Small things that break you suspension of disbelief or immersion

[Tvtyrant]

Um...

For most of my adult life well over 50% of my income went towards rent, at 36% ofincome that mortgage sounds cheap to me, real cheap, though from Forums I understand that "There Be Dragons", U.S.A. has very different housing prices than here.




Yes, it was that, Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom, The Muppet Show, and Sha-Na-Named on Sundays.




Since (IIRC) you live beyond the Great Ice Wall I'm now inclined to believe that you are in-fact The Night King

You also live in San Francisco, which is one of the highest priced markets in the world. The entire Pacific coastal city region is colossally more expensive than most cities even the rest of the country.

[Peelee]

You also live in San Francisco, which is one of the highest priced markets in the world. The entire Pacific coastal city region is colossally more expensive than most cities even the rest of the country.

Assumign the pay is roughly proportionate, the percent wouldn't differ too much, though. Big assumption there, of course.

[Gnoman]

The West Coast is one of the higher-priced housing markets relative to local income.

[Pippa the Pixie]

I love watching good actors act poorly.

But I'm talking about when the characters are suddenly perfect actors.

Like the dinner gets bought by Mr. Evil. So to get it back the characters come up with a wacky plan to make the dinner a historical site/rat infested/condemned/low value or whatever.

So then Ed, the cashier, in just five minutes can expertly become Lord Von Stine and perfectly play that role. Gretta the waitress can play Molly the Banker perfectly. Lou and Fred can play perfect cops. And so on.

Not to mention everyone has perfect costumes and perfect scripts to follow.

[gomipile]

But I'm talking about when the characters are suddenly perfect actors.

Like the dinner gets bought by Mr. Evil. So to get it back the characters come up with a wacky plan to make the dinner a historical site/rat infested/condemned/low value or whatever.

How does a dinner become a type of site/location? And why are people getting worked up over a character buying a single meal?

[Kantaki]

How does a dinner become a type of site/location? And why are people getting worked up over a character buying a single meal?

1. Easy. You just need to make it huge.
A literal pizza hut.

2.It's really, really tasty?

[Peelee]

But I'm talking about when the characters are suddenly perfect actors.

Oh, I know (and agree with you). I was just tossing out a corollary. Good actors acting like bad actors and doing it convincingly is great to watch.

[Mordar]

Assumign the pay is roughly proportionate, the percent wouldn't differ too much, though. Big assumption there, of course.

Very big assumption. Very interesting article in National Geographic on the topic...can't seem to find the link, but I think it was three issues ago, syncing up with their "valley of the Boom" TV series push.

In short, people making 6-figure income living in RVs parked on the side of the road, people in high 5-figures living like college kids, bank employees having to commute 4-8 hours *per day* to jobs. Brutal.

So yeah, Full House was an excellent example of people living well beyond their means. Unless Bob Sagat got a huge insurance settlement from his wife's death...?

- M

[Tvtyrant]

Assumign the pay is roughly proportionate, the percent wouldn't differ too much, though. Big assumption there, of course.

Median California income is $64,000, the median California house was $393,000 in 2017. Median Wisconsin income is 59,500, median Wisconsin house cost is 186,400.

We could go make an index by state or by city, but I'm reasonably certain you are paying more of your income for housing than most of the country.

[King of Nowhere]

for me it is poor or contradictory worldbuilding.
as an example I bring ravnica from magic the gathering. It's a city covering a whole planet in a fantasy setting.
now, the first thing I wonder when presented with something like this is "where do they get their food"? in star wars they can bring it from other planet or use hydroponics, but not with renaissance technology. either they can replicate hydroponics with magic, or they need massive cultivations somewhere. there is mention of a guild associated with fungi and decay in charge of feeding the city, but that can't work: fungi only break down what's already there, they don't put new energy into the system. you need photosynthesis for it, and you can't do it underground.
I asked the question on the specific forum, and I didn't got a clear answer. Just the fact that the issue is not considered is a prime offender.

as an example of the second, baldur's gate had a "belt of poison immunity" and the fluff text on it said "this item was worn by the king''s taster".
this clearly does not consider the implications of magic. if you have a belt of poison immunity, why not give it to the king and skip the taster? what's the point of having a taster immune to poison since he will not show signs of poisoning? for that matter, what's the point of poisoning the king in a world where you can buy a raise dead in any temple?

