Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
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="clearstream" data-source="post: 9709447" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>Knowing why our car gets 22 km to the liter isn't identical to "simulationist" experiences that may be sought such as immersion. I don't know why my car gets the distance it does to the liter, but that doesn't prevent me from being immersed as myself in the real world.</p><p></p><p>Accuracy of simulation is proportional to cost, and in TTRPGs simulative work must be done at prices that can be paid at the table, including the price of interpreting and enacting the game text. That text itself must first be designed and playtested at prices that can be paid by designers. You wrote that the "absence of simulationist mechanics in one aspect of the game does not mean that the game lacks any simulationist mechanics". Limits to what can be afforded make absences inevitable, and that applies too, to the depth with which each aspect is treated.</p><p></p><p>Yet if that's all true, then the presence of simulative weather mechanics should make D&D count as "simulationist" <em>even if</em> other aspects of the game aren't covered. Thus it seems that you have some additional principle in mind that hasn't been articulated. Knowing the temperature, precipitation and wind strength seem like "basic elements that inform the narrative" to me.</p><p></p><p>I've queried a few times where you see great differences between texts, and answers have anchored on "a Dodge/Parry roll in combat". [USER=7050925]@definiteFreakyFishGuy[/USER] listed information that D&D combat mechanics provides. Omitted from their list was further information that D&D provides, such as the weapons used, types of harm, positioning and movement of combatants, inflicted conditions... and of course, <strong>dodging</strong> by any character and <strong>parrying</strong> by duelists. Those are all "basic elements that inform the narrative"... but again it seems of the wrong sort although no explanation has been given why.</p><p></p><p>[USER=7050925]@definiteFreakyFishGuy[/USER] identified the problem I noted with the argument from extension, which is that it begs the question i.e. fails to show <em>why</em> some games fit your internal definition of "simulationist" and not others. What's needed is to do more than wave toward dodge and parry in combat. D&D <em>has</em> dodge and parry. Cite <em>specific </em>mechanics and say what subjects and experiences they serve, showing that simulative work by someone at the table isn't necessitated at any point in their implementation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 9709447, member: 71699"] Knowing why our car gets 22 km to the liter isn't identical to "simulationist" experiences that may be sought such as immersion. I don't know why my car gets the distance it does to the liter, but that doesn't prevent me from being immersed as myself in the real world. Accuracy of simulation is proportional to cost, and in TTRPGs simulative work must be done at prices that can be paid at the table, including the price of interpreting and enacting the game text. That text itself must first be designed and playtested at prices that can be paid by designers. You wrote that the "absence of simulationist mechanics in one aspect of the game does not mean that the game lacks any simulationist mechanics". Limits to what can be afforded make absences inevitable, and that applies too, to the depth with which each aspect is treated. Yet if that's all true, then the presence of simulative weather mechanics should make D&D count as "simulationist" [I]even if[/I] other aspects of the game aren't covered. Thus it seems that you have some additional principle in mind that hasn't been articulated. Knowing the temperature, precipitation and wind strength seem like "basic elements that inform the narrative" to me. I've queried a few times where you see great differences between texts, and answers have anchored on "a Dodge/Parry roll in combat". [USER=7050925]@definiteFreakyFishGuy[/USER] listed information that D&D combat mechanics provides. Omitted from their list was further information that D&D provides, such as the weapons used, types of harm, positioning and movement of combatants, inflicted conditions... and of course, [B]dodging[/B] by any character and [B]parrying[/B] by duelists. Those are all "basic elements that inform the narrative"... but again it seems of the wrong sort although no explanation has been given why. [USER=7050925]@definiteFreakyFishGuy[/USER] identified the problem I noted with the argument from extension, which is that it begs the question i.e. fails to show [I]why[/I] some games fit your internal definition of "simulationist" and not others. What's needed is to do more than wave toward dodge and parry in combat. D&D [I]has[/I] dodge and parry. Cite [I]specific [/I]mechanics and say what subjects and experiences they serve, showing that simulative work by someone at the table isn't necessitated at any point in their implementation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
Top