Contemporary Simulationist TTRPGs [+]

[Aldarc]

What is common to FKR and more systematic simulationist approach, is that they aim to model functioning of the fictional world. World, not a story. The logic is: "Given the parameters of the situation, what would happen?" Not, what would be most dramatic, funny, thematically appropriate or would push the action to most interesting direction. Such things might be considered in simulationistic play, but not as part of the resolution, but as part of seeding the initial conditions.

Somewhat, and I see the point you are trying to make. Where I would push back is that FKR could potentially be used for more genre emulationist play. So "what would be most... thematically appropriate" might be the guiding logic "to model function of a fictional world" for a superhero game run by FKR principles. That may include pushing the action to more interesting directions. I think that it likely depends on the FKR group/GM.

 

[dragoner]

I would categorize flavors of the Cepheus Engine as contemporary simulationist. Its SRD is based upon Mongoose Traveler 1e, but there's flavors that diverge away from the far future SciFi of Traveler to more contemporary time frames. Like Traveller it works with the premise that PCs will advance through the same career, or a number of careers, during character creation. With the idea that they'll be about as competent they'll ever be upon completion. Those careers give PCs skills that are quite granular and intended to be played out in more simulationist way.

A few of the publishers that have created CRBs reflecting their take on the SRD, have also published companions, settings and design guides that make it more contemporary. There continues to be a steady stream of publications being released for it, so potential, contemporary themed content on the horizon. I like simulationist TTRPGs as much as I like light more narrative focused ones. I partiucularly like simulationist for Military and Historical Fantasy themes. Other than CE and the already mentioned BRP family of TTRPGs, which I own and homebrew with, I don't know of any other recent publications. But no doubt there's others out there.

With my flavor Kosmic I am shooting for "plausibility, and playability" it being near future, solarpunk, and accurate starmaps. I guess it does count fwiw.

 

[Umbran]

For example, the 5E 6-8 encounters per day expectation is an attrition adventure day attempt at a fantasy adventure simulation. No its not attempting to sim reality, its attempting to put a process of resource attrition across the day in place to simulate an adventure day.

I don't think so. The 6-8 encounter guideline is more about game balance than simulation - if you don't have a stack of encounters, you don't stress resource-use properly across classes, allowing some to "nova" and effectively hog spotlight. Trying to claim this as simulation smacks of the reductive and circular, "All games are simulationist - they simulate a world that is like how the game plays out."

Not to say you can't do simulation in D&D. Just that this isn't an example of it.

I personally am also not a fan of "well, the simulation bit is in the GM". If your simulation is not in the ruleset, then the GAME is not simulationist - the GM is. The published work does not get to claim unto itself the work of the person who buys it.

The first thing that comes to mind when I think of a simulationist game is Twilight: 2000, which has been around a while, but has its most recent edition in 2021.

 

[payn]

I don't think so. The 6-8 encounter guideline is more about game balance than simulation - if you don't have a stack of encounters, you don't stress resource-use properly across classes, allowing some to "nova" and effectively hog spotlight. Trying to claim this as simulation smacks of the reductive and circular, "All games are simulationist - they simulate a world that is like how the game plays out."

Not to say you can't do simulation in D&D. Just that this isn't an example of it.

I personally am also not a fan of "well, the simulation bit is in the GM". If your simulation is not in the ruleset, then the GAME is not simulationist - the GM is. The published work does not get to claim unto itself the work of the person who buys it.

The first thing that comes to mind when I think of a simulationist game is Twilight: 2000, which has been around a while, but has its most recent edition in 2021.

That’s a very odd game play mechanism to model a “game day” and not be a simulation.

 

[dbm]

A ‘game day’ is by nature a game construct, not a world construct. That makes it a ‘gamist mechanism’ rather than a ‘simulationist mechanism’ in my mind.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

A ‘game day’ is by nature a game construct, not a world construct. That makes it a ‘gamist mechanism’ rather than a ‘simulationist mechanism’ in my mind.

I rather feel "heal from anything by good night's sleep" is a rather poor simulationist mechanic except perhaps in a superhero game.

Then again, it could still be less simulationistic. In some similar games the resource recovery is tied by something meta, like number of encounters undertaken, so at least resting for a night is something that makes sense in the fiction to act as recovery, even though the effectiveness is absurd.

 

[payn]

A ‘game day’ is by nature a game construct, not a world construct. That makes it a ‘gamist mechanism’ rather than a ‘simulationist mechanism’ in my mind.

It isnt a game day, its an adventuring day. It's not a simple game mechanism for deciding outcomes, its a series of systems that can interact in a myriad of ways to deliver eventual combined outcomes. Which is why when it was written in a way to explain at wills, encounter, and daily in 4E things started to look more like game constructs which obviously kicked up some dust between D&D players.

Im gonna stop here though as this is a + thread and we approaching arguing the premise territory. Might be a good thread spin off.

 

[dbm]

Ars Magica spell durations such as ‘sun’ (spell expires at sunrise or sunset) would be a simulationist mechanism from my perspective as it corresponds to a real thing in the game world. A spell duration based on time (even if that time is expressed in rounds which are in turn expressed in seconds etc) is also simulationist since it is based on real passage of time. But a mechanism where an effect is based on an ‘encounter’ doesn’t map to a real-world construct, or even an in-game-world conept that I can see. That would be a gamist mechanism, or maybe a narrativist one.

These things aren’t ‘bad’, often people prefer them since whether a spell lasts 4 minutes or 5 is arguably less important than whether it lasts to the end of the encounter. But in a strongly simulationist system it would be a firm definition. And the benefit of this, to people who appreciate it, is that you can then make plans based on those rules and those plans have meaning. It’s an example of Sanderson’s First Law of magic, but it can apply to almost any endeavour in a simulationist game system. The players can make plans based on in-game-world-logical inferences.

 

[Umbran]

That’s a very odd game play mechanism to model a “game day” and not be a simulation.

It isn't a "mechanism".
It is advice to the GM for adventure design.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Ars Magica spell durations such as ‘sun’ (spell expires at sunrise or sunset) would be a simulationist mechanism from my perspective as it corresponds to a real thing in the game world. A spell duration based on time (even if that time is expressed in rounds which are in turn expressed in seconds etc) is also simulationist since it is based on real passage of time. But a mechanism where an effect is based on an ‘encounter’ doesn’t map to a real-world construct, or even an in-game-world conept that I can see. That would be a gamist mechanism, or maybe a narrativist one.

These things aren’t ‘bad’, often people prefer them since whether a spell lasts 4 minutes or 5 is arguably less important than whether it lasts to the end of the encounter. But in a strongly simulationist system it would be a firm definition. And the benefit of this, to people who appreciate it, is that you can then make plans based on those rules and those plans have meaning. It’s an example of Sanderson’s First Law of magic, but it can apply to almost any endeavour in a simulationist game system. The players can make plans based on in-game-world-logical inferences.

Right. A good test of whether something is simulationistic is to see whether it makes sense for the people in the setting discuss about the things represented by the rules and would they make the same conclusions than the player that are looking at the rules.