[Aedilred]

as an example of the second, baldur's gate had a "belt of poison immunity" and the fluff text on it said "this item was worn by the king''s taster".
this clearly does not consider the implications of magic. if you have a belt of poison immunity, why not give it to the king and skip the taster? what's the point of having a taster immune to poison since he will not show signs of poisoning? for that matter, what's the point of poisoning the king in a world where you can buy a raise dead in any temple?

Raise Dead and monarchy is a whole can of worms. If the king dies and there's the possibility of raising him, who makes that call? Is the deceased king still legally the king? Do you spring for the full True Resurrection? Who signs off that expenditure? Who carries the can if the king doesn't want to come back? What happens if someone steals the body and resurrects the old king after a new one's been crowned? Is there a limit on the number of times you can resurrect the same king? Are you obliged to keep resurrecting a king once he's old and feeble provided he still wants to? Sure, resurrection spells don't work on "old age" but pretty much nobody actually dies of old age, so you could probably run through quite a bit of the treasury bringing him back from heart attacks, strokes, cancer, etc. once he gets to a certain point. And that's probably just the start of it.

The one time it came up in one of my campaigns, I handwaved it that there were laws in place prohibiting the emperor from being raised from the dead, mainly for campaign narrative reasons but IC because someone had considered the above and figured it was more trouble than it was worth.

[King of Nowhere]

Raise Dead and monarchy is a whole can of worms. If the king dies and there's the possibility of raising him, [...]

and that's covered under worldbuilding. in a world with the resurrection spell, the choice may vary, but it is certainly going to be fixed in the law, and certainly every nation has considered the thing and has established procedures.
I don't need to know them, a boook has limited space and we may not be told all the technicalities; but having a nation thrown in disarray because "they didn't consider the possibility" would certainly be bad worldbuilding. In general, you need to consider the interactions between magic and society.

My personal option is "there must be an attempt to raise the king unless external circumstances prevent it. if the king can be raised fast enough, he's still king and no problem. if the king cannot be raised immediately, a regent/council of nobles mmust decide whether to keep trying or to crown a new king. Once a new king is crowned, he's king and he stays king even if the old king is eventually raised".

[Themrys]

Raise Dead and monarchy is a whole can of worms. If the king dies and there's the possibility of raising him, who makes that call? Is the deceased king still legally the king? Do you spring for the full True Resurrection? Who signs off that expenditure? Who carries the can if the king doesn't want to come back? What happens if someone steals the body and resurrects the old king after a new one's been crowned? Is there a limit on the number of times you can resurrect the same king? Are you obliged to keep resurrecting a king once he's old and feeble provided he still wants to? Sure, resurrection spells don't work on "old age" but pretty much nobody actually dies of old age, so you could probably run through quite a bit of the treasury bringing him back from heart attacks, strokes, cancer, etc. once he gets to a certain point. And that's probably just the start of it.

The one time it came up in one of my campaigns, I handwaved it that there were laws in place prohibiting the emperor from being raised from the dead, mainly for campaign narrative reasons but IC because someone had considered the above and figured it was more trouble than it was worth.

I suppose you'd want to make a law about at which age you still bring the king back.

Someone who gets a heart attack once is likely to soon get one again, same with organ failure.

@King of Nowhere: Murdering the king would make perfect sense if a majority of people want to get rid of him, but people aren't willing to risk the upheaval that would come with a revolution. Poison him, claim there's not enough money to get him raised, get a new king, problem solved.

And the king's taster obviously got that poison resistance belt as a gift by those who wanted to poison the king.

