Search results

You seem to be designing your system bottom up instead of top down, that is a really bad idea IMHO. Can you clearly explain to us what is the goal of the game you are trying to build ?

D&D was never a good "simulationist" game, if "in-game linear cause to effect rules" is what you mean by "simulationist". Levels, HPs, classes and XP are strong metagame concepts that have been part of every D&D edition. If you want to build such kind of "simulationist" game, use Riddle of...

GnomeWorks did bring the "simulationism" tag, so my comment will use "GNS/BigModel" terms. First and foremost, it's not a "simulationism" issue but a "realism" one, where "realism" is a specific style of "simuliatinism" where the fictional world share most of its properties with ours (the...

:) I made the decision to not answer to GNS bashing on this thread because my OP was clearly announcing a GNS discussion.

Please delete.

Of course I'm a strong believer of "System does matter", and that's the point here. My point is that the definition of what is good roleplaying (a.k.a. the goal of the game in a RPG) that will presented in the DMG is along the lines of what R. T. said. This mixed gamist/simulationist...

It's not a different facet, in both cases the goal is to emulate something. First is about Setting/Genre/System, second is about Characters. In other words, Sim-minded players want a coherent world in wich they can play coherent characters in coherent situations, etc..

I was answering to another poster who claimed I was framing too much things in GNS. I perfectly agree that mechanics can help one of the agenda. The Sim players on the boards are not dissatisfied about the same Sim parts I'm dissatisfied with. Many Sim mechanics elements are removed from the...

It would a error to frame for example a single technique (4E skill check giving narrative autority to players) as G/N/S. My OP was about the fact that D&D 4E is still a mixed Sim/Gam RPG like the past editions, GNS discussion was expected no ?

"Realism" is a kind of Simulationism, not a synonym. (e.g. you could do "Marvel comics" Sim game). The common idea is to emulate something that is already established -> the reality we know in the first case or the "Marvel universe" in the second one.

If you fail to recognize what is a Simulationist creative agenda, that's not my problem.

That would be really bad, XP should be the main reward system of D&D.

Evil Quote from the blog : A roleplaying game rewards the player for making choices that are consistent with his character. That's is Sim support hard wired in the game design.

If you have not discovered the pleasure of Scry/Buff/Teleport(without error) in your 3.x, I'm more than happy for you ;) Spell components for spells like Raise Dead / Resurection ? Yeah, I could see it's a kind of protection agains't dungeon hit-and-run tactic. It is however, IMHO, far from...

More than often*, the result of 3.x rm is the 15 min. day, how it is supposed to help Nar play ? *Except in DM-hammered time-based adventure.

Could you elaborate on this ?

If the goal is to win the discussion, isn't that gamist ? ;)

I agree that 4E is less S and better G than 3.x I fail to see how 4E can be a boon to nar-play as long as we have XP gained for coherent behavior and good strategies. If you reward doing X, don't ask people for doing Y wich is the opposite of it. Edit : For example the paladin player doing a...

I have certainly less play experience with indie RPGs than you, but here I must disagree. The key idea of my OP is : What is done to the G part is good, it's the "downplaying S" that isn't enough for 1) my personal taste (my ideal is a nicely mixed G/N RPG like Burning Wheel*), 2) for those...

I'm not against rewards for "good in-character acting" What I really don't like to have in D&D (and personally in any RPG) is the Sim idea that players should be rewarded foremost to play their character up to their definitions (a.k.a. paladin code and such). BTW, I won't answer to blatant...