Search results

Seems like more of Gygax putting on his salesman hat again, yeah.

As you say, a simulation doesn't have to simulate reality. However, in this case it seems to me that was the intent, and the GM, perhaps subjectively, saw the survival as a bad simulation of reality. Or, they were peeved at the player's stated knowledge that by the rules the fall couldn't kill...

And why I never claimed you were speaking any other way.

Certainly there are many more simulative systems, I agree. But it's not like Savage Worlds is a storygame.

If clean, simple gameplay in general and serving your player's wants and needs in specific are your primary goals (as this reads to me regarding your interests), pushing hard into sim may not be the best choice for you. But we all weight different aspects if the hobby differently.

But it still depicts characters with statistics representing something real in the setting, traveling through a world full of things also represented mechanically, so I wouldn't say there's as little sim as you suggest. I've read that game. Unless you're using rules different from Pinnacle...

Both awesome games I've played extensively.

Yes, I would say that. That motivation is anti-verisimilitudinous. Now, adding that dragon for a diagetic reason works, or if a previously undefined area is being defined (in the latter case via diagetic GM judgement or a diagetically-designed randomizer).

Modeling is important to my sense of simulation, but yeah eliminating narrative as a mechanical consideration is just as important, as part of my sense of verisimilitude.

See, I prefer my TTRPG play to be more setting-focused, and exploring that setting through your PC is the primary purpose of play. So simulation is very important to me. As I said above though, I can get behind certain varieties of genre emulation, which is pretty much always more PC-focused...

To me, simulation is simply the idea of modeling the game's setting as realistically as possible within the practical limits of play. Now obviously the extent of those limits varies significantly from person to person, but my limits are pretty high on this stuff. I want details on things like...

As @Lanefan said, we really need to know what you mean by "D&D", as many games have gone by that name. Several of the older editions have quite the simulationist mentality IMO (no matter what Gygax may have claimed while shilling the game).

Would be an awesome new thread though.

Yeah, I really miss D&D-adjacent discussions here. But most of them are still tagged WotC 5e even though the topic can usually apply to many other games, and I'm not allowed to post there anymore.

I'm pretty awkward socially (my wife and I are virtually convinced I'm on the spectrum), but I am working on it.

My preference is for lower power levels than modern WotC usually rolls with, but reasonable simulation can make a difference there as well (as with A5e and it's extensive exploration rules).

Well, I also really enjoy talking about things I like, and none of the games I enjoy the most have a large community unfortunately. And everyone in the hobby still talks about 5e and 5.5 way, way more than anything else.

Shadowdark feels great for the kind of old school game I enjoy, and it's fun to play and relatively easy to find players for, but I prefer ideally to marry that feel to some solid world-sim. My favorite games are A5e, ACKS II, DCC, the Without Number series, and converting AD&D 1e and 2e's lore...

Fair enough. I really don't do memes, and I'm not great at teasing either to be honest. Sorry.

Oh I expect they are. But why would I want the trend to move further in that direction? Is there a reason everyone seems bothered by me not wanting my preferences to become extinct? Seems pretty reasonable to me. I mean, if you want me to go away just say so.