D&D General On simulating things: what, why, and how?

[Blue]

I do want things to hold together, but in a genre way and not a real world realistic way. Forget being able to cast spells, in the real world number of attackers can easily trump skill of attackers. There's lots of reality I actively do not want in my heroic fantasy.

Also, I want choice on what to sacrifice to make a good session, as long as I am . If realism needs get clicked down three notches in order to keep pacing up and fast for the sessions, that's a choice I want to be able to make.

In the end, I want a good enough simulation of my genre to feel consistent and believable without bogging down play or getting in the way of stories we are telling.

So some - but not too much - simulation is a reasonable goal I look for in systems I play.

One point to make is what is being simulated - the default answer seems to be "genre physics". But simulating emotional stress and the effects on the actions of the character can be just as much a thing as simulating physical stress and the effects of those wounds. Depending on what the focus of the game is.

 

[Reynard]

Mostly what they’re objecting to is mechanics that prioritize adherence to a given idea of “realism” over more gameplay-focused concerns such as game balance, and/or simulation that goes into such detail that it complicates or slows down gameplay too much for their tastes.

I think it is good when people can articulate what they want and, possibly more important, what they don't want out of the play experience. If nothing else, it helps people decide if the game is right for them, and possibly if the people are right for them. It is much more useful than just labeling games as this or that style. (Note: I am not accusing you of such; I am agreeing without in a round about way.)

I think it is worth having a discussion with one's fellow participants what they mean when they say "I do" or "I do not" like simulation or storygaming or anything else.

 

[Reynard]

One point to make is what is being simulated - the default answer seems to be "genre physics". But simulating emotional stress and the effects on the actions of the character can be just as much a thing as simulating physical stress and the effects of those wounds. Depending on what the focus of the game is.

I am with you here. I am constantly wishing i could find a reasonable set of rules that promote characters behaving in a manner I consider consistent with what mortal humans care about: surviving, eating, having a bath, maybe getting frisky. I like human characters, especially in otherwise fantastic circumstances.

 

[Mannahnin]

I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that without a fictional weight written down somewhere you cannot adjudicate such things in D&D? Do you also need a volume written down for you?

If no fictional weight is specified, then we come up with some other adjudication method. One may be provided by the game system in question. In D&D, weights and carrying capacities are usually specified in the rules, and where not otherwise specified, we generally treat a fictional object weighing a specified amount as acting much like a real object weighing that much, within the context of our game world and play.

I'm not sure where you're going with this.

 

[chaochou]

But you could also imagine such details of invented units and then play out a hypothetical engagement between them. That would be a high concept simulation - the principles of modeling real properties and using the system to “simulate” the interactions between them are the same, you’re just simulating imaginary parameters.

You can do what you like. But I said my benchmark for simulation is 'testable against real world outcomes'. Since that isn't possible with made-up units (whatever that means) I don't agree it's a simulation, and calling it 'high concept' is just verbiage.

 

[payn]

I am with you here. I am constantly wishing i could find a reasonable set of rules that promote characters behaving in a manner I consider consistent with what mortal humans care about: surviving, eating, having a bath, maybe getting frisky. I like human characters, especially in otherwise fantastic circumstances.

I like gritty systems where combat is quick and deadly and usually decided by whoever had the advantage. Though, folks do like knock out brawls that are more like wrestling matches that take time and have ups and downs. The two are extremes I suppose. Everybody has to find out where their own spot is on the spectrum.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Mostly what they’re objecting to is mechanics that prioritize adherence to a given idea of “realism” over more gameplay-focused concerns such as game balance, and/or simulation that goes into such detail that it complicates or slows down gameplay too much for their tastes.

Ok. I now understand, but I don't share that opinion. At all.

 

[Charlaquin]

You can do what you like. But I said my benchmark for simulation is 'testable against real world outcomes'. Since that isn't possible with made-up units (whatever that means) I don't agree it's a simulation, and calling it 'high concept' is just verbiage.

My point is the gameplay principles are the same, even if there’s no real-world counterpart. You may not want to call it simulation (that’s also verbiage), but fundamentally both approaches are ultimately about using the game mechanics to abstract more complex processes in order to reproduce the expected outcomes with a similar degree of probability. It’s just more hypothetical in one case than the other.

 

[Charlaquin]

Ok. I now understand, but I don't share that opinion. At all.

Perfectly reasonable. Different strokes.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I do want things to hold together, but in a genre way and not a real world realistic way. Forget being able to cast spells, in the real world number of attackers can easily trump skill of attackers. There's lots of reality I actively do not want in my heroic fantasy.

Also, I want choice on what to sacrifice to make a good session, as long as I am . If realism needs get clicked down three notches in order to keep pacing up and fast for the sessions, that's a choice I want to be able to make.

In the end, I want a good enough simulation of my genre to feel consistent and believable without bogging down play or getting in the way of stories we are telling.

So some - but not too much - simulation is a reasonable goal I look for in systems I play.

One point to make is what is being simulated - the default answer seems to be "genre physics". But simulating emotional stress and the effects on the actions of the character can be just as much a thing as simulating physical stress and the effects of those wounds. Depending on what the focus of the game is.

I don't want to simulate a genre. I want to simulate a world where a genre story might conceivably take place, if events go that way.