Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
R. Thompson : D&D still a sim/gamist RPG
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kwalish Kid" data-source="post: 4116855" data-attributes="member: 446"><p>So far, it seems that the only specific simulationist thing is the reward for playing in character. Aren't characters also part of the narrative? And what in RT's blog says that part of acting in character is not developing that character?</p><p></p><p>i went back and took a good look at that blog post, and I'm finding it extremely difficult not to think that the OP of this thread is based on a massive mistaken reading of the original blog post.</p><p></p><p>Let's actually link to the blog post: <a href="http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Communities/BlogPost.aspx?blogpostid=48904&pagemode=2&blogid=2100" target="_blank">http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Communities/BlogPost.aspx?blogpostid=48904&pagemode=2&blogid=2100</a></p><p></p><p>OK, now that people have had a chance to read the think, let's think for a bit.</p><p></p><p>Later, skeptic makes it clear that he thinks that Thompson's definition of roleplaying is "Acting in character".</p><p></p><p>But is this what Rodney says? No. First, he quotes JD Wiker, "Is there some insurmountable obstacle inherent in the mechanics that prevents designers from introducing a set of rules that lets players play their characters a certain way?" He does this to highlight what he has previously said about players coming up with innovative ways around game challenges. Thompson continues, "What the non-combat encounter system in 4th Edition does is it not only lets people play their characters how they want to, it rewards it." This is a comment on a game mechanic that rewards tactics by the player, and so is gamist, but it is a comment about providing the freedom within the system so that this gamist activity takes place in the most narrativist way possible, that is, so that the player can shape the story of the game. </p><p></p><p>But what about the following quote? ""That's what differentiates a board game from a roleplaying game, I think. A board game rewards players for making choices that lead to victory. A roleplaying game rewards the player for making choices that are consistent with his character." This is not something said by Thompson, this is something that he quotes John Wick as saying. After that quote, Thompson writes, "What 4E's noncombat encounter system does is it lets you make a choice that is consistent with your character AND lets you achieve victory with that (or, at least, some modicum of success)." Even if we do read "consistent with your character" to mean play that rigid reflects a character with no narrative growth, this statement is about one possibility of the skill resolution system, not a core reward mechanic of the game geared specifically around character consistency.</p><p></p><p>To me, Thompsonwrites som ethings that are downright narrativist in their leaning. For example:</p><p></p><p>To me, this indicates that part of what the system is designed to do is assist the DM in accommodating player additions to the narrative rather than building narrow victory conditions around pre-planned elements of the simulated game world.</p><p></p><p>Clearly D&D is not, and probably never will be a wholly narrativist game. It will always have gamist elements (if only because these encourage identification with the activity). It will always have elements of simulation (it is almost impossible to do away with them).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kwalish Kid, post: 4116855, member: 446"] So far, it seems that the only specific simulationist thing is the reward for playing in character. Aren't characters also part of the narrative? And what in RT's blog says that part of acting in character is not developing that character? i went back and took a good look at that blog post, and I'm finding it extremely difficult not to think that the OP of this thread is based on a massive mistaken reading of the original blog post. Let's actually link to the blog post: [url]http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Communities/BlogPost.aspx?blogpostid=48904&pagemode=2&blogid=2100[/url] OK, now that people have had a chance to read the think, let's think for a bit. Later, skeptic makes it clear that he thinks that Thompson's definition of roleplaying is "Acting in character". But is this what Rodney says? No. First, he quotes JD Wiker, "Is there some insurmountable obstacle inherent in the mechanics that prevents designers from introducing a set of rules that lets players play their characters a certain way?" He does this to highlight what he has previously said about players coming up with innovative ways around game challenges. Thompson continues, "What the non-combat encounter system in 4th Edition does is it not only lets people play their characters how they want to, it rewards it." This is a comment on a game mechanic that rewards tactics by the player, and so is gamist, but it is a comment about providing the freedom within the system so that this gamist activity takes place in the most narrativist way possible, that is, so that the player can shape the story of the game. But what about the following quote? ""That's what differentiates a board game from a roleplaying game, I think. A board game rewards players for making choices that lead to victory. A roleplaying game rewards the player for making choices that are consistent with his character." This is not something said by Thompson, this is something that he quotes John Wick as saying. After that quote, Thompson writes, "What 4E's noncombat encounter system does is it lets you make a choice that is consistent with your character AND lets you achieve victory with that (or, at least, some modicum of success)." Even if we do read "consistent with your character" to mean play that rigid reflects a character with no narrative growth, this statement is about one possibility of the skill resolution system, not a core reward mechanic of the game geared specifically around character consistency. To me, Thompsonwrites som ethings that are downright narrativist in their leaning. For example: To me, this indicates that part of what the system is designed to do is assist the DM in accommodating player additions to the narrative rather than building narrow victory conditions around pre-planned elements of the simulated game world. Clearly D&D is not, and probably never will be a wholly narrativist game. It will always have gamist elements (if only because these encourage identification with the activity). It will always have elements of simulation (it is almost impossible to do away with them). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
R. Thompson : D&D still a sim/gamist RPG
Top