R. Thompson : D&D still a sim/gamist RPG

skeptic said:
I have certainly less play experience with indie RPGs than you, but here I must disagree.

The key idea of my OP is : What is done to the G part is good, it's the "downplaying S" that isn't enough for 1) my personal taste (my ideal is a nicely mixed G/N RPG like Burning Wheel*), 2) for those wanting to add a N layer on top of it.

My example was the classic paladin already tortured by his G/S alternatives.

*(without much emphasis on the lifepaths part of it)

Yet in Rodney's own post, his paladin chooses (essentially) a Narr-style sub-optimal choice by not going after his shield.

If he was tuned into G mode, he would have gone for the shield for the bonus.

If he was tuned into S mode, he would have probably just taken a breather. He was just dropped to negative hit points only seconds before.

But, in N mode, he jumped back into the fray (sans-shield) because that's what was good for the story. And because that's what he felt his character would do. He chose a sub-optimal choice, unencumbered by any sense of "realism" applied to the environment.

If anything 4e has downplayed D&D 3e's Simulationist foundation. Hence, you see all the grognards who are pissed off because Healing Surges don't make sense or because getting fully healed up between encounters isn't "realistic".

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. But I see 4e as a boon to Narr-play.

Or at least as much of one as we could ask for from D&D.

Hong stated it well that GNS is only good for arguing about GNS.

But I don't understand how 4e could simultaneously screw over Sim by becoming a boardgame/CCG/MMO and at the same time decrease Narr possibilities by boosting/retaining Sim while implementing undoubtedly the most Narr D&D subsystems in the history of the game.

Sure. It's not Burning Wheel. But it was never going to be.

Maybe selecting a more realistic basis for comparison might help.

I mean, if you were going to do Narr D&D, would you rather have 3e?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


smathis said:
If anything 4e has downplayed D&D 3e's Simulationist foundation. Hence, you see all the grognards who are pissed off because Healing Surges don't make sense or because getting fully healed up between encounters isn't "realistic".

I agree that 4E is less S and better G than 3.x


smathis said:
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. But I see 4e as a boon to Narr-play.

Or at least as much of one as we could ask for from D&D.

I fail to see how 4E can be a boon to nar-play as long as we have XP gained for coherent behavior and good strategies.

If you reward doing X, don't ask people for doing Y wich is the opposite of it.

Edit : For example the paladin player doing a thematic choice getting bad reactions from both the G and S minded players around the table. (Hey, why did you not do X to help us win that fight! || What ? A paladin of Torm would never do that before a cleric of Bane!)


smathis said:
I mean, if you were going to do Narr D&D, would you rather have 3e?

If I was trying to add a Nar play in D&D, it would be :

Still purely G during challenges (combat or social) and character creations, but N at the choices of adventures and at the choices of challenges.
 
Last edited:

My current running theory is that GNS is really a game of linguistic Calvin-ball. The GNS game falls outside the GNS model, and is therefore the ultimate meta-game; a game where we sit around and talk about the game (or is that just another form of "simulationism?"). I have yet to get a consistent, corroborated definition for any of the three terms used, so they're not terribly useful in discussion, IMHO.
 

Halivar said:
My current running theory is that GNS is really a game of linguistic Calvin-ball. The GNS game falls outside the GNS model, and is therefore the ultimate meta-game; a game where we sit around and talk about the game (or is that just another form of "simulationism?"). I have yet to get a consistent, corroborated definition for any of the three terms used, so they're not terribly useful in discussion, IMHO.

If the goal is to win the discussion, isn't that gamist ? ;)
 

smathis said:
I mean, if you were going to do Narr D&D, would you rather have 3e?

Maybe. We will have to see about rituals. 3e resources management has promoted in-game Narr development in some kind of way.
 


smathis said:
...brilliant words...

You, smathis. You keep posting.

I've just discovered Narr play, myself, and have become wholly disenchanted with Sim; this is why I'm really excited to leave D&D 3.5 behind. I mean, so much so that I've been badgering everyone I know to get in on a game of Risus or tSOY. Your description of D&D as an unfocused catch-all--and why that's a good thing--has me itching to grab some dice and play some 4e.
 


xechnao said:
Rm interacted with adventure or story development.

More than often*, the result of 3.x rm is the 15 min. day, how it is supposed to help Nar play ?


*Except in DM-hammered time-based adventure.
 

Remove ads

Top