In the past, I have been more than slightly flummoxed why, when in the middle of a roleplaying session with wizards, or super heroes, or aliens, or what have you, that a player will take issue with some minor point or technical detail, saying some historical event wouldn't go that way, or that's not how a particular gadget works "in real life."
Now, I'm a big believer in suspension of disbelief. I also believe that a balance has to be struck. For the aliens, wizards, et al, to be accepted, there has to be a veneer of reality, usually in the form of the every day details of the world. Water runs downhill, toast lands butter side down and fire uses up oxygen. But I hate it when someone, often unthinkingly, because they're concerned about verisimilitude, derails the group's concentration on the game over what is, ultimately, a minor inaccuracy
Until now, I didn't have a pat answer, something that could halt the discussion in its tracks without giving preference to for or against. After dealing with such situations several times last night and sleeping on it, I've devised one: "It's not up for discussion."
Right now that sounds heavy-handed to me, so I'll smooth the phrasing, but that's the jist of what I want to be saying when someone wants to dither over how a character's STR score translates to "real world terms" when there's a tanker truck hurtling through the air that needs catching.
Tags: GMing Roleplaying
