Search results

It is true that 4E borrows some techniques from other RPGs that can support narrativist play. The skill system changes and the tools for creation of encounters on the fly are both of them. Hopefully, those changes don’t seem to conflict with the Sim/Gam aspects of the system. Will they make...

It's quite funny, but again it reduces Simulationism too much. Let's create a Sim game that has nothing to do with such kind of details : The world of this game is : a chessboard with sentient pieces. The rules of chess apply in this world. (excluding restrictions like, a touched piece must...

Even if it's a humor thread.... 1) Emphasis on "realism", e.g. Riddle of Steel combat system for example doesn't define Simulationism/RightToDream. 2) Simulationism re-group all sessions of play where the MAIN goal was to emulate something that already existed, that includes very different...

I won't go over that one again, try looking for something named "System does matter" on theforge ;)

At least, read my comment carefuly before answering.

If I play poker with you and I discover that you cheated to let me win because it would be more fun, I would punch you. In a similar way, players can feel cheated by a DM "fudging the dice". Other games avoid this issue completely, because the PCs won't die if the players/DM don't want them...

Again, and again the problem is that the goal of different group playing D&D is different. Some wants to follow a (hopefully) good story written by the DM, some wants to overcome (or face defeat) sound challenges, some wants a sandbox and some wants to participate in the creation of an original...

IMHO yes, if the kind of rules pointed aboves are available. To make it clear, I much prefer a less-powerful DM with powerful tools available to him, than the opposite.

You have to know and understand that BW is built with far more powerful rules than what D&D ever got (changing a bit in 4E). Not only conflict resolution, but thing likes stakes setting, "Say yes or roll", "Let it ride", etc. These severly restrict DM autorithy (a good thing IMHO).

IME, Rule Zero is more about abusing DM than flexibility. BW is flexible because it is conflict-resolution based (BTW, I hate BW character creation, the so-called lifepaths). D&D 4E is less task-resolution and more conflict-resolution than it's predecessors, hand-waving will be much less...

D&D and any other RPG should follows BW stance on rule 0, i.e. DM can't cheat, like all the players around. That doesn't mean the game doesn't have DM-specific or players-specific rules. e.g. In D&D the DM is they guy responsible to set-up encounters and plays NPCs to make them be apropriate...

Care to explain that ?

That's your "sandbox" style rules (the core of your game). However, that doesn't to be enough for your system... because you don't want the game to be completly open-ended. I'll think about it and add more later. Of course not, the point where many disagree (including me, but that's not the...

You don't like my example because it's the other end of the "simulationism" spectrum, where the goal is to emulate a given genre/theme. Now, I'm beginning to figure out what kind of game you want... Something like a "sandbox" core, with a (vanilla) gamist layer riding it. Such kind of game is...

So, why did you dislike the idea that Pippin wasn't helping at all in my example, but only doing funny stuff and doing so bringing more orcs for Aragorn to fight ? After all, Pippin's player chose to create a "comic relief" character. (BTW, the idea here is not to discuss about LOTR...

Characters are going to face adversity of course. What is G is to ask to players to overcome challenges, i.e. finding a way to make their character useful to win a fight or a negociation.

You playstyle is a confused G/S. The whole idea of "contribution to the party success" is very G. I'll have to think which questions to ask to make you realize what your real priority is.

The only balance really important in a RPG is the "spot-light one", i.e. each player having a good share of the attention of the others. D&D is doing it with "powerfulness balance", because D&D is all about overcoming challenges, where the most powerful generally is more successful. In a...

I only kept the most important parts : We are going somewhere... First, let me say that combat vs non-combat stuff has nothing to do with the playstyle(gamism, simulationism, narrativism). It is a common error to link combat to gamism, even if it's easy to come up with a gamist "solve the...

In a "sandbox" simulationist mindset (what GnomeWorks is talking about), the players want a referee, not a GM/DM.