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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RSKennan" data-source="post: 4295743" data-attributes="member: 8256">As a GM who's all about immersion, I generally seek out games that are strong on simulation. This has led me to play things like GURPS lately. Until recently I thought immersion and simulation were the same thing, despite theory essays to the contrary. Since 4e came out, I've realized that I'm not tied to simulationism as much as I'd thought. Immersion and simulation are two different things, though their venn diagrams overlap more than a little. I'm finding that 4e's fast and loose design philosophy of square circles, low fluff mechanics, etc., is actually helping my imagination more than hindering it. Like others have said, it's a lot easier to see the game as an abstraction and not worry too much about it when the rules actually are abstract.  In 3.x, I could make an argument against the statement that "The rules aren't the physics of the world", and while I'd feel uneasy about it, I'd have a case. In 4e, I don't have a case. This also means that I don't have to worry about whether my setting details fit obscure "simulation-based" rules every time I have an idea. No more world building with my rulebooks, except when I want them. This is liberating. I can refer to the rules when necessary, but focus on making my setting come to life in other ways. All in all, 4e has brought back the wonder of GMing that I lost during 3.x. I thought I had just gotten older, but this edition has proven me wrong. I feel like a kid again.</blockquote>

Verification