The Death of Simulation

[marune]

I wonder if some people are roughly equating narrativist with plot-based railroading; that the outcome is pre-determined by the DM (or the players, for that matter) before the encounter/adventure/entire campaign even takes place.

You still can have nar play even if you start with a set outcome known by both the GM and the players (some poster pointed out a Sorcerer's supplement that does it).

All you need is a premise that is not already answered by this outcome.

Of course, that's not the same as "plot-base railroading".

I'll try an example, don't worry to destroy if needed :

Introduce the players to the Ravenloft setting in this way : You have been brought to the dark, mysterious, inescapable, dread land of Ravenloft through the mists. In less than a year, you will all have been either killed by a horde of zombies, gone insane, or worse turned into an undead yourself. How will you spend the time you have left ?

When a player decide that he as done what must be done to give his answer, he can narrates how it ended for his character.

 

[LostSoul]

It seems to me then it's the *motive* then rather than the actions that really determine where it all falls. I suppose that's why various play styles could exist in harmony. A power gamer would get along with a sim person if the sim person wanted to a play a crafty, powerful, and inventive fighter type that was always looking for the most effective kill. And if the narr person could somehow explore this as a theme, then he basically be doing the same thing that the other three were doing.

I think that's why they can't exist in harmony. One of the most powerful rewards in this little hobby of ours is the social one; positive reinforcement from other players validating your choices (even if it's in a "man, you really hosed me there, nice work" way). When the people that you're playing with don't even notice the really cool thing you just did, I don't think it works so well.

I shouldn't say that it can't work, just that I don't think it works as well. When everyone has the same agenda, and you're all "grooving" on each other's choices, it's awesome.

 

[LostSoul]

I wonder if some people are roughly equating narrativist with plot-based railroading; that the outcome is pre-determined by the DM (or the players, for that matter) before the encounter/adventure/entire campaign even takes place.

I think that's probably because "narrativism" is a poor choice of words. "Thematic" sounds better to me.

edit: A poor choice by those who came up with the term.

 

[pemerton]

I didn't say it's impossible to have a vanilla narrativist agenda in D&D 4E, I only rejected the "tell me how you fight, I'm gonna tell you who you are" premise.

OK, sorry for the mis-attribution and thanks for the reply.

 

[pemerton]

Batoche, interesting posts. I agree especially about the "problem player" threads and GNS incompatability.

 

[marune]

Batoche, interesting posts. I agree especially about the "problem player" threads and GNS incompatability.

Bastoche was one of my D&D player and he brutally introduced me to RPG theory some time ago, I asked him to come play with us on this thread

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Simulation has been eliminated as a design goal in 4e.

This is a fact.

D&D 4e is not ideally suited to sandbox play or rules-emergent world building.

Eh. Let me get my hands on the actual rules, and then I'll see what I can do with them and Urbis.

I see no need for unwarranted pessimism as long as the final version of the rules is not yet available.

 

[Victim]

Sim isn't by necessity about emulating real life; it can include what if scenarios and genre conventions (although realistic is probably the most common goal). You could still have HP and such; it's just that those would be built into the internal logic of the world.

 

[pemerton]

I see no need for unwarranted pessimism as long as the final version of the rules is not yet available.

Who said anything about pessimism?!

 

[Bastoche]

I wonder if some people are roughly equating narrativist with plot-based railroading; that the outcome is pre-determined by the DM (or the players, for that matter) before the encounter/adventure/entire campaign even takes place.

Lanefan

The point in nar play is not to determine *what* happens but rather *how* it happens and more importantly at what cost. It may be with a plot agreed upon beforehand (heroquest IIRC 3e) or it could be a bit more "open-ended" like in burning wheel. In the later, the players give "hints" to the GM but he pretty much take the lead. However, he may not forsee to far ahead where the campaing is heading and he would be ill-advised to railraod his players.

To echo LostSoul's question about the term, I guess it comes from the idea to give more "control" to the PC over the imagined universe. At least all the control of his PC.