Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Why use D&D for a Simulationist style Game?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 6358162" data-attributes="member: 85870"><p>I've been following this thread off and on, have caught most of the general "gist," but can't reply to any specific post. </p><p></p><p>To reply to @<em><strong><u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=22779" target="_blank">Hussar</a></u></strong></em>'s original post / original question, "Why use D&D for a simulationist style game?" the answer is, because you don't know any better. </p><p></p><p>Up until 2009, that's exactly where I would have been. I'd never seriously played any other game system other than D&D; my entire RPG history consisted of BECMI and 3.x. It would never have occurred to me to even attempt to use another system. If I was going to play a game, I would've wrangled D&D into what I wanted it to be.</p><p></p><p>It's interesting, because I read the post yesterday that statted up one of the Game of Thrones characters into a level 13 D&D 5 character. And I thought it was really cool. Until I saw that he had 147 hit points. And having now been thoroughly ensconced in Savage Worlds for a couple of years now, my mind just totally rebelled at the thought. Hit points? <em>And a 147 of them?</em> Had the same reaction to 13th Age, when I found it wasn't uncommon for high-level enemies to have upwards of 300+ hit points. And I'm sorry, but just . . . no. I don't have any desire to try and track, justify, or otherwise rationalize how a 13th level fighter has 147 hit points any more. </p><p></p><p>Savage Worlds has all kinds of gamist subsystems. Character advancement bears absolutely no relation to the "real world." The "soak a wound using an action point / benny" system is pure meta-game abstraction (though most of the rest of the damage system can be easily modeled to a reasonable "real world" analogue). But for all of its gamist / narrativist / meta-game "proud nails," Savage Worlds is BY FAR more "simulationist" in its approach to action resolution than D&D will ever be.</p><p></p><p>The reason is that where Savage Worlds feels the need to be simulationist, it generally adheres to those principles. When meta-game mechanics come front and center, they make zero attempt to weave their way into the rest of the game. It's not explicitly called out in the rules, but in play, the elements that are strictly metagame pretty much stay within the metagame, and don't intrude into other arenas. </p><p></p><p>Frankly, I'm eternally grateful for the advent of 4e, for without it, I never would have been compelled to look at systems other than D&D. And discover systems that suited what I was looking for in an RPG much, much better than D&D---of any variety---ever will.</p><p></p><p>I think the confusion with D&D, 3.x in particular, comes because there's a dichotomy between the abstract combat elements of hit points and armor class, versus the more relatively "real world" modeling of the skill system. The skill system feels like it semi-accurately models a character's relative capability, and so suddenly the cry of "D&D is now simulationist!!" went up. As long as you limit your view of D&D's "simulationism" to that narrow component of the mechanics, it's actually reasonably accurate. It's fairly easy to envision how a particular bonus to a skill correlates to a "real world" equivalent. </p><p></p><p>As soon as you expand your view to pretty much anything else in 3.x, claims of "simulationism" start to look dubious at best, or at the very least, rationalized by proponents through the view of an individualistic lens of what the "simulation" actually entails.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 6358162, member: 85870"] I've been following this thread off and on, have caught most of the general "gist," but can't reply to any specific post. To reply to @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=22779"]Hussar[/URL][/U][/B][/I]'s original post / original question, "Why use D&D for a simulationist style game?" the answer is, because you don't know any better. Up until 2009, that's exactly where I would have been. I'd never seriously played any other game system other than D&D; my entire RPG history consisted of BECMI and 3.x. It would never have occurred to me to even attempt to use another system. If I was going to play a game, I would've wrangled D&D into what I wanted it to be. It's interesting, because I read the post yesterday that statted up one of the Game of Thrones characters into a level 13 D&D 5 character. And I thought it was really cool. Until I saw that he had 147 hit points. And having now been thoroughly ensconced in Savage Worlds for a couple of years now, my mind just totally rebelled at the thought. Hit points? [I]And a 147 of them?[/I] Had the same reaction to 13th Age, when I found it wasn't uncommon for high-level enemies to have upwards of 300+ hit points. And I'm sorry, but just . . . no. I don't have any desire to try and track, justify, or otherwise rationalize how a 13th level fighter has 147 hit points any more. Savage Worlds has all kinds of gamist subsystems. Character advancement bears absolutely no relation to the "real world." The "soak a wound using an action point / benny" system is pure meta-game abstraction (though most of the rest of the damage system can be easily modeled to a reasonable "real world" analogue). But for all of its gamist / narrativist / meta-game "proud nails," Savage Worlds is BY FAR more "simulationist" in its approach to action resolution than D&D will ever be. The reason is that where Savage Worlds feels the need to be simulationist, it generally adheres to those principles. When meta-game mechanics come front and center, they make zero attempt to weave their way into the rest of the game. It's not explicitly called out in the rules, but in play, the elements that are strictly metagame pretty much stay within the metagame, and don't intrude into other arenas. Frankly, I'm eternally grateful for the advent of 4e, for without it, I never would have been compelled to look at systems other than D&D. And discover systems that suited what I was looking for in an RPG much, much better than D&D---of any variety---ever will. I think the confusion with D&D, 3.x in particular, comes because there's a dichotomy between the abstract combat elements of hit points and armor class, versus the more relatively "real world" modeling of the skill system. The skill system feels like it semi-accurately models a character's relative capability, and so suddenly the cry of "D&D is now simulationist!!" went up. As long as you limit your view of D&D's "simulationism" to that narrow component of the mechanics, it's actually reasonably accurate. It's fairly easy to envision how a particular bonus to a skill correlates to a "real world" equivalent. As soon as you expand your view to pretty much anything else in 3.x, claims of "simulationism" start to look dubious at best, or at the very least, rationalized by proponents through the view of an individualistic lens of what the "simulation" actually entails. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Why use D&D for a Simulationist style Game?
Top