Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 6240839" data-attributes="member: 6688937">Oh I wouldn't argue that. 1e is, I would think, not only the most gamist, but also IIRC the only explicitly gamist incarnation of the game.hmm...interesting idea. I'm not sure that I agree, but its an interesting idea. Although, in a bigger sense, I'm starting to doubt the whole concept of simulationism in rpgs.I'd need a fair bit of convincing that rigor and transparency act as detriments to gamist play. Wargames, for example, are often long on both and quite gamist (obviously). There exist folks who use the 4e mechanics with a few tweaks to play a very competitive "Old-School" game. I can't see how more regulated rewards makes them any less rewards. Sure, it takes an element of chance out of the game (that is, a recent OSR game I played in kinda disintegrated after two very fortunate sets of rolls on the random treasure tables.) However, I tend to see it as primarily a shift in frequency and potency. If anything, it makes 4e a better gamist game, because your character + stuff even more directly reflects your accomplishments with that character,  rather than random rolls on a chart.I'm not sure how you figure that (and I dread to bring this up). Look at any of the Mario Bros games, now turn one into a tabletop game. They certainly aren't Nar or Sim, they are almost purely gamist. Similar to your note about 1e, what level can you get to is a measure of player skill, not character skill. Yet Mario doesn't get substantially more effective as the game goes on (temporary power ups notwithstanding). The only thing that changes as you progress in Mario levels is the complexity of the levels. 4e can, to some extent, be played in a very similar vein. From my point of view, its regulated to play that way (at least "rules-as-suggested"). You will receive these benefits as you level up for precisely the reason of maintaining a specific challenge level while we tour a bunch of "levels/tiers" with different trappings/flavor...a very gamist concept indeed, that treadmill. At least AFAICT.Consider also intra-class balance. From what I can tell, this is a purely gamist concept, because its measured directly against that challenge level from above. Its also not (from what I can tell) incompatible with the 1e take on gamism, which include tacit admissions that playing a Fighter is "easy mode" and playing thief or wizard is "hard mode" or "normal mode" (which is which seems to vary a bit between the editions and presentations). The wizard player receives his rewards of power for surviving all those low levels at a much higher difficulty setting than the fighter player. The difference is not one of gamism, but of design choice in how to affect it best.You might think that challenge or difficulty level is not Gamist, but I can't see how it isn't. For the (pure) Sim player, the world just is, and I'm exploring it. It may be terrible and gritty, or it may be rainbows and unicorns, but its just there. If I am correctly experiencing the world as my character would (living the dream), then there is no "fair" except as he would experience it. For the pure Narrative player...heck, there are Narrativist games where victory is a foregone conclusion and the players are merely dickering over how the victory happens. Difficulty or challenge is merely flavor for such a player. (Of course, no real player is such a purist in TTRPGs, at least IME.)I tend to agree. I think D&D, as the "big one" seems to gravitate toward the middle  of the "triangle".  Whenever it jaunts off away from any of the poles (whether with a new edition or not) it seems much less well-received. To my view, the game started off very Gamist with a dash of Sim, and stumbled backwards into Narrativism. Fans of the newly discovered Narrativism dragged through kicking and screaming into 2e...where its shortcomings stood out. 3e doubled down on Sim(ish) things and kicked Narrativism and Gamism to the curb. 4e (in so many ways) tried to be the anti-3e, and so tossed 3e's Simishness to the side. 5e seems....well I dunno. To me, it looks like its abandoned all three agendas with the intent of providing a good simple vehicle for a group of geeky buddies to hang around a table and goof off while occasionally generating good stories as they pretend to be elves, etc. Which, honestly is maybe the best thing.</blockquote>

Verification