Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4445794" data-attributes="member: 42582">That's not the sense in which I'm using the words, nor (as far as I know) Mustrum Ridcully.HeroWars is a narrativist game, not a simulationist one. It has far more consistent mechanics than any pre-3E version of D&amp;D.Purist-for-system simulationist play, in the Forge sense, is play in which the mechanics model the causal processes of the gameworld. Traveller, Runequest and Rolemaster are classic examples.Narrativist play, in the Forge sense, is play in which the mechanics facilitate the distribution of narrativist control between the players of the game (including GM) and leave the question of ingame causality to be narrated by the appropriate person once the result of the dice is known. Minions, healing surges and martial encounter powers are all examples of narrativist mechanics.Ie they are complaining that the mechanics have no ingame meaning.In the Forge sense, gamist play is that in which the goal of play is for the players to overcome challenges in the real world (whether by luck or skill). Tunnels and Trolls is an example - it emphasises luck, like gambling. 1st ed AD&amp;D is another - it emphasises skill, like wargaming.This is not connected in any way to the Forge notion. What you are describing sounds like a gamist player who wants to use character build rules rather than action resolution rules. Neither T&amp;T nor AD&amp;D would be good for this person, but 3E D&amp;D might be.Narrativists have, as the goal of play, the construction of a thematically meaningful story (ie not just a sequence of events) by the participants in the game. Challenges or conflicts of some sort are likely to be significant in narrativist RPGing for the same reasons that they are in literature, film etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 4445794, member: 42582"] That's not the sense in which I'm using the words, nor (as far as I know) Mustrum Ridcully. HeroWars is a narrativist game, not a simulationist one. It has far more consistent mechanics than any pre-3E version of D&D. Purist-for-system simulationist play, in the Forge sense, is play in which the mechanics model the causal processes of the gameworld. Traveller, Runequest and Rolemaster are classic examples. Narrativist play, in the Forge sense, is play in which the mechanics facilitate the distribution of narrativist control between the players of the game (including GM) and leave the question of ingame causality to be narrated by the appropriate person once the result of the dice is known. Minions, healing surges and martial encounter powers are all examples of narrativist mechanics. Ie they are complaining that the mechanics have no ingame meaning. In the Forge sense, gamist play is that in which the goal of play is for the players to overcome challenges in the real world (whether by luck or skill). Tunnels and Trolls is an example - it emphasises luck, like gambling. 1st ed AD&D is another - it emphasises skill, like wargaming. This is not connected in any way to the Forge notion. What you are describing sounds like a gamist player who wants to use character build rules rather than action resolution rules. Neither T&T nor AD&D would be good for this person, but 3E D&D might be. Narrativists have, as the goal of play, the construction of a thematically meaningful story (ie not just a sequence of events) by the participants in the game. Challenges or conflicts of some sort are likely to be significant in narrativist RPGing for the same reasons that they are in literature, film etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification