Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Death of Simulation
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="loseth" data-source="post: 4020436" data-attributes="member: 54535"><p>I agree (as I stated in my two earlier posts).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, I agree. I just think that the number of actual instances of mutual exclusivity is much lower than the perceived number of instances, and also that degree of mutual exclusivity is also often perceived as being higher than it really is (this is especially evident in the inappropriate use of the naval 'ship design triangle' to conceptualise GNS).</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is another good example of a perceived mismatch that isn't really three. To accurately simulate the great effect that experience has on one's profession performance, it is often difficult to individually quantify all the factors that improve one's performance. In fact, many of these factors are quite amorphous or not fully understood even by experts and are thus inherently resistant to quantification in the first place. You'll often get a more accurate simulation of a person’s professional abilities by just focussing on a few important (and easily measurable) factors and assigning a level to account for the performance in general.</p><p></p><p>D&D does this, with the profession in question being 'adventurer.' Now, in D&D terms, being an adventurer mostly means being someone who excels at exploring the places where enemies are present, interacting with people to find such enemies and then killing the enemies in combat. So, the most logical way of simulating the way experience causes an increase in one's overall ability as a D&D-style adventurer? Use a system based on combat experience (since being a D&D adventurer is mostly about combat), with some room for including relevant non-combat elements (like achieving important adventuring goals) in the mix. In other words, use the D&D XP/level system. </p><p></p><p>Could more be done to marry-up the excellent simulationist and gamist potential of the level/XP system? Definitely. One option that I have used many times myself, for example, is to reduce the skill list to only the most important adventuring skills, so that it's logical that all adventurers should get better at them (thanks to the SWSE half-level bonus) as they become more experienced adventurers. The rest of one’s ‘skills/abilities’ can then be handled by a much simpler system that won’t interfere with the main (combat-oriented) game mechanics, but still provides the verisimilitude of fully-fleshed-out characters. I'm sure there are many other things that could also be done to make the XP/level system more consistent and fit better with most people's sense of verisimilitude, but the fact that more needs to be done doesn't change the excellent potential that's there. </p><p></p><p>However, if a designer adopts the mistaken attitude that 'XP is a gamist concept, dammit, so trying to make it work in terms of immersion and setting/story consistency must be badwrongdesign,' then he or she will needlessly end up with a design that is suboptimal.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Adopting a policy of making the game numbers work as the first priority and then modifying game elements, on an ad-hoc basis, to be more successful at simluation whenever the need arises is a clear design intent and, IMHO, one that is likely to produce a good game.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="loseth, post: 4020436, member: 54535"] I agree (as I stated in my two earlier posts). Again, I agree. I just think that the number of actual instances of mutual exclusivity is much lower than the perceived number of instances, and also that degree of mutual exclusivity is also often perceived as being higher than it really is (this is especially evident in the inappropriate use of the naval 'ship design triangle' to conceptualise GNS). This is another good example of a perceived mismatch that isn't really three. To accurately simulate the great effect that experience has on one's profession performance, it is often difficult to individually quantify all the factors that improve one's performance. In fact, many of these factors are quite amorphous or not fully understood even by experts and are thus inherently resistant to quantification in the first place. You'll often get a more accurate simulation of a person’s professional abilities by just focussing on a few important (and easily measurable) factors and assigning a level to account for the performance in general. D&D does this, with the profession in question being 'adventurer.' Now, in D&D terms, being an adventurer mostly means being someone who excels at exploring the places where enemies are present, interacting with people to find such enemies and then killing the enemies in combat. So, the most logical way of simulating the way experience causes an increase in one's overall ability as a D&D-style adventurer? Use a system based on combat experience (since being a D&D adventurer is mostly about combat), with some room for including relevant non-combat elements (like achieving important adventuring goals) in the mix. In other words, use the D&D XP/level system. Could more be done to marry-up the excellent simulationist and gamist potential of the level/XP system? Definitely. One option that I have used many times myself, for example, is to reduce the skill list to only the most important adventuring skills, so that it's logical that all adventurers should get better at them (thanks to the SWSE half-level bonus) as they become more experienced adventurers. The rest of one’s ‘skills/abilities’ can then be handled by a much simpler system that won’t interfere with the main (combat-oriented) game mechanics, but still provides the verisimilitude of fully-fleshed-out characters. I'm sure there are many other things that could also be done to make the XP/level system more consistent and fit better with most people's sense of verisimilitude, but the fact that more needs to be done doesn't change the excellent potential that's there. However, if a designer adopts the mistaken attitude that 'XP is a gamist concept, dammit, so trying to make it work in terms of immersion and setting/story consistency must be badwrongdesign,' then he or she will needlessly end up with a design that is suboptimal. Adopting a policy of making the game numbers work as the first priority and then modifying game elements, on an ad-hoc basis, to be more successful at simluation whenever the need arises is a clear design intent and, IMHO, one that is likely to produce a good game. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Death of Simulation
Top