D&D 4E Turning 4e into a simulationist game

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

If that works for you, fine.

For some of us, we require more explanation than that.

So, why does a Rider and a Horse survive a Fireball in your world? Possibly even reliably?

Or do you rather not have Fireballs (it's not like "classic" fantasy really uses a lot of them, it's really something that seems to have come out of the wargaming roots of D&D and RPGs...)?

---

My take on "simulation" with D&D 4 is in my blog

The problem of "simulationist" is always that you have to ask _what_ you want to simulate.
Wik, you start this thread as a "generic" simulationist system, but you actually go into specifics for a particular world - for example, you think that using torches and rations are important to simulate and that everburning tourches or everlasting rations are bad for that. But what if you wanted to simulate a fantasy world where these are common place?

Before attempting to change anything about a game system, make sure you know what you want to achieve and why.

Removing Everburning Torch is not done just for "simulation" - you're simulating something specific, a world where light is not always available and you need to spend some effort for it.

So, before you go into simulation, what do you want to simulate?
- Magic is hard to come by?
- Magic is hard to come by, but it is inherent in destined individuals (magical items growing with the player characters)
- Magic is hard to come by, but very powerful (e.g. No At-Will magical abilities, but rituals and daily powers are more powerful
- Combat is dangerous and risky, you get easily injured. (Change Healing Rules, create real injury effects, diseases or similar effects from injuries, and so on)
(...)

 

[Intense_Interest]

If that works for you, fine.

For some of us, we require more explanation than that.

No, you don't. Because every explanation of a magical world is by nature reduced to "A Wizard Did It", not because the so-called perfect simulation of a magical world hasn't been created, but because Intellectually-Derived Magic is the only thing that requires explanation for people not adapted to a magical world.

I can't fault you for not being Deductive, but the logic is there whether you want it to be for your rhetorical hammer to work. Dirt is Dirt. We don't explain dirt. Magic is Magic. Magic comes from Wizards (or Wizard-like, if you prefer), which explains why Magical things happen.

Or in Formal Logic:

There is a Magical world
Magic comes from Wizards
If something is explainable without magic, then it is not Magical
If a world is Magical, then it it will have things in that world that are not explainable without Magic
Wizards did "it" (Magic) in a Magical World.

 

[GnomeWorks]

So, why does a Rider and a Horse survive a Fireball in your world? Possibly even reliably?

Horses - or any other kind of mount - generally don't. They can, but this is generally a function of the caster rolling poorly for damage; in such a case, the fireball isn't very... fiery.

D&D does a pretty poor job of indicating a caster's ability with a particular spell; spell knowledge and ability is strictly binary, which - IMO - is a really bad way to go about it.

Or do you rather not have Fireballs (it's not like "classic" fantasy really uses a lot of them, it's really something that seems to have come out of the wargaming roots of D&D and RPGs...)?

I'm fine with fireballs. But they need to be sensible.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Me, I'll be playing the rules-as-written for 4E, using my imagination to create a believable world economy that Wants Adventurers and Needs Heroes.

If you've got no interest in making positive contributions to the thread, then don't throw rocks from the peanut gallery.

Thanks

 

[Plane Sailing]

Moved to 4e house rules

 

[Plane Sailing]

Wik, in the whole 'gamist vs simulationist' debate that kicked off when 4e was launched, one of the big talking points IIRC was the issue of 'powers'.

It seems to me that how powers work (especially martial encounter and daily powers) is likely to one of the biggest issues you may want to tackle in turning 4e into a 'simulationist' game.

Cheers

 

[Halivar]

The very term "simulationist" is ill-defined to the point of being meaningless.

First question that needs to be asked:
What are we simulating?

The answer ain't "the real world," so that's right out. What then?

IMO a "simulationist" game requires only consistent world physics (not even realistic physics... only consistent). To that degree, I would say that 4E (and all previous editions of D&D) are simulationist, and the folks who came up with the whole GSN paradigm (and, IIRC, do not play D&D) seem to agree.

Now, if you want verisimilitude (in its literary usage, meaning "not requiring suspension of disbelief"), then the first thing you need to do is get rid of hit points: everyone is a minion. You get hit, you die. Roll a save, and you're only horribly maimed instead.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

Wik, if you're genuinely looking to change the costs on items, I've done a pretty extensive amount of houseruling to change prices on a grain-based economy . It also includes common salaries by profession:
http://deismaar.pbwiki.com/f/CommonSalariesAndEquipment.doc

As for weapon and armor costs, I've got them here as well. Note that I use a graduating system of armor/weapons to eliminate the need for magic items:
http://deismaar.pbwiki.com/f/Armor_4E_Final.xls
http://deismaar.pbwiki.com/f/Weapons_4E_Final.xls

 

[Irda Ranger]

what sort of house rules/changes would be necessary to turn 4e into a Simulation-based game, as opposed to the "gamist" game it currently is?

None whatsoever.

"Simulationist" is an approach to gaming, not a rule-set. To play 4E as a simulationist you simply enforce the rules as written and allow all logical consequences to flow from there to your gaming table and gaming world. You could allow (for instance) treasure parcels to remain, but they work that way for everyone, everywhere (not just the PCs here & now).

For instance, the above method of play (more or less) results in Ptolus when you run 3.x as a "simulationist" game.

The problem most self-described "simulationists" (including myself) have with that is that the 4E ruleset would make a really odd world to live in. It wouldn't look at all like Middle Earth, Faerun, Midkemia, or whatever world you probably want to play in. In fact you'd probably have to assume that quantum mechanics would govern at the macro scale, since the observer can change the level of his opponents ...

What you're going to have to do is reverse horse & cart. The first thing you need to do is clearly define the world (the result) that you want. Only once that's done can you go back and write rules that should (more of less) produce that result when played in a simulationist manner.

Tell us what sort of world you want first, only then can we make rule suggestions.

 

[gizmo33]

Now, if you want verisimilitude (in its literary usage, meaning "not requiring suspension of disbelief"), then the first thing you need to do is get rid of hit points: everyone is a minion. You get hit, you die. Roll a save, and you're only horribly maimed instead.

The definition of "hit" in DnD is not that you're physically hit with a weapon. And in reality, it's possible to be hit with a weapon and not be hurt at all (thanks to armor).