Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nom" data-source="post: 4104103" data-attributes="member: 56980">Here's the key disconnect:If the game mechanics are a &quot;simulation&quot;, then every event that happens in the game mechanics has a specific analogue in the game world.&nbsp; There's aggregation, certainly (the &quot;critical hit&quot; might be to the eye or to the gut), but the point is still a 1:1 correspondence between the mechanic and an instance of some class of in-game event.However, that's but one way of viewing things.&nbsp; It's entirely possible to tell two parallel stories of the events without one being an analogue of the other.&nbsp; Under this model, specific &quot;narrative&quot; events don't have to correspond with specific &quot;game mechanic&quot; events.&nbsp; Narrative events may occur that do not feature in the game model, and game model events occur that do not feature in the narrative.Game model, a &quot;healing surge&quot; is a mechanic that allows a character to draw down on his long-term hit point reserve into the current battle.&nbsp; But that doesn't mean that either concept needs to be represented in the narrative.&nbsp; Narratively, the character simply &quot;isn't defeated yet&quot;.&nbsp; It's completely legitimate to say that &quot;Tom huddled defensively for a moment while planning his next move&quot;; the narrative doesn't need to know that Tom used his &quot;second wind&quot; action to gain a defensive boost and simultaneously upped his current hit point total.&nbsp; It also doesn't care that he actually stayed huddled for two rounds, only 1 of which used a &quot;second wind&quot; while the other used some other defensive mechanic.It's quite acceptable for the narrative and the game mechanics to hide details from each other: &quot;don't you worry about that&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nom, post: 4104103, member: 56980"] Here's the key disconnect: If the game mechanics are a "simulation", then every event that happens in the game mechanics has a [u]specific[/u] analogue in the game world. There's aggregation, certainly (the "critical hit" might be to the eye or to the gut), but the point is still a 1:1 correspondence between the mechanic and an instance of some class of in-game event. However, that's but one way of viewing things. It's entirely possible to tell two [u]parallel[/u] stories of the events without one being an analogue of the other. Under this model, specific "narrative" events don't have to correspond with specific "game mechanic" events. Narrative events may occur that do not feature in the game model, and game model events occur that do not feature in the narrative. Game model, a "healing surge" is a mechanic that allows a character to draw down on his long-term hit point reserve into the current battle. But that doesn't mean that either concept needs to be represented in the narrative. Narratively, the character simply "isn't defeated yet". It's completely legitimate to say that "Tom huddled defensively for a moment while planning his next move"; the narrative doesn't need to know that Tom used his "second wind" action to gain a defensive boost and simultaneously upped his current hit point total. It also doesn't care that he actually stayed huddled for two rounds, only 1 of which used a "second wind" while the other used some other defensive mechanic. It's quite acceptable for the narrative and the game mechanics to hide details from each other: "don't you worry about that". [/QUOTE]

Verification