Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8618788" data-attributes="member: 22779">That's not what I'm arguing.&nbsp; I'm not arguing that a simulation needs a 1:1 relationship with cause and effect.&nbsp; That's [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER]'s argument that that is needed for a simulation.My argument is that for something to be a simulation, at least as far as RPG's go, it needs to be able to allow the player to definitively say X did NOT happen.&nbsp; It doesn't necessarily need to say that X did happen.&nbsp; Because you can certainly substitute Y and Z for X.&nbsp; But, in order to be a simulation, it needs to be able to definitively say that, while X, Y or Z might have happened, A definitely did not.To me, refining my definition as we've been going along, Sim is mostly defined by being able to say that something did not happen in the fiction.&nbsp; So, in a Wounds/Vitality system where a hit does not deal any wounds, we are obliged, by the system, to make a narrative where that hit does not actually cause any physical harm to the target.&nbsp; Conversely, if the attack did deal Wound damage, then the narrative could not include any narrative that did not include some sort of physical harm to the target.There's more to the definition than simply saying that Sim systems tell you what is.&nbsp; That's not really all that useful.&nbsp; After all, a non-sim system can generate exactly the same narration as a sim based system, simply by choosing the same narratives.&nbsp; But, a non-sim system cannot tell you what didn't happen, whereas a sim system can.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8618788, member: 22779"] That's not what I'm arguing. I'm not arguing that a simulation needs a 1:1 relationship with cause and effect. That's [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER]'s argument that that is needed for a simulation. My argument is that for something to be a simulation, at least as far as RPG's go, it needs to be able to allow the player to definitively say X did NOT happen. It doesn't necessarily need to say that X did happen. Because you can certainly substitute Y and Z for X. But, in order to be a simulation, it needs to be able to definitively say that, while X, Y or Z might have happened, A definitely did not. To me, refining my definition as we've been going along, Sim is mostly defined by being able to say that something did not happen in the fiction. So, in a Wounds/Vitality system where a hit does not deal any wounds, we are obliged, by the system, to make a narrative where that hit does not actually cause any physical harm to the target. Conversely, if the attack did deal Wound damage, then the narrative could not include any narrative that did not include some sort of physical harm to the target. There's more to the definition than simply saying that Sim systems tell you what is. That's not really all that useful. After all, a non-sim system can generate exactly the same narration as a sim based system, simply by choosing the same narratives. But, a non-sim system cannot tell you what didn't happen, whereas a sim system can. [/QUOTE]

Verification