Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6590912" data-attributes="member: 82106">I don't think 'Simulationist' IS an agenda, or at least its some sort of esoteric 'unicorn' agenda that doesn't exist in the real world. That's why I like the label 'Naturalist' (maybe there's a better one than that even). It connotes the striving to have a 'naturalistic' process. Its not necessarily or even predominantly about simulation, it need not in any sense attempt to simulate any extant world at all, or it could simply follow on from some literary source, etc. [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION] really has expounded it pretty well in its purest form. The game world simply exists. It is composed entirely of exactly whatever the GM has placed into it, and any additions are intended to be purely logical extrapolations therefrom. Adjudication of character actions is intended to be purely causal and INTERNAL in nature, nothing outside the narrative reality is supposed to factor in, and the narrative is supposed to evolve purely according to mechanical rules supplemented by some sort of 'naturalistic judgment' of a notional unbiased participant. The thing that has really always alluded me, except in terms of purely 'skilled play' of a Gygaxian sort, is what exactly the result is supposed to be?</blockquote>