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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6097163" data-attributes="member: 27160">I don't perceive this as what [MENTION=85555]Bedrockgames[/MENTION] has been saying, but I do think this is an interesting topic.Personally, I find that 'realistic' games (which I think split two or more ways - more below) are actually less easy to immerse in because they only really work well when played collaboratively as regards the rules. Basically, you either need a GM who is better informed about every aspect of the topics that will be interacted with in play than you are, or you need to collaborate to make sure that the rulings selected represent "reality" to the best of everyone present's knowledge. This second one is essentially what we do when playing Hârn - it can be great fun as well as fascinating and educational <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />To play "immersed" I find it actually easier to have clear rules that define the game world, so that I don't have to worry my little head about how "unreal" it all is.Getting back to "realism", though, I think this comes in (at least) two "flavours". Type I realism (as I'll call it) asks for each rule in the game to reflect something identifiable and plausible. Freeform or "light" types of rules suit this demand best, generally, since opinions on what is "unrealistic" are so heterogeneous; having fewer rules just means there is less to object to! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Type II realism, on the other hand, isn't bothered about what each rules element is meant to represent; as long as the outcome feels unforced and satisfying, it's less important what abstractions and approximations were used to get there. I think HârnMaster does this extremely well. The rules are certainly noy "light" and in many places they are somewhat abstracted, but they get results/outcomes that feel "natural". They tend to be a lot less decisive and produce much more "messy" outcomes than most RPGs - and for a certain type of "explorative" game, I like that a lot. And yet you roll randomly for hit location in combat, and craft skills all use the same basic scale of competence... It's subtle, but it's actually a different aesthetic in play in the two "Types" of "realism".</blockquote>

Verification