Search results

I thought this tangent was a dead end, but indeed this one could be fruitful! It is a way to clarify the distinction between world and event. A worldbuilder that is enjoying making a world, but are not into writing novels, are typically adressing the first, but not the second. They might have...

They added a town? And the dragon was indeed on the line (just to clarify that). But fair enough, this is what I expected now. Still good to check to confirm. And for the second question?

Ok. Then that explains that. Now back on track (railroad?). Assuming we now have a common understanding of the story of the 30th year of the development of this imagined imagined world. Is there absolute power at play here? Might a potential motivation for sharing this world be to bring the...

I said nothing about the purpose. Rather the opposite. This indicate a self awareness that novels isn't your thing - so why make a thing for that purpose? The Tolkien reference was also meant partly to guide you into the right mindset. I think the common understanding is that he didn't make his...

Well, that is my understanding of how the word "simulationist play" has been used. If this kind of play doesn't actually exist, I guess any claim @pemerton doesn't play simulationistic shouldn't be controversial at all? :D (And I am very open for that posibility)

Ok. So let me clarify. The player decided that as the alternative of thiefling was not on the table, they rather wanted to make a new human fighter character. This using the normal rules of the game with no extra limitations from the DM in terms of mechanics. The player then decided to go...

Because "simulationist" refers to your purpose of the activity. You do indeed simulate something, but that is not the purpose of that activity. As such you are appear to be willing to make decissions that might be problematic in terms of what you are trying to simulate, if it serves this primary...

Who do you think decided to build the town and challenge the dragon?

If you want to bring the analogy back to RPGing. You have a world you have worked on for 30 years. You could have kept it for yourself. If you had been a better writer you might perhaps been able to get a novel or two out of it. There is nothing special about the world. Fully generic fantasy...

Oh. I agree it is almost certanly railroading. I agree it seemingly breaks with preestablished lore. If this had happened to me I would probably have been hell bent on investigating what sort of loyalty the guards had - as it certanly wouldn't seem to be towards the tennets of Sutekh-Garyx...

I am indeed surprised at how you recognise this situation as unambiguously a situation of absolute power. Which might help me reframe some of your previous statements for myself. Regarding the mindset. I am really surprised that you seem so confident in your attempt to deduce a mindset ("toy...

I am sorry? I don't get the question? I have run several sessions simulating travel, fantasy life, diplomatic negotiations and various exploration expeditions, without any particular volience or dangers being in the cards at all. I think I would feel confident running a decent simulation of...

Ok, I reread the passage where you described the situation (post #5318 for reference). Indeed there is more meta than what I remembered. The question is: Would you have been more happy if you actually got to play out the failed bribery and reasoning attempt with the guard? In that case that...

To the first - I don't know. To the second: Simulations that have volient or highly dangerous situations as a prominent feature. I would not feel confident in running such scenarios without the support of a system for determining the "bang you are dead" conundrum agreed upon with the players...

Are you sure the real question isn't at what point these caveats go without saying?

I think that is generally accepted by now. The argument is about how this technique fits badly if you have play with some different point. Which I also believe is quite generally accepted by now.

As such, this boils down to the ages old words of wisdom: Never give the GM a good idea?

I have also stated it provide a structure of play and responsibilities that is helpful for simulation. This happen to be shared among trad games. And regarding labeling T&T. Now we are back to labeling games rather than examine how suitable they are for a certain kind of simulation. I think...

I don't question the design idea behind the jenga tower. What was the design intention, and how suitable something is for other uses than the original design intent is two quite different questions. We could claim our game is designed to be able to run everything well, and maybe even belive it...

Now I think we are starting to tickle the real subtlety of "absolute power". A school kid come to school with their new cool toy. They let their friends play a bit with it. This sharing is a nice bonding exercise. All the while though, the kid owning the toy provide clear instructions about...