Search results

Sorry, going to break my answer into two parts because I have two different answers for you @Faolyn. The more personal answer is that I do appreciate sim systems. I LIKE them. I've played a lot of them. GURPS, Palladium, Warhammer Fantasy, even a brief stint of Harn. And these systems...

I'd point out that I'm not the only one in this conversation, so, it's obviously important to more than just me. But, for me, the point of the conversation is to determine what differentiates simulation from just playing the game. Every RPG has situation resolution mechanics. Every RPG has...

I would question that any simulation that is based on a complete ignorance of how certain results occur isn't much of a simulation. I mean, sure, I can say that it's going to rain tomorrow, but, I think it's probably better to listen to the weather people about their prediction. The reason we...

No. And that's the problem. It's not analogous. Because it happens BEFORE the results. Why did you crash? Well, your altitude was too low. Or maybe your plane stalled. Or maybe whatever. The program tells you HOW you crashed long before you actually crash. That's the point of a...

So, essentially, simulation is just an illusion? So long as the DM maintains the illusion of simulation, and the players don't question it, then it's simulation? Not sure how much folks would agree with that stance. It's simulation just because the players say so? And if the players...

Not quite the argument I'm making though. I'm saying that because the die includes all the intangible reasons for why you failed or succeeded a check, we can't really look to the mechanics for guidance on how we succeeded or failed. It's too nebulous. Sure, you have the results. But, the...

The PHB is a bit more DM leaning now too. AFAIK, there aren't any rules for skills in the DMG. It's a bit like 2e where they put all the actual game mechanics in one book. ((Yes, I realize there are mechanics in the 2024 DMG, work with me here. :p))

Oh, hey. I'm not the one making the argument. That's @Maxperson who is insisting that the die roll ONLY represents skill. He just posted exactly that right above you. Me? I totally in your boat. The roll is a combination of all sorts of things.

Yes, but, I can have a -1 and still succeed. What skill did I have? How did I succeed when I had no training, no innate capability or competence? You aren't allowed to say that I got lucky. After all, you're insisting that the roll ONLY represents skill. So, someone who is completely...

I agree. For determining the results? Yeah, it really doesn't matter. You have X% chance of success in either system. But, how those elements come together? What those dice actually mean and how they interact? Yeah, that matters.

That's the point. No they don't. In sim leaning games, the dice generate information about how a task succeeded or failed. Again, I've demonstrated this. If your roll is below your modified skill value, you succeeded. Why did you succeed? Well, if the modifier is positive, then any roll...

The probabilities might be the same. Heck, I'll take your word for it. But what those things represent is not. A DC 15 represents the difficulty of doing THAT SPECIFIC task. It is completely in isolation. It does not matter who is attempting that task. The task has a difficulty for that...

Oh, no. I haven't actually read anything in this thread for a while. Just wanted to get something off my chest. :p

Ok. I already accepted that advantage/disadvantage satisfies my definition of sim. What happens when you don't have either though? When you are rolling only one die?

No, they do not. Your "DC" in GURPS is 100% based on YOUR SKILL. It is not based on the task. The task might modify things, but, it does not set the DC. IOW, in D20, the DC for a task is 15 (say) regardless of who is attempting that task. No matter what, that lock is a DC 15 lock. In...

Nope. Reread you 2024 PHB again. On page 10 it clearly states only roll when narratively interesting.

You're missing the point though. It's not that the answer must be definitive. It simply has to be informed by the mechanics. Sure, it could be wrong. Any interpretation can be wrong. But, it must be informed by the mechanics if it is to be simulationist. If you succeed in a GURPS die...

The rules do not make this distinction. There is not supposed to be a way to tell which is first or second. Now, adding that in, sure, you could make the argument. But, I thought house rules were off the table here in this discussion. I mean, I have an add on in my VTT that tells me which...

Agreed. Not every one does. But at least one does. It has to provide any amount of explanation. Even the tiniest sliver is fine. Again, you keep insisting that this is all or nothing. That a simulation in my definition must explain everything. It most certainly doesn't. But it does have...

Where in that definition does it say ANYTHING about the process? It only talks about resolutions. I totally agree D&D gives you the results. But, it does not define the process at all. It provides zero information about the process. And no, you don't "just roll when it's unsure that the...