[Peelee]

Median California income is $64,000, the median California house was $393,000 in 2017. Median Wisconsin income is 59,500, median Wisconsin house cost is 186,400.

We could go make an index by state or by city, but I'm reasonably certain you are paying more of your income for housing than most of the country.

I'll take that bet in a heartbeat! How much we talking about here?

Nobody tell him that I'm not in California.

[Lemmy]

as an example of the second, baldur's gate had a "belt of poison immunity" and the fluff text on it said "this item was worn by the king''s taster".
this clearly does not consider the implications of magic. if you have a belt of poison immunity, why not give it to the king and skip the taster? what's the point of having a taster immune to poison since he will not show signs of poisoning? for that matter, what's the point of poisoning the king in a world where you can buy a raise dead in any temple?

Maybe that was the joke? Or perhaps the taster himself is part of a conspiracy to poison the king... "You can totally eat it, Your Highness... Here! I'll take a bite right in front of you!"

[Reddish Mage]

You realize the political confusion resulting from the fact that a King can potentially be raised from the dead is a rather obscure and nuanced consequence from easy magic existing.

I recall many threads have been created over the ability of D&D magic to violate rules of economy and potentially create a very different universe from what most campaign settings look like. I believe its logical extreme is the tippyverse.

When you get into fridge-logic everything breaks down. Incidentally, I vote the Baldur's Gate developers knew exactly what the implications of having a King's poison taster wearing a belt of poison resistance.

[Rodin]

I rather liked the way Girl Genius handled it. You can use any amount of Mad Science to save your life and you're just fine. If you actually die though? Your title is null and void, you're out of the line of succession, and everybody moves up a rank as if you were permanently gone. You can be brought back to life (as long as your brain is intact), but you are officially labeld An Abomination Of Science and no longer eligible for the perks of royalty. This prevents the younger generations from outright declaring war on the older ones, and keeps things at the usual acceptable level of familial backstabbing and murder. It also makes royals generally think twice about having themselves resurrected at all, keeping check on their numbers a bit.

[Arcane_Secrets]

for me it is poor or contradictory worldbuilding.
as an example I bring ravnica from magic the gathering. It's a city covering a whole planet in a fantasy setting.
now, the first thing I wonder when presented with something like this is "where do they get their food"? in star wars they can bring it from other planet or use hydroponics, but not with renaissance technology. either they can replicate hydroponics with magic, or they need massive cultivations somewhere. there is mention of a guild associated with fungi and decay in charge of feeding the city, but that can't work: fungi only break down what's already there, they don't put new energy into the system. you need photosynthesis for it, and you can't do it underground.
I asked the question on the specific forum, and I didn't got a clear answer. Just the fact that the issue is not considered is a prime offender.

as an example of the second, baldur's gate had a "belt of poison immunity" and the fluff text on it said "this item was worn by the king''s taster".
this clearly does not consider the implications of magic. if you have a belt of poison immunity, why not give it to the king and skip the taster? what's the point of having a taster immune to poison since he will not show signs of poisoning? for that matter, what's the point of poisoning the king in a world where you can buy a raise dead in any temple?

It isn't always obvious if the king and the taster have entered an area with antimagic or magic nullifying properties otherwise. Retaining the taster adds a layer of redundancy in case the belt fails either because of antimagic or because of the invention of some kind of poison that otherwise bypasses normal poison immunities.

[Keltest]

It isn't always obvious if the king and the taster have entered an area with antimagic or magic nullifying properties otherwise. Retaining the taster adds a layer of redundancy in case the belt fails either because of antimagic or because of the invention of some kind of poison that otherwise bypasses normal poison immunities.

Also, just because you aren't dying from it doesn't necessarily mean you wouldn't be able to tell it was poisoned.

[Arcane_Secrets]

Also, just because you aren't dying from it doesn't necessarily mean you wouldn't be able to tell it was poisoned.

I'm being a little slow today unfortunately so could you try rephrasing that sentence with fewer negatives please?

