Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8609781" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think "realism" is a secondary, though not at therefore irrelevant, concern.The key feature of simulationist mechanics is that they model/express the in-fiction causal processes. Classic Traveller PC gen does this even though it is in some sense rather approximate and/or unrealistic (eg no one ever changes jobs) and does not have anything but a very intuitive set of criteria for accuracy (ie our sense, as RPGers, of what work will be like in the Far Future).When I ran one of my daughters through a little Traveller session, she complained about the ridiculousness of a "Far Future" in which there is no mobile telephony - only walkie-talkies - and in which people still drive cars (her PC used Mechanical skill to break into and hotwire one). In that sense, she found the setting unrealistic. But she had no issues with understanding the mechanics, and how they related to the fiction.Contrast Torchbearer, when she asked why using a trait against yourself gives you checks? Ie she had simulationist intuitions, and didn't understand what was happening in the fiction that was being modelled by this process. I explained that nothing was; that it's a gameplay conceit.I don't think that either EPT or RM really simulates a culture. They depict cultures, and their depictions have an intricacy, richness and vividness that contrasts with (eg) Ghost Tower of Inverness or Desert of Desolation. In this respect I would contrast the Pendragon Winter Phase, which tries to model certain cultural processes (marriage, child birth, estate management) with rolls and modifiers that are supposed to model/express in-fiction causal processes.I see it as about the degree of engaging and plausible character of the fiction. To me it is separate from simulationism as a feature of mechanical design, and the way mechanics relate to fiction.We can see this also by looking at HeroWars/Quest, which is just as steeped in the fiction of Glorantha as RQ is, but is not remotely simulationist in either its PC build or action resolution procedures.I don't agree with this. I don't think it is an impenetrable barrier; but I <s>don't</s> think it is a hindrance. This is because unless the in-fiction causal processes are Toon-like, there is no guarantee that they will produce drama. And hence mechanics committed to modelling them likewise can't have such a guarantee.I think it's no coincidence that even a system like BW, with clear simulationist influences on its approach to PC build and to setting obstacles, eschews simulation completely when it comes to framing scenes and establishing the consequences of failure. Conversely, when I was young and hence had not worked out that Classic Traveller could be played in a PbtA style, and instead was applying simulationist sensibilities as much as I could to encounter design, consequences, etc, the result was boring situations and boring play. Probably quite true to the imagined Far Future, which is full of bureaucrats and mortgages and bills of lading, but not very conducive to satisfying play!EDITED to strike out an errant negation.</blockquote>

Verification