Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4289116" data-attributes="member: 42582">A quibble, which I think you could reasonably take as proving your point: "narrativists" who like the GM to tell the story are (in Forge terms) a species of High Concept Simulationist.A limited defence: I readily concede that Forgist terminology doesn't capture all the useful distinctions. But it does capture some of them. In your post you use "crunch-heavy" and "crunch-light" as if that distinction is unproblematic, but it's also ambiguous (is 4e cruch light - because it has easy statblocks and very streamlined mechanics compared to 3E or AD&D - or is it crunch heavy, because it has 400+ pages of power descriptions that are needed to make it go?).Putting the real Sinecure to one side and focusing on the Forgist labels: they predict that s/he might enjoy Tunnels and Trolls or Palladium (gamist, probably easily drifted to the preferred non-mechanical form of simulationism), would probably not enjoy Chivalry and Sorcery (too close to RM/RQ), would probably not enjoy Prince Valiant even though it's quite simple in its mechanics from what I understand.Maybe these things could be worked out from first principles without the aid of Forge labels - but they do help me to think about what is going on, even if they're not perfect.</blockquote>