Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="apoptosis" data-source="post: 4017551" data-attributes="member: 3226">That would be narrativist based games. Definitions vary a lot. I usually define them as having rules that help the group create a story in a cooperative manner.  Other definitions are more abstract (about exploring a certain theme etc.).A nice example of this is the characters who want to break into a house to break into a safe to steal something.In simulationist perspective whether there is something cool in the safe is based off of some logic based on the NPC. Success could mean finding something cool or finding nothing. Failure could just mean they dont successfully find the safe or break into the house.In narrativist perspective if they succeed they DO find something interesting and cool. If they fail something bad happens. Nothing happening is not a result.The DM might have to change the consistency of the world (it might have been that he didnt envision the NPC having anythign intersesting...that is ok in a simulaitonist approach, but that is not ok in a narrativist approach).Though this is kind of mixing up simulationist/narrative vs task/conflict resolution but it does help think of what the game is trying to do.Another approach is somethign like bonus dice. In a simulationst game if you sneak past the guard to assasinate the king, a great roll to sneak past the guard doesn't help you assasinate the king it just helps you get undetected past the guard.In a more narrativist approach, a great roll on sneaking past the guard could roll over into bonus dice to help assasinate the king.In reality there is no reason for success on one of those challenges should help you with the other, it lacks a certain consistency (probably not the correct word); you could try and expalin it in a ad-hoc manner. In the other perspective, you actually dont care that they two are not realistically connected it is an abstraction for the game.</blockquote>

Verification