Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 9712854" data-attributes="member: 22779">Absolutely yes.  Because none of that was an actual example.You absolutely are introducing things into the fiction.  WTF do you think inventing a narration means?  How do you narrate the cause of the result without introducing anything into the fiction?  That's not rhetorical.  That's an honest question.  If the system is not providing any information about how a result occurred, how do you, as GM narrate those results without introducing anything into the fiction?  I'm so tired of all this overly pedantic, ridiculous posturing.  You're accepting that the GM can narrate the cause of results and clalming that this makes the system simulationist.  It's ludicrous.  That's just free form play.  That's not simulationist because you can do this in EVERY SINGLE RPG.  Well, no, that's not true actually.  You cannot actually do this in actual simulationist RPG's because the system will define, at least in some small part, how a result was achieved.  Therefore the DM is actually constrained by the information the system itself is providing.  That's what makes the system simulationist.  "Make naughty word up" is not simulationism.</blockquote>