[Lethologica]

I'm being a little slow today unfortunately so could you try rephrasing that sentence with fewer negatives please?

The taster might still recognize that they have been poisoned even though the poison didn't kill them.

[Reddish Mage]

The point is the whole notion of a food taster is ridiculous because the King could simply wear the belt. Not to mention detect poison is low level magic.

It’s not hard to come up how “Detect Evil” or “Speak with Dead” complicates a pseudo-medieval justice system.

This is just low hanging fruit. Anyone who access to wish spells is very dangerous.

[Peelee]

It’s not hard to come up how “Detect Evil” or “Speak with Dead” complicates a pseudo-medieval justice system.

I disagree; I can easily see being Evil as not being against any laws, and as for Speak with Dead, removing the victim's jaw and tongue would be a grisly yet simple method to defeat that. If SwD was common at all, such mutilation wouldn't be far behind.

[Bohandas]

I disagree; I can easily see being Evil as not being against any laws, and as for Speak with Dead, removing the victim's jaw and tongue would be a grisly yet simple method to defeat that. If SwD was common at all, such mutilation wouldn't be far behind.

Also, different civilizations might disagree on which detect spell is the real detect evil spell (ie, some might mix it up with detect law, for example)

[Keltest]

The point is the whole notion of a food taster is ridiculous because the King could simply wear the belt. Not to mention detect poison is low level magic.

It’s not hard to come up how “Detect Evil” or “Speak with Dead” complicates a pseudo-medieval justice system.

This is just low hanging fruit. Anyone who access to wish spells is very dangerous.

Well, the food taster could be quality control as well. Any dish not fit for the king's table gets sent back.

Having gotten that out of the way, "detect evil" is not nearly the useful tool it seems like at first glance, both because it is fallible, and because "being evil" is not equivalent to "being a criminal."

[Frozen_Feet]

Also, different civilizations might disagree on which detect spell is the real detect evil spell (ie, some might mix it up with detect law, for example)

*insert rant of how "good" and "evil" are just labels invented by self-serving gods to stomp on the little guys and totally don't mean what it looks like they mean*

Having gotten that out of the way, "detect evil" is not nearly the useful tool it seems like at first glance, both because it is fallible, and because "being evil" is not equivalent to "being a criminal."

There's also the potential angst of finding out you, yourself, are evil every time it is cast.

[Reddish Mage]

*insert rant of how "good" and "evil" are just labels invented by self-serving gods to stomp on the little guys and totally don't mean what it looks like they mean*



There's also the potential angst of finding out you, yourself, are evil every time it is cast.

You speak as if D&D worlds were places filled with existential doubts and philosophical ethical quandaries as opposed to a place of well-known moral absolutes. I’ve seen enough campaigns to know that multi-axes ethics is a required part of the standard curriculum.

Everyone knows “law-chaos” and “good-evil” and most NPCs in the literature that care about the subject have a pretty good idea what the requirements one or the other. Unlike forum goers, and actual gamers, who endless debate these things on inappropriate forums in the playground.

[Frozen_Feet]

Oh, D&D worlds *aren't* places of existential doubts and philosophical ethical quandaries. They *are* places of well-known moral absolutes. That's the joke. That doesn't stop a particular sort of villain from arguing otherwise.

[Durkoala]

The point is the whole notion of a food taster is ridiculous because the King could simply wear the belt. Not to mention detect poison is low level magic.

I took it to mean that the belt became magic as a result of being worn by a poison taster and possibly picking up their aquired resistance to poison*? While they were alive and wearing it, it was just an ordinary belt.

*it's magic, OK? I don't need to explain everything.

[Fyraltari]

I took it to mean that the belt became magic as a result of being worn by a poison taster and possibly picking up their aquired resistance to poison*? While they were alive and wearing it, it was just an ordinary belt.

*it's magic, OK? I don't need to explain everything.

Food tasters do not acquire an immunity to poison. That’s the whole point of the job.