Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8612656" data-attributes="member: 22779">No, it really isn't.&nbsp; In many systems, the system will tell you directly what happens.&nbsp; You can certainly claim that the character was killed by bites, but, that's entirely on you, not the system.&nbsp; The system didn't tell you that.&nbsp; All the system told you was that the character lost enough HP to die.&nbsp; Since HP don't actually mean anything and don't map onto any specific result, any result is acceptable. You ask &quot;How much of our narrative do we need prescribed for us by written game rules?&quot;&nbsp; In a simulation system, the answer is ANY.&nbsp; You need at least a tiny, tiny sliver of an answer if you're going to claim that the system is a simulation.&nbsp; If the system cannot give you any answers (or, in the case of D&amp;D, any answer you care to narrate is acceptable) then it's not a simulation. IOW, I say that your character M died of embarrassment.&nbsp; Use the mechanics to prove me wrong.&nbsp; You can't.&nbsp; And that's the point. Which doesn't mean that you must have narrative follow mechanics.&nbsp; Obviously you don't need that.&nbsp; You DO need that for a simulation though.&nbsp; If you want to definitively answer what happened, then you need some form of simulation.&nbsp; If you cannot definitively answer any questions, then it's not a simulation.Take a system I do know better - Battletech.&nbsp; In BTech, you roll your attack, then you roll your location for damage.&nbsp; Then there are a number of potential follow up effects depending on the damage done.&nbsp; I can definitively say that your Mech fell down because that PPC blew off it's hip actuator.&nbsp; That's a (very simple and not terribly accurate) good example of a simulationist system.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8612656, member: 22779"] No, it really isn't. In many systems, the system will tell you directly what happens. You can certainly claim that the character was killed by bites, but, that's entirely on you, not the system. The system didn't tell you that. All the system told you was that the character lost enough HP to die. Since HP don't actually mean anything and don't map onto any specific result, any result is acceptable. You ask "How much of our narrative do we need prescribed for us by written game rules?" In a simulation system, the answer is ANY. You need at least a tiny, tiny sliver of an answer if you're going to claim that the system is a simulation. If the system cannot give you any answers (or, in the case of D&D, any answer you care to narrate is acceptable) then it's not a simulation. IOW, I say that your character M died of embarrassment. Use the mechanics to prove me wrong. You can't. And that's the point. Which doesn't mean that you must have narrative follow mechanics. Obviously you don't need that. You DO need that for a simulation though. If you want to definitively answer what happened, then you need some form of simulation. If you cannot definitively answer any questions, then it's not a simulation. Take a system I do know better - Battletech. In BTech, you roll your attack, then you roll your location for damage. Then there are a number of potential follow up effects depending on the damage done. I can definitively say that your Mech fell down because that PPC blew off it's hip actuator. That's a (very simple and not terribly accurate) good example of a simulationist system. [/QUOTE]

Verification