Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9790426" data-attributes="member: 7025508">It is not the main agenda of D&D, but certain amount of it is assumed as a default. Earliest editions were rather bad at it, but that is not necessarily by choice rather than the designers were still figuring out things. But yes, this spawned other games that did it better. 3e has a lot of simulationism in it (again, not necessarily done well, but the intent is clear.) And the edition that most openly moved away from this is the one that tanked, so certainly people still expect some of it.I mean pretty simple mechanic that a lot of game has where we have number measuring the diegetic capability of the character rolled against number that measures the diegetic difficulty of the task and from this we draw the odds of success (or better yet, odds of achieving various degrees of success,) is simulationistic in the way I like. This is a simple abstaction that represnt causality that actually exists in the setting. Note that some games such as Burning Wheel has superficially this structure, but then they draw odds of things that are not causally connected to the things these numbers represnt from them, which weakens it as a simulation.</blockquote>