Search results

Not really. That's not the point of the Jenga tower. The point of the Jenga tower is to ramp up the horror factor by ramping up the tension of the players. As they pull each piece out of the tower, each next piece gets that much harder. It's not simulating anything in the game world at all...

I agree. I really do. The mechanics are perfectly functional and fine. I use them all the time. But, the problem is, we're trying to claim that the mechanics are simulationist. That's the problem. Did you fall because your skill was insufficient? Was it just bad luck? Did you fall...

Sorry, but going to separate this one out. Where it's useful is in actually creating a taxonomy for discussing a game. If a DM says, "I'm running a heavily sim based game where the logic of the setting is key and mechanics are as diegetic as possible" and then pulls out D&D, then the DM is...

So, by this definition, simulation has nothing to do with the system. It's mostly due to the person running that system? Is that a fair approximation? Note, I'm sorry, but, I don't know what a "one word each game" is. But, yeah, that's why I'm not going to agree here. If being simulationist...

Why do I need to? His blog is saying EXACTLY the same thing I'm saying. Again, what do you think diegetic means? And, again, provide me a definition of simulation and how it is distinct from other styles, where all information is provided post hoc by the DM based solely on the results of the...

Ummm... I'm confused. @pemerton, in that link you provided, was pointing to how he agreed with my points. You keep pointing to these definitions of simulation without providing the definitions, so, it makes it rather hard to understand your point. A RNG generator to simulate fair die rolls...

Really? The rope breaking or the cliff face crumbling is due to my skill? That's an interesting take. See, you've added in all this stuff that ignores the die roll. If the character's bonus was high enough to climb without a roll, then, sure, I'd buy that it was purely skill and strength...

You absolutely do gain some information about how a result was achieved in a video game. You can see the path of the bullet as it hits the baddy. Poof, instant information. If you played an FPS and shot in the opposite direction from the baddy and the baddy fell down, would that be a good...

Well, now there's improvement at least. We've gone from "D&D is a great simultationist game" to "it qualifies as a sim, but, just barely." Gotta admit, it's progress.

I'm sorry, but, "strict"? Seriously? Asking that a simultionist system provide any information about how the result was achieved is strict? Note, again, I'm not talking about how much, or the quality of the information. Just that the system provide any information about how the result was...

Heh. How to say you've never looked at solo RPG's without saying you've never looked at solo RPG's.

I 100% agree with you. For an RPG, working is very much in fact enough. However, for a SIMULATION RPG, it is not. That's the key point you keep ignoring. When the system provides zero guidance "showing the work" as it were, then it is not a simuationist system. Because, again, maybe this...

Except that can NEVER be the answer. The player is forbidden to add anything to the game world. So, while the character knows the answers, it MUST come from the DM. Nothing about the game world can ever come from the players. That's how this apparently works. The DM is the SOLE source of...

Wow. Really? I LOVE it when the players do that. Heck, my players do it all the time. It's fantastic. It means they do all the work and I just get to play with the toys they are gifting me. Why on earth would you want to stop that? My last character, for example, was a priest of Kossuth...

I'd much rather, in a simulationist leaning game, that the DM's narration was actually connected to the fiction of the game than whatever justification they can pull out of thin air. Funny how there appears to only be two options. The idea that the DM uses the tiny kernel of information...

To be fair, it depends on a lot of factors. How long is your ship, for example? Depending on how fast you are accelerating, different parts of the ship will actually experience time differently. As you approach C, this gets more and more pronounced. So, the front of your ship might...

A good rule of thumb for writing SF is that you are allowed one "gimme" IOW, the writer is allowed to break science without having to jump through hoops to explain it on one thing. FTL travel is very often this one thing. Because once you have FTL, then you can have aliens and other worlds...

That's not circular. That's how all definitions are derived. Find a group of shared concepts, give it a name and that's the definition of that name. 🤷 I didn't come up with the definition of simulation. I'm simply using it the same way that it's been used in usual parlance. In order of a...

When one is doing a math test, one is doing science. Being able to show your work is the basic, fundamental principle of maths or sciences.

The speed of light is very much NOT relative to the observer. The speed of light is a universal constant. That's the POINT of the Theory of Relativity. The fact that you think that the speed of light is relative to the observer means that you really, really don't understand how the Theory of...