Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8677192" data-attributes="member: 6801845">I don't think there is, or needs to be one definition of what a simulation is.&nbsp; It will always come down to subjective standards.&nbsp; For example there's nothing wrong with the quantum backpack, but at that point you're simulating a specific fiction tool, in this case the flashback.&nbsp; You're no longer simulating the real world nature of cause and effect.&nbsp; Which is fine if you go in with that mindset.&nbsp; When I DM sometimes the flashback is background, other times it's minor and I'll allow it because it doesn't really change the current state of the reality the PCs live in.&nbsp; But at a certain point there's no take backs because it would be too disruptive of the &quot;feel&quot; that I'm trying to model.&nbsp; As much as I would like to suddenly realize that I had remembered to pick up milk from the store I'm going to have eggs for breakfast because I don't feel like going back out.In a similar fashion, I fully accept that much of D&amp;D is not realistic. I also believe that many aspects qualify as simulation.&nbsp; It's reality + action movie logic and tropes + magic.But I also don't see why it makes much difference.&nbsp; Different people have different definitions.&nbsp; So?&nbsp; Some people want to claim that all dragons have the same toughness and capabilities of the dragons in a box office movie flop (I had to look it up) rather than the fiction established by the rules of the game.&nbsp; Which is fine, we all have different perspectives on this stuff.I understand people want one clear definition, I just don't think there is one.&nbsp; Even if there was one, I don't see how it would affect gameplay.&nbsp; So, like, peace out, live and let live but I am trying to bow out of this conversation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 8677192, member: 6801845"] I don't think there is, or needs to be one definition of what a simulation is. It will always come down to subjective standards. For example there's nothing wrong with the quantum backpack, but at that point you're simulating a specific fiction tool, in this case the flashback. You're no longer simulating the real world nature of cause and effect. Which is fine if you go in with that mindset. When I DM sometimes the flashback is background, other times it's minor and I'll allow it because it doesn't really change the current state of the reality the PCs live in. But at a certain point there's no take backs because it would be too disruptive of the "feel" that I'm trying to model. As much as I would like to suddenly realize that I had remembered to pick up milk from the store I'm going to have eggs for breakfast because I don't feel like going back out. In a similar fashion, I fully accept that much of D&D is not realistic. I also believe that many aspects qualify as simulation. It's reality + action movie logic and tropes + magic. But I also don't see why it makes much difference. Different people have different definitions. So? Some people want to claim that all dragons have the same toughness and capabilities of the dragons in a box office movie flop (I had to look it up) rather than the fiction established by the rules of the game. Which is fine, we all have different perspectives on this stuff. I understand people want one clear definition, I just don't think there is one. Even if there was one, I don't see how it would affect gameplay. So, like, peace out, live and let live but I am trying to bow out of this conversation. [/QUOTE]

Verification