Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bastoche" data-source="post: 4034410" data-attributes="member: 306">I think it boils down to definition hell like someone mentionned. I strongly think that what you refer to RC is nar play. You just coin it a sim name and I fail to see why. Yes theme can be explored in a sim game but unlike nar play, it is not the point. As soon as you make it the point, you slip into nar territory.All the supplementary conditions you add to sim play to make it adress a theme/premise make it nar no matter if the rules system you actually use isn't.In other words, yes you can take a sim game (like gurps) and add a layer of theme adressing via players agreement but you've just added a &quot;house rule&quot; to make theme happen which boils down to layering a nar part (via house ruling) into the game.&quot;Adressing theme in play&quot; is THE definition of nar play. (a)&quot;Exploring the system/characters/setting&quot; is THE definition of sim play. (b)You can then imagine a game 100% (a) which would be 100% nar and a game 100% (b) which would be 100% sim. You suggest going from (b) toward (a) and I assume you have more than 50% (b) and the rest (a) and you want to still call it sim. You can certainly continuously go from (a) to (b) and vice versa. I think our disagreement lay on what level of mix you stop to call a game (b) and call it (a) or vice versa. IMO, a 20% (a) 80% (b) I call that a sim-nar game. It IS sim and it IS nar. What I'm saying is that a game that is not 100% (b) cannot be simply described as being a sim game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bastoche, post: 4034410, member: 306"] I think it boils down to definition hell like someone mentionned. I strongly think that what you refer to RC is nar play. You just coin it a sim name and I fail to see why. Yes theme can be explored in a sim game but unlike nar play, it is not the point. As soon as you [i]make[/i] it the point, you slip into nar territory. All the supplementary conditions you add to sim play to make it adress a theme/premise make it nar no matter if the [i]rules system[/i] you actually use isn't. In other words, yes you can take a sim game (like gurps) and add a layer of theme adressing via players agreement but you've just added a "house rule" to make theme happen which boils down to layering a nar part (via house ruling) into the game. "Adressing theme in play" is THE definition of nar play. (a) "Exploring the system/characters/setting" is THE definition of sim play. (b) You can then imagine a game 100% (a) which would be 100% nar and a game 100% (b) which would be 100% sim. You suggest going from (b) toward (a) and I assume you have more than 50% (b) and the rest (a) and you want to still call it sim. You can certainly continuously go from (a) to (b) and vice versa. I think our disagreement lay on what level of mix you stop to call a game (b) and call it (a) or vice versa. IMO, a 20% (a) 80% (b) I call that a sim-nar game. It IS sim and it IS nar. What I'm saying is that a game that is not 100% (b) cannot be simply described as being a sim game. [/QUOTE]

Verification