Recent content by FrogReaver

It’s a bit ironic for me in that I normally wouldn’t call myself a simulationist because I don’t prefer games with really granular simulation systems. But compared to narrativist games I like alot more simulation than i find in them.

Sure. I use the shorthand d&d to refer to certain d&d play styles because I don’t know what else to flipping call them that won’t take 100 pages of description. It’s not perfectly accurate, but for this discussion it really should be sufficient.

Seems like an unproductive distraction to me. At best you show d&d can be played in more ways than I propose. So just add the needed adjective to the front of d&d to narrow the scope and then the point we make still remains. There is no need to take this discussion to defining all d&d play.

I think your use of ‘significant’ is a major weakness. How is significance determined? That is, if I assert the meaning of runes are significant but what causes a fall is not then is that process sim?

Even if they are internal instead of text based that doesn’t mean I’m cherry picking anything? That is there can be additional non-text based rules to how I and other players the game, to the point that we are essentially playing different games depending on how different those additional rules...

What is the actual difference between simulation and process simulation. That’s not a distinction I’m particularly familiar with.

I don’t think I agree but let’s assume I’m wrong for a moment. At best all this does is show d&d can be played in a larger variety of ways than I initially gave it credit for. But since my point is really that d&d in X playstyle doesn’t do this, then I’m not sure how this counterpoint has any...

How is simply declaring what runes mean (contingent on a success) actor stance instead of author stance? How is poking and prodding at the GMs world author stance instead of actor stance?

Differences abound. 1) the significance of the details being ‘filled in’. For example - What the runes mean is a huge detail whereas what causes you to fall is an extremely minor one. 2) how the GM in d&d chooses the specific narration is done with the whole probability space in mind and if...

Why do you assume there is?

It’s not even if the player is mailing it in. Experts can conjecture what something means with no evidence, and in such instances they are likely to be wrong. What makes this a case of the expert conjecturing with evidence as opposed to without, because I see no evidence for the basis for this...

You can get a ton of steps in if you go for a walk on your breaks and whatever time you have left after lunch. Even if it’s just inside the building. 30 mins of walking even at a slower pace is probably like 2000+ additional steps every day. It adds up fast.

New update. At 183.2 lbs. Also my A1C dropped from 11.9 to 5.5 (back in normal range) over the last 6 months. No medication, just diet and exercise.

I actually prefer the items that set strength to a specific amount. It adds some uncertainty around how to build the best character as you typically don’t know if you will find such an item.

I don’t think that whatever an archaeologist might conjecture is more likely. I think the likelihood of his conjecture greatly depends on the nature of his conjecture, whether he is basing it on already established facts or not.