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
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
How did 4e take simulation away from D&D?
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="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5494954" data-attributes="member: 18280"><p>I admit that I am a bit confused.</p><p></p><p>I have been told by many since 4e came out that, in order to grok 4e, one had to accept that the rules weren't meant to simulate what occurs in the game universe. That the rules should work as written (so as to not negate or nerf carefully balanced characters).</p><p></p><p>Now, in this thread, where that idea is being questioned, I keep hearing the opposite. And I could be wrong, but it seems as though I am hearing the opposite from some of the same individuals.</p><p></p><p>Which is it?</p><p></p><p>Should the RAW take precence over the fiction (i.e., the fiction must be shaped to explain the outcomes by RAW) or should the fiction take precedence over the RAW (i.e., the RAW is only applied as makes <em>a priori </em>sense from the fictional world)?</p><p></p><p>Either one is okay, although it will obviously colour your view of the game based upon what you want. But to imagine that the game doesn't do simulation whenever the question comes up why X is a poor simulation of Y, and then to imagine that the game has simulation in spades when the question comes up why it doesn't do simulation well, seems to me more than a little wonky.</p><p></p><p>While it might be fairly said that all editions of D&D fail at providing true simulation, it must be noted that there are degrees of failure. </p><p></p><p>IMHO, and certainly based on my reading both of the designer blogs and on this board, 4e doesn't attempt to simulate outside of combat (where it attempts to simulate a specific type of combat), but rather attempts to facilitate collaborative storytelling between combats, where the mechanics spur creative narration (rather than arrising from and arbitrating the outcome of narration).</p><p></p><p>To help make the difference clear, you can either look at Strength and say "This is what strength is....what should that mean in game terms?" or you can say "This is the balanced effect that we want within game play.....how should the fluff reflect this?" There is a degree of each in all rpgs, but how much of each has a drastic effect on design and game play.</p><p></p><p></p><p>RC</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5494954, member: 18280"] I admit that I am a bit confused. I have been told by many since 4e came out that, in order to grok 4e, one had to accept that the rules weren't meant to simulate what occurs in the game universe. That the rules should work as written (so as to not negate or nerf carefully balanced characters). Now, in this thread, where that idea is being questioned, I keep hearing the opposite. And I could be wrong, but it seems as though I am hearing the opposite from some of the same individuals. Which is it? Should the RAW take precence over the fiction (i.e., the fiction must be shaped to explain the outcomes by RAW) or should the fiction take precedence over the RAW (i.e., the RAW is only applied as makes [I]a priori [/I]sense from the fictional world)? Either one is okay, although it will obviously colour your view of the game based upon what you want. But to imagine that the game doesn't do simulation whenever the question comes up why X is a poor simulation of Y, and then to imagine that the game has simulation in spades when the question comes up why it doesn't do simulation well, seems to me more than a little wonky. While it might be fairly said that all editions of D&D fail at providing true simulation, it must be noted that there are degrees of failure. IMHO, and certainly based on my reading both of the designer blogs and on this board, 4e doesn't attempt to simulate outside of combat (where it attempts to simulate a specific type of combat), but rather attempts to facilitate collaborative storytelling between combats, where the mechanics spur creative narration (rather than arrising from and arbitrating the outcome of narration). To help make the difference clear, you can either look at Strength and say "This is what strength is....what should that mean in game terms?" or you can say "This is the balanced effect that we want within game play.....how should the fluff reflect this?" There is a degree of each in all rpgs, but how much of each has a drastic effect on design and game play. RC [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
How did 4e take simulation away from D&D?
Top