it pops up. Inconsitencys with the use or
appliation of that basic model are another thing entirely. For they are much
harder to work with or around.
David G. Hinkley
dhinkley@***.org
------------------------------------------------
"No passion in the world is equal to the passion
to alter someone else's draft"
H.G. Wells
