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

[Lanefan]

But that could all be changed very simply if you wanted. You could just say “on this world, Drow are not all evil… they are like any other racial group and run the gamut alignment-wise”. Easy.

I could, and to some extent have, done just this with Drow in the past; but that doesn't change the surface-folk's perception of them, and it's that perception - aided by eons of surface-Elf propaganda - that's gonna cause kill-on-sight reactions.

And as Demons and Devils are always and without exception Evil, anything claiming itself to be a part-Demon isn't likely to get a friendly reaction from decent folk.

What I did with Drow specifically for my current setting is that unknown to anyone on the surface they've become almost extinct, discovery of which served as a useful, if minor, plot sidebar a few times.

That sounds like about 10 minutes worth of work.

In 5e, maybe. In my system, hells no.

 

[Lanefan]

... But I see no reason for @Lanefan to sacrifice their artistic vision ...

"Artistic vision" - heh, now that's charitable!

I mean, if you remove the fiendish association from the tieflings, what's even the point?

Ditto removing the draconic assiciation from dragonborn, which would leave you with a glorified lizardfolk.

 

[pemerton]

In my view I have yet to come across an RPG not able to provide me a simulationist experience per my understanding of @clearstream 's description. If that is the defining criteria for "simumationistic", then yes I would consider all RPGs simulationistic.

So just to be clear: you are allowing that the play of Cortex+ Fantasy (hacked from MHRP), where the player has their PC read the strange runes and thus identify a way out of the dungeon, can be simulationist RPGing?

 

[pemerton]

That would indeed be simulationistic, if you used these things to derive odds of things related to them but often you don't.

I don't understand what this means.

That makes two of us then, given that what I describe happens often in your game based on the play reports you've provided!

I've never posted anything about a wyvern attacking; nor about an unrelated event occurring on a failed test.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Ideally for whom? Not for me. I love world building as a GM, and I don't particularly feel I need help with it, but as player I like exploring what someone else has created. I am not looking for helping the GM to do their job. Again, other approaches are perfectly valid, but not everyone needs to do collaborative world building.

Ideally for everyone. If you sketch out your world and before you complete it, you share some details with the players and solicit any input they may have... if they have none, then it's a non-issue. If they do... if they have preferences, then you're more likely to be able to accommodate them in some manner.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with your preferences. But what I'm describing shouldn't impact those, should it? Unless you think simply asking for input from players is some kind of burden, I suppose.

Deciding to depict the drow in certain way, be it inspired by some old lore or not is an artistic choice. In this case not one I would make, but we all are different as creators, which is marvellous.

It may be an artistic choice. But the nature of the comment was not about that. It was about how they would be attacked on sight by the other PCs.

Unless @Lanefan comments on the factors that went into making this artistic choice, I cannot judge. I can only go by what he said... which was to describe the issue with other PCs attacking drow on sight.

Yes, but the outcast trope seems a bit lacklustre without the actual fiendish bit.

I don't disagree, but I also don't think you need to be literally part demon for the outcast trope to resonate. I mean... it's just a metaphor.

 

[pemerton]

I don’t think Burning Wheel is a great example because to my recollection the only mechanic I’ve seen listed problematic in it is using circles to fix the location of things like Evards Black Tower as here and now. That was a Burning Wheel example, right?

I don’t think it’s worth hashing out the likely irreconcilable differences of opinion around ‘PCs memory’ to engage in this topic when we have examples like the runes from Torchbearer 2e that don’t rely on remembering.

You jump around between different games too much to make your points to those not intimately familiar with all the ones you cite. IMO.

Multiple posters in this thread have pointed to examples of play from Burning Wheel as not being simulationist. You appear to do so here, with your reference to Circles tests and Wises tests.

But by @Enrahim's and @clearstream's accounts in this thread, those episodes of play are simulationist because (i) they foster immersion and (ii) they foster understanding and appreciation of the subject matter of the shared fiction.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I could, and to some extent have, done just this with Drow in the past; but that doesn't change the surface-folk's perception of them, and it's that perception - aided by eons of surface-Elf propaganda - that's gonna cause kill-on-sight reactions.

And as Demons and Devils are always and without exception Evil, anything claiming itself to be a part-Demon isn't likely to get a friendly reaction from decent folk.

What I did with Drow specifically for my current setting is that unknown to anyone on the surface they've become almost extinct, discovery of which served as a useful, if minor, plot sidebar a few times.

But... you're in charge of the surface folks' reactions. I don't quite understand. They don't HAVE TO react that way if you don't want them to.

In 5e, maybe. In my system, hells no.

I wasn't even thinking about a system. What is it about system that makes it so complex?

 

[pemerton]

You jump around between different games too much to make your points to those not intimately familiar with all the ones you cite. IMO.

In the same way that the classification of animals requires attending to more than one or two species, so it seems to me that the classification of RPGs requires attending to more than just one or two approaches to play.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't understand what this means.

That seems unlikely.

I've never posted anything about a wyvern attacking; nor about an unrelated event occurring on a failed test.

Not a wyvern perhaps. But other things. IIRC the rune thing was not Burning Wheel, but do you think it could work roughly similarly in BW?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Multiple posters in this thread have pointed to examples of play from Burning Wheel as not being simulationist. You appear to do so here, with your reference to Circles tests and Wises tests.

But by @Enrahim's and @clearstream's accounts in this thread, those episodes of play are simulationist because (i) they foster immersion and (ii) they foster understanding and appreciation of the subject matter of the shared fiction.

Yeah, I wouldn't call that simulation. By that metric almost anything can be simulation. Nor would I link immersion and simulation in such a direct way. Simulations might feel immersive to some people, but whether they do or don't has no bearing on their status as a simulation.