Simulationism vs. Gamism Deathmatch: There can be only one!

[Zamkaizer]

I heard the match was a draw--Gamism got bored and left while Simulationism was referencing the implications of horizontal wound, made by a iron axe swung with exactly 207.53 kg of force that impacted 2.3 mm above the right hip. Impatient bastard didn't even stick around to find out the composition and reproduction rate of the resulting microbial infection.

 

[marune]

I heard the match was a draw--Gamism got bored and left while Simulationism was referencing the implications of horizontal wound, made by a iron axe swung with exactly 207.53 kg of force that impacted 2.3 mm above the right hip. Impatient bastard didn't even stick around to find out the composition and reproduction rate of the resulting microbial infection.

It's quite funny, but again it reduces Simulationism too much.

Let's create a Sim game that has nothing to do with such kind of details :

The world of this game is : a chessboard with sentient pieces.

The rules of chess apply in this world. (excluding restrictions like, a touched piece must be moved, etc.)

When a king is beaten, the world is destroyed to be reborn again (the pieces believe that it is done by the Great Kasparov, their god).

The players play the piece (divide the 32 pieces between the players), the GM is only there as a referee.

Players are encouraged to "roleplay" their pieces according to their classical comic personification (King fearing his Queen, stubborn rooks, whites are LG, blacks are LE).

Finally, the movement decisions must be done "in-character" : pawns shut-up, Bishops are King's counsellors, and Queen has veto.

That is a simple Simulationist RPG that has nothing to do with tons of rules dealing with the complexity of a world like ours.

Throw in there a player with a "gamist" mindset and you are good for trouble (Casting is powergaming, Promotion to a Queen ? You damn munchkin!)

To come later : the gamist and the narrativist versions.

 

[Li Shenron]

Er, well, gamism won. It had more hit points, and action points. Sorry. There's just nothing we could do.

But it doesn't have Rule 0!!!

Hence, I Rule-0 that my favourite way of running the game wins

 

[Kwalish Kid]

Simulationism lost because the Deathmatch did not simulate the physics of combat accurately.

No, Simulationism lost because the deathmatch rules it was using did simulate the physics of combat accurately. Gamism was using a more fun version of the rules and thus got away relatively unharmed.

 

[Celebrim]

Simulationism lost because it was tricked into a one on one death match - which automatically rigged the fight in Gamism's favor.

Simulationism should have just gone to war, where it's more realistic population demographics would have allowed it to win through shear overwhelming numbers. I mean, when's the last time you saw a gamist map with a village every few miles? No, it's all 'points of light' and huge unoccupied swaths of land with nothing but the occasional ogre or troll.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

But it doesn't have Rule 0!!!

Hence, I Rule-0 that my favourite way of running the game wins

Wait - Rule Zero is simulationist?

 

[Ingolf]

It's ok.
The GNS Theory should always be discussed in humor threads.

And, preferably, only in humor threads . . .

 

[Dausuul]

Simulationism lost because it was tricked into a one on one death match - which automatically rigged the fight in Gamism's favor.

Simulationism should have just gone to war, where it's more realistic population demographics would have allowed it to win through shear overwhelming numbers. I mean, when's the last time you saw a gamist map with a village every few miles? No, it's all 'points of light' and huge unoccupied swaths of land with nothing but the occasional ogre or troll.

Simulationism decided to stick with the one-on-one fight because to do otherwise would have risked bringing Narrativism in, and Narrativism always has gigantic armies of evil mooks at its disposal which don't have to worry about things like logistics and supply lines. In a one-on-one fight, Simulationism could at least rely on Gamism's sense of fairness to give both sides a fighting chance.

 

[DandD]

I kick you in the nuts, Hitler. I kick you in the nuts, Satan. And I kick you in the nuts, Simulationism.

As a minion of gamism, my special ability is to kick on those who are already on the ground and defeated...

 

[essenbee]

Simulationism lost because it was tricked into a one on one death match - which automatically rigged the fight in Gamism's favor.

Simulationism should have just gone to war, where it's more realistic population demographics would have allowed it to win through shear overwhelming numbers...

But the simulationist army turned out to be just a bunch of minions and got slaughtered to a man...