Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9031707" data-attributes="member: 6785785">I followed what you meant, I just am unsure how that addressed what I was saying. Sure. But I'm honestly not familiar with any games that involve such arbitrary GMing. It doesn't seem like a quality unique to simulation games. Again, I don't follow how this addresses my question. I asked if you are to use tables to facilitate simulation in order to disclaim making decisions about how things go, or if you should choose. It sounds like you're saying you should choose? But remain impartial? How do you do that? If there are three possible outcomes, one is 50% likely, one 30%, and the last 20%, how do you decide? Do you just pick the 50% option since it's the most likely? If you pick, how are you remaining impartial? What world isn't external to the players? Do you mean the characters? Either way, I'm not sure what this means. No, my concern isn't that the roles are asymmetrical. My concern is that when the GM is acting with simulation as a priority, how is it apparent to the players? If the players aren't involved in or aware of the methods of simulation, then it seems to me like the GM is just narrating what he'd like to narrate. Not necessarily, it very much depends on the game. My general approach overall is likely to have them be closer than many others likely would, but even then, they're still asymmetrical.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hawkeyefan, post: 9031707, member: 6785785"] I followed what you meant, I just am unsure how that addressed what I was saying. Sure. But I'm honestly not familiar with any games that involve such arbitrary GMing. It doesn't seem like a quality unique to simulation games. Again, I don't follow how this addresses my question. I asked if you are to use tables to facilitate simulation in order to disclaim making decisions about how things go, or if you should choose. It sounds like you're saying you should choose? But remain impartial? How do you do that? If there are three possible outcomes, one is 50% likely, one 30%, and the last 20%, how do you decide? Do you just pick the 50% option since it's the most likely? If you pick, how are you remaining impartial? What world isn't external to the players? Do you mean the characters? Either way, I'm not sure what this means. No, my concern isn't that the roles are asymmetrical. My concern is that when the GM is acting with simulation as a priority, how is it apparent to the players? If the players aren't involved in or aware of the methods of simulation, then it seems to me like the GM is just narrating what he'd like to narrate. Not necessarily, it very much depends on the game. My general approach overall is likely to have them be closer than many others likely would, but even then, they're still asymmetrical. [/QUOTE]

Verification