Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8628367" data-attributes="member: 5142">I agree, so I can acknowlege that you made a salient point about &quot;fairness&quot; here. However, one would hopefully imagine that these challenges can be overcome in some capacity or another by the party. Otherwise it's just the GM playing rope-a-dope with the other players.There tends to be more openness to this among <a href="https://retiredadventurer.blogspot.com/2021/04/six-cultures-of-play.html" target="_blank">Neo-Traditional Play</a>. However, such games support this to differing degrees. Fate, for example, is honestly fairly High Concept Simulationist / Neo-Trad even though it gets labeled as a &quot;story game&quot; or &quot;gamist&quot; by its detractors.* But it has mechanical support for players to introduce backstory or for the GM to invite the players to do so as a natural part of play.* I suspect that the source has to do a lot with how some people have differing expectations of what &quot;simulationism&quot; entails particularly in regards to immersion. Some people with simulationist preferences who advocate &quot;Hardline Actor Stance,&quot; for example, regard anything that risks taking them out of their character immersion or dispelling the illusion as &quot;(meta-)gamist&quot; and &quot;not roleplaying.&quot; So when they see things like fate points, invokes/compels, etc. in Fate that they claim break their personal sense of immersion, then Fate fails the purity test for what &quot;simulationism&quot; is supposed to be (for them).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 8628367, member: 5142"] I agree, so I can acknowlege that you made a salient point about "fairness" here. However, one would hopefully imagine that these challenges can be overcome in some capacity or another by the party. Otherwise it's just the GM playing rope-a-dope with the other players. There tends to be more openness to this among [URL='https://retiredadventurer.blogspot.com/2021/04/six-cultures-of-play.html']Neo-Traditional Play[/URL]. However, such games support this to differing degrees. Fate, for example, is honestly fairly High Concept Simulationist / Neo-Trad even though it gets labeled as a "story game" or "gamist" by its detractors.* But it has mechanical support for players to introduce backstory or for the GM to invite the players to do so as a natural part of play. * I suspect that the source has to do a lot with how some people have differing expectations of what "simulationism" entails particularly in regards to immersion. Some people with simulationist preferences who advocate "Hardline Actor Stance," for example, regard anything that risks taking them out of their character immersion or dispelling the illusion as "(meta-)gamist" and "not roleplaying." So when they see things like fate points, invokes/compels, etc. in Fate that they claim break their personal sense of immersion, then Fate fails the purity test for what "simulationism" is supposed to be (for them). [/QUOTE]

Verification