Contemporary Simulationist TTRPGs [+]

[Enaknomolos]

I would categorize flavors of the Cepheus Engine as contemporary simulationist...

Some Mongoose releases are strongly sim too. The World Builder's Handbook, in particular, packs an absurd amount of contemporary astrophysics into a gaming supplement.

I think it's also a clear example of one sort of situation where simulation does require complexity. If you want your sci-fi stars and worlds to accord with contemporary science, then there's simply no way of doing that without maths, even if that maths is a bit streamlined for gaming purposes.

 

[payn]

This is probably a relatively hot take for a + thread, but...

Dungeons and Dragons.

D&D has always had significant simulationist elements, from it's roots as a wargame and extending through every edition. It is 100% okay to say "I value simulationism in my D&D game". Some people will mock you for this. Some ENWorlders will mock you for this. They are wrong, as any one-true-wayism of D&D is wrong.

That being said, 3.0e was probably the height of simulationism in D&D largely due to influence from Peter Adkinson, and I doubt we'll see it matched in future editions. 2e gained a notable amount of simulationism over time (by means of it's many, many expansions). 5e is arguably towards the lower end, but the elements are still there. And I don't think 5e 2024 moves the needle much in either direction from 2014.

One of the arguments I often see is that simulation must be a complete reality simulator or its no simulation at all. Another is that folks want a game, and not a simulation, as if the two are mutually exclusive. Though, a lot of simulation can live in the abstract. For example, the 5E 6-8 encounters per day expectation is an attrition adventure day attempt at a fantasy adventure simulation. No its not attempting to sim reality, its attempting to put a process of resource attrition across the day in place to simulate an adventure day. See Snarf's post on some of the differences in rules and rulings of sim.

So, yeah I agree that D&D has some sim in it. Id even say the contemporary sim in games tends to be more the abstract under the hood variety as opposed to classic actual rules. Forbidden Lands, for example, uses supply dice to track resources in an old school dungeon crawl way. Its a contemporary design, but with a classic gaming feel. I'd agree D&D seems to be following this path since 3E.

 

[dbm]

It hasn’t finished cooking yet but The Broken Empires will be a new ’sim-lite’ RPG when it arrives. This is a new system which aims to be simulations but without going to extremes of detail that would slow down play.

It’s uses a d100 ‘Blackjack’ mechanic for its core resolution, with most actions seeming to be opposed. The person who rolls highest while still under their skill level wins. There are a bunch of interesting flourishes to the system. By using the tens number as degree of success it helps minimise the number of dice tools needed to resolve something. There are rules for travel and negotiation (without this turning into ‘social combat’), and a free-form magic system which takes inspiration from Ars Magica but aims to do something different with that premise.

It should release early next year, I’m really looking forward to it.

 

[Aldarc]

It hasn’t finished cooking yet but The Broken Empires will be a new ’sim-lite’ RPG when it arrives. This is a new system which aims to be simulations but without going to extremes of detail that would slow down play.

It’s uses a d100 ‘Blackjack’ mechanic for its core resolution, with most actions seeming to be opposed. The person who rolls highest while still under their skill level wins. There are a bunch of interesting flourishes to the system. By using the tens number as degree of success it helps minimise the number of dice tools needed to resolve something. There are rules for travel and negotiation (without this turning into ‘social combat’), and a free-form magic system which takes inspiration from Ars Magica but aims to do something different with that premise.

It should release early next year, I’m really looking forward to it.

Good call. This is another project that has me interested. I doubt that it will be my go-to game of choice, but I definitely can't wait to at least get my hands on the PDF and see how the game works.

Forbidden Lands, for example, uses supply dice to track resources in an old school dungeon crawl way. Its a contemporary design, but with a classic gaming feel.

Agreed.

 

[The Firebird]

I have more thoughts about your post, but I have an absence of time to address everything. So for now...

The thing is, I'm not so sure. I would like to direct you to a post I made in the other thread that prompted this one:

I think that it's possible that there is a contingent of contemporary sim fans that are skeptical of mechanics as the means to simulationism. There are arguably a number of new simulationist games out there that veer towards the rules light side of things as a result.

I have two comments. The first is--how popular is FKR really and what do its proponents consider the main example of the genre? I've not seen anyone running a game billed as "FKR". I have played a Braunstein, which I see mentioned in the same conversation, but I think there are some key differences. But I won't elaborate on that yet.

Second, the key point I mentioned was "the GM has to make up a procedure" is a fail state. I think that doesn't clash with FKR as you describe it to the extent that the GM has expert knowledge of the material. For example, if I say "my soldiers want to dismantle this barn and use the wood to make a bridge", and the GM did that while in the army, then they aren't really making up a rule, right? They're applying an unwritten rule. In contrast, if I ask "how many bakers are in a town of 10,000", most GMs wouldn't have a solid grounding in demographics and they will have to make something up.

Put another way, we can read the FKR games as having very detailed but hidden rules. The fact that they are 'rules light' on the tin doesn't mean the GM has complete authority to rule however they want. They are ruling in line with their experience, will make the same rulings in the same scenarios, and will make those rulings based on perceived realism. And if the games are really doing what they say they are doing, then two expert GMs should make identical rulings.

 

[Aldarc]

I have two comments. The first is--how popular is FKR really and what do its proponents consider the main example of the genre? I've not seen anyone running a game billed as "FKR". I have played a Braunstein, which I see mentioned in the same conversation, but I think there are some key differences. But I won't elaborate on that yet.

Second, the key point I mentioned was "the GM has to make up a procedure" is a fail state. I think that doesn't clash with FKR as you describe it to the extent that the GM has expert knowledge of the material. For example, if I say "my soldiers want to dismantle this barn and use the wood to make a bridge", and the GM did that while in the army, then they aren't really making up a rule, right? They're applying an unwritten rule. In contrast, if I ask "how many bakers are in a town of 10,000", most GMs wouldn't have a solid grounding in demographics and they will have to make something up.

Put another way, we can read the FKR games as having very detailed but hidden rules. The fact that they are 'rules light' on the tin doesn't mean the GM has complete authority to rule however they want. They are ruling in line with their experience, will make the same rulings in the same scenarios, and will make those rulings based on perceived realism. And if the games are really doing what they say they are doing, then two expert GMs should make identical rulings.

Snarf is the poster more well-versed in FKR. Overgeeked as well. This is one area where I know that I am out of my depth, and I fear getting dragged into a protracted disagreement about the subject on what is meant to be a plus thread.