Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Craw Hammerfist" data-source="post: 4021585" data-attributes="member: 49470">Why, thank you.&nbsp; That is the most cogent explanation for the sim-gamist issue I have heard.&nbsp; It does, however, raise a problem with point of view.&nbsp; You are assuming that a fireball would catch things on fire.&nbsp; If all of the players have that same assumption, then you can go forward in the sim experience.&nbsp; I don't assume a fireball would do more than scorch the walls.&nbsp; I worked in the oil field years ago and saw a handfull of small explosions.&nbsp; Those that were natural gas related typically did not catch things on fire.&nbsp; The fire was hot, but it was over fast.&nbsp; Most of the damage was concussive.&nbsp; An exploding gasoline can catches all kinds of things on fire, however because it throws fuel all over.&nbsp; What if fireball is more akin to the former?&nbsp; Does that mean 1e was gamist for me, but 3e is a sim?&nbsp; Granting that the fireball is just a single example, I'm sure that there are any number of instances where the natural consequences of a spell or action do not get tracked in D&amp;D.&nbsp; However, for any given scenario, &quot;what is happening in my head&quot; is different, to varying degrees, from &quot;what is happening in your head.&quot;&nbsp; How does this get rectified in a sim based game? (or is that the game itself?)&nbsp; In D&amp;D, the rule switched.&nbsp; Whereas you were more comfortable with the rule as enabling a sim game in 1e, it feels more internally consistent to me in 3e.&nbsp; Is simulationism v gamism a purely subjective viewpoint?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Craw Hammerfist, post: 4021585, member: 49470"] Why, thank you. That is the most cogent explanation for the sim-gamist issue I have heard. It does, however, raise a problem with point of view. You are assuming that a fireball would catch things on fire. If all of the players have that same assumption, then you can go forward in the sim experience. I don't assume a fireball would do more than scorch the walls. I worked in the oil field years ago and saw a handfull of small explosions. Those that were natural gas related typically did not catch things on fire. The fire was hot, but it was over fast. Most of the damage was concussive. An exploding gasoline can catches all kinds of things on fire, however because it throws fuel all over. What if fireball is more akin to the former? Does that mean 1e was gamist for me, but 3e is a sim? Granting that the fireball is just a single example, I'm sure that there are any number of instances where the natural consequences of a spell or action do not get tracked in D&D. However, for any given scenario, "what is happening in my head" is different, to varying degrees, from "what is happening in your head." How does this get rectified in a sim based game? (or is that the game itself?) In D&D, the rule switched. Whereas you were more comfortable with the rule as enabling a sim game in 1e, it feels more internally consistent to me in 3e. Is simulationism v gamism a purely subjective viewpoint? [/QUOTE]

Verification