Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D podcast!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 6099895" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>I think we are back hard on the old (dawn of hobby old) point that running a fantasy RPG session shares a lot with reading a fantasy novel, but in other ways they are nothing alike. This is critically the difference between "simulation" and "emulation".</p><p></p><p>If you want, for example, Aragorn to be described on the character sheet in a way that makes him recognizable to a LotR fan, you'll simulate him via the system one way. OTOH, if you are more interested in having a character act in a way that makes him recognizable to a LotR fan, you'll emulate him via the system in a different way. There will be considerable overlap, of course, though much of this will be color, not mechanics. </p><p></p><p>People really far along the curve seeking immersion won't see this, I think, because for them color and description is what they hang their hat on. If you want to play someone like Aragorn, describe him appropriately and then read LotR for insights. Whereas the emulation crowd is after a different effect: we give the character to someone who has no clue about LotR, but still get play somewhat as expected. </p><p></p><p>The problem with discussion of mechanics on the simulation front is that it depends on a shared set of source material, and at least some overlap in reactions to that material. Frankly, even if mechanics were readily agreed upon, I think my take on literary fantasy would be incompatible at the table with some others, simply based on their take on literary fantasy. Never mind simulating something in play--we don't even agree sufficiently about the story as it was told in print. </p><p></p><p>In contrast, the problem with discussion of mechanics on the emulation front is that it depends on shared play experience. Until someone experiences emulative play, they are only seeing it thinly, through a fog, if at all. And unless it looks attractive, they have no particular reason to gain the experience. </p><p></p><p>If WotC couldn't resolve the difference well enough in the 4E DMG to avoid contradictory advice with a small team, I don't really see it being bridged in the larger arena of the fanbase. At best, we'd have champions of each side at WotC, with all of them playing in all modes, and those with preferences being equally protective of the other side. That's a lot to ask. So I expect Next to go back to being a fairly nifty beer and pretzels fantasy game with a few nods thrown towards the sim crowd to make them buy adventures and read them. I'll play it and have fun, because I like shallow fantasy gaming some times. If we get more than that, I'll be pleasantly surprised.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 6099895, member: 54877"] I think we are back hard on the old (dawn of hobby old) point that running a fantasy RPG session shares a lot with reading a fantasy novel, but in other ways they are nothing alike. This is critically the difference between "simulation" and "emulation". If you want, for example, Aragorn to be described on the character sheet in a way that makes him recognizable to a LotR fan, you'll simulate him via the system one way. OTOH, if you are more interested in having a character act in a way that makes him recognizable to a LotR fan, you'll emulate him via the system in a different way. There will be considerable overlap, of course, though much of this will be color, not mechanics. People really far along the curve seeking immersion won't see this, I think, because for them color and description is what they hang their hat on. If you want to play someone like Aragorn, describe him appropriately and then read LotR for insights. Whereas the emulation crowd is after a different effect: we give the character to someone who has no clue about LotR, but still get play somewhat as expected. The problem with discussion of mechanics on the simulation front is that it depends on a shared set of source material, and at least some overlap in reactions to that material. Frankly, even if mechanics were readily agreed upon, I think my take on literary fantasy would be incompatible at the table with some others, simply based on their take on literary fantasy. Never mind simulating something in play--we don't even agree sufficiently about the story as it was told in print. In contrast, the problem with discussion of mechanics on the emulation front is that it depends on shared play experience. Until someone experiences emulative play, they are only seeing it thinly, through a fog, if at all. And unless it looks attractive, they have no particular reason to gain the experience. If WotC couldn't resolve the difference well enough in the 4E DMG to avoid contradictory advice with a small team, I don't really see it being bridged in the larger arena of the fanbase. At best, we'd have champions of each side at WotC, with all of them playing in all modes, and those with preferences being equally protective of the other side. That's a lot to ask. So I expect Next to go back to being a fairly nifty beer and pretzels fantasy game with a few nods thrown towards the sim crowd to make them buy adventures and read them. I'll play it and have fun, because I like shallow fantasy gaming some times. If we get more than that, I'll be pleasantly surprised. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D podcast!
Top