I think there’s a strong value in looking at our #dnd games with the scientific method. Test hypotheses and adjust based on the results.
— SlyFlourish (@SlyFlourish) July 9, 2017
… heh! Okay… explain magic with your… huh… scientific method… especially divine magic.
— Christopher Lindsay (@Onnatryx) July 9, 2017
Fire a magic missile, write down the results, fire more magic missiles.
— SlyFlourish (@SlyFlourish) July 9, 2017
You ever see a cleric whip out a protractor to see how many skeletons fit in Turn Undead?Not in my game. That kind of metagaming is only appropriate in a competitive minis game. I do TotM with heavy description and trust.
— Christopher Lindsay (@Onnatryx) July 10, 2017
I know, I was poking the scientists. “How far away is that scorpion cultists?” “How far does he need to be?”
— SlyFlourish (@SlyFlourish) July 10, 2017
Old AD&D fireballs required DMs to have a grasp of fluid dynamics. 🙂
— Merric Blackman (@MerricB) July 10, 2017
Yeah I had a DM in college that was a physics major… that really burned me arse.
— Christopher Lindsay (@Onnatryx) July 10, 2017
I think Sly’s point is around using the sci method to improve our games. I DMed with x approach, got y result, now let’s try DMing with z.Oh…right… of course. Ahem… I knew that.
— Christopher Lindsay (@Onnatryx) July 9, 2017
