Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4489454" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is consistent with my remark that narrativists do not have an inconsistent gameworld, but do not have a consistent interpretation of the ingame meaning of metagame notions such as "level".Also, the notion of "advancing the plot" has nothing to do with narrativist play as that phrase is generally used. It seems connected to what The Forge calls high concept simulationism. Whereas in this thread "simulationism" is being used to refer to what The Forge calls purist-for-system simulationism combined with more-or-less sandbox play.A related point: many of the posts on this thread seem to assume that it is up to the GM to decide what the ingame meaning of the mechanics is (eg is the +0.5/lvl a "destiny" thing, or prowess, or ...?). In narrativist play a reasonable amount of that responsibility falls on the players.As to why scale by +0.5/lvl at all? It allows advancement.As to why not compress the scale, as opposed to compress its ingame interpretation? The scale as currently implemented interacts with bonuses from feats, from stats, from powers, from items. These other numbers, in turn, interact with damage dice, with hit point totals, etc.I don't feel any great urge to build my own simulationist game around different numbers when WoTC have already worked out a set of numbers for me, and the non-simulationist use of those numbers is fairly straightforward.</blockquote>