Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8676286" data-attributes="member: 16814">Different thing -- not really arguing one is more real that the other, hitpoints fixed is as made up as hitpoints unfixed, but rather what agreed and understood constraints are on that ability to make things up.&nbsp; So, yeah, just as arbitrary from the point of view of making it up, but not the end of the possible story as far as the game is concerned.&nbsp; I'd say changing monster hitpoints would certainly be against the OP definition of simulation, but could well be within a genre or trope simulation.Personally, I don't like it, but then I have pretty strong gamist (to briefly touch on Forge jargon) proclivities.I'm not sure who &quot;we&quot; is in this sentence.&nbsp; There are lots of RPGs that are very complex and detailed and still get played.&nbsp; There are RPGs lighter in rules than 5e, but much, much tighter as well.&nbsp; I don't think the drive for RPGs is to rely on the GM handling all of the simulation.&nbsp; In 5e, certainly, that's the role of the GM.&nbsp; But it's not at all the role of the GM is, say, Stonetop, or Blades in the Dark.&nbsp; Constraint can often be a boon to creativity.I think it's not great as an uncertainty resolution engine.&nbsp; The core loop of play presented isn't really that, because the only uncertainty that matters is that of the GM.&nbsp; If the GM isn't uncertain, no amount of player uncertainty matters.&nbsp; I'm still not willing to concede that GMs as creator and curator of the fiction is the best way.&nbsp; It's a way, there are others, and they're different in ways that make any such claim difficult outside of personal preference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8676286, member: 16814"] Different thing -- not really arguing one is more real that the other, hitpoints fixed is as made up as hitpoints unfixed, but rather what agreed and understood constraints are on that ability to make things up. So, yeah, just as arbitrary from the point of view of making it up, but not the end of the possible story as far as the game is concerned. I'd say changing monster hitpoints would certainly be against the OP definition of simulation, but could well be within a genre or trope simulation. Personally, I don't like it, but then I have pretty strong gamist (to briefly touch on Forge jargon) proclivities. I'm not sure who "we" is in this sentence. There are lots of RPGs that are very complex and detailed and still get played. There are RPGs lighter in rules than 5e, but much, much tighter as well. I don't think the drive for RPGs is to rely on the GM handling all of the simulation. In 5e, certainly, that's the role of the GM. But it's not at all the role of the GM is, say, Stonetop, or Blades in the Dark. Constraint can often be a boon to creativity. I think it's not great as an uncertainty resolution engine. The core loop of play presented isn't really that, because the only uncertainty that matters is that of the GM. If the GM isn't uncertain, no amount of player uncertainty matters. I'm still not willing to concede that GMs as creator and curator of the fiction is the best way. It's a way, there are others, and they're different in ways that make any such claim difficult outside of personal preference. [/QUOTE]

Verification