D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[Micah Sweet]

I tend to view "gamist" and "simulationist" as the same thing.

I am assuming by the distinction, gamist specifically means formulating "mechanics" in a way that is either "win" or "lose", and emphasizing challenge and competition?

That's my understanding. How is that the same as simulationism?

 

[Pedantic]

I play Fluxx with my younger kids. It's a terrible game but a fun activity. A lot of things that fall into the bucket of "games" are really just activities, to my perspective.

Oh I agree, but TTRPA doesn't have quite the same ring.

 

[FrogReaver]

Seriously?! You have an issue with a made up cat?
So you don't make things up on the spot? You don't borrow cool ideas from the players at the table?
Is this a genuine gripe? You ONLY roleplay in worlds where all pets are named?

All I’m saying is that it depends on why the cat was made up.

This is another get lost in the weeds debate.
I'm not announcing probabilities I'm looking to see if more plausible fiction can lead to additional generated comment for a Fail Forward in a Trad game.
By all means provide a more plausible example in your mind.

What if there isnt one?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Again, both cooks and bears exist in their respective environments and in both cases the process of adjudicating their appearance is the rolling of dice. It feels like to me that a lot of people have so internalized the specific process of D&D that they've given it all these special properties and status that objectively just aren't there! I'm not criticizing anyone for their taste in games, but I agree with the OP that running into this can get a bit wearing.

But if someone has a preferred method, why is that a problem for you? How does that affect your play?

 

[hawkeyefan]

It's not "where the PCs are" It's in the particular spot in the forest that the 2pm wandering monster roll would happen. I just roll it in advance for a better player experience. If they somehow move away from the forest and encounters shouldn't be rolled a 2pm and/or shouldn't be rolled on the forest table, it doesn't happen. The encounter is not following them.

How big of an area are we talking about? Is it like a wilderness hex? Or more specific than that?

I mean... how can you predict with that level of accuracy where the PCs will actually physically be in that forest? How do you know to place the trolls on that exact spot?

Or is it more a case of the PCs are in this big area and so are the trolls, so they will encounter one another?

I had to expand upon it way upthread since just having cook in kitchen didn't give enough detail. So for my posts, coming from my playstyle, I established more in order for the explanations of how and why I do things to make more sense.

Okay, I somehow missed that. I suppose you made the situation such that the Fail Forward was more absurd.

Meanwhile, I have similarly fleshed out the scenario in a way that makes it work. Weird.

We on this side aren't saying that what you guys do is without merit.

No, just nonsensical and the like!

Also, @Hussar didn't say your play style was without merit. He said your argument was without merit.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What I personally find frustrating is that many people approach from the perspective of there being this like platonic form of roleplaying, a golden structure of play, even if just a golden structure for them. And they basically have no respect for play that does not meet their standard or really any concern for accuracy when discussing other methods of play. The only concern seems to be is this for me and/or does this conform to my golden standard.

Like how narrative game has come to mean anything besides play is not structured fundamentally like AD&D. Games have basically nothing in common except not being structured according to the golden standard get treated like they are fundamentally the same thing. Crucial details about how they work, how they are structured, what their mechanics do get confused and attempts to clarify get met with I still don't like that as if whether you like or not is the only thing that matters. Not the actual details of how stuff works or the communication costs that combining these very distinct things together as one have on people who play these games.

Treating fundamental differences between games like Hillfolk, Chronicles of Darkness and Apocalypse World as essentially rounding errors is deeply frustrating because they play nothing like one another and have GM roles as distinctive from one another as they are from AD&D. This is especially frustrating for me when it comes to stuff like Vampire - The Requiem which at core is pretty damn simulation-oriented but gets cast as Narrative because the things it simulates are as psychological as physical.

I think that for a lot of people, "I don't like that" is the most important consideration. We are talking about a leisure activity here.

 

[FrogReaver]

Again, both cooks and bears exist in their respective environments and in both cases the process of adjudicating their appearance is the rolling of dice. It feels like to me that a lot of people have so internalized the specific process of D&D that they've given it all these special properties and status that objectively just aren't there! I'm not criticizing anyone for their taste in games, but I agree with the OP that running into this can get a bit wearing.

Alternatively why can’t those with a narrativist preference just be ex-d&d gamers whose preferences never aligned much with d&d who finally found a game that does and they mistake their like for it as the narrativst methodologies possessing special properties and status that just isn’t there?

 

[AlViking]

Lets use that example of the party trying to break into a kitchen (forget the rest of the backstory, as I have not been following every single post). Spying through the kitchen window they spot a cat that's watching them intently. The cat is the only other living creature in the kitchen.
The GM calls for a lockpicking roll and the result lands in the Success with Complication category and so narrates that the rogue successfully unlocks the door, but the sound of the lockpicking made the cat bolt abruptly out of the kitchen knocking over a teaspoon into the sink and causing some commotion.
Maybe someone who saw the cat bolt out of the kitchen goes to investigate but the PCs have some moments to prep as they hear the footsteps of the approaching person. i .e. (they can close the door without entering the kitchen and wait for the person to leave hopefully, they can hide in the pantry or they can prepare an ambush etc)

What essentially I'm doing above is introducing fiction (the existence of a cat) beforehand which fiction may allow for Fail Forward to generate more content (the approaching person).
I believe that may be acceptable to a more Trad-style player?

The presence of the cat was established before the attempt to open the lock, so sure. I'm even okay with the cat being there if the GM has notes on it before the attempt is made, or rolling a dice to see if the cat happens to be in the kitchen at the time of the break-in. But the cat should be there or not when I open the door when I was successful as well, our characters may have had a chance to handle it differently.

What I don't want is a complication after every single failed check. It would feel artificial to me.

 

[AlViking]

No. The scenario was, the cook screamed because they noticed the PC breaking in due to their clumsy attempts at lockpicking. If the attempt had worked correctly, the cook wouldn't have noticed them enter it and wouldn't have screamed.

Nope. The cook was added because of the failed check.

 

[Faolyn]

Let’s expand on that. Could the players have done anything to validate that the house had no one awake in it before?

What would be the risks for them involved in doing so?

This, of course, heavily depends on the game and what sort of abilities the PCs have, but let's say that through whatever those abilities are, they're positive that nobody is awake in that house. So now there are two options:

Option A is to have them just break in, no roll necessary.

Option B is to have them roll, because there are outside forces--a neighbor's dog, an alarm spell--that could still affect things.

It really depends on how interesting it is, whether the roll would move things along or cause things to stop.