Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6353424" data-attributes="member: 22779">I think where I take issue here though, is that making D&D work as a simulation takes far, far more than "minor adjustments".  The idea of HP being real, for example, isn't a minor adjustment, it's a complete change to the intentions of the game.  Heh, to bring up a personal bugaboo, ruling that looking at a medusa turns you to stone requires actually specifically changing what the rules say.  It's not that you are making minor changes here.  The changes are actually pretty wide reaching and to reach any sort of modelling, you pretty much have to change every single rule.</blockquote>Thing is, there's a difference here.  No one claims that 4e isn't narrativist right out of the box.  You can't.  It's right there in the rules.  Those things that you claim are "anti-sim" are narrativist.  You admit that 4e borrows narrativist elements do you not?  The concept behind Skill Challenges is pulled straight out of narrativist games.  Warlord healing, Come and Get It, and various other player driven narrative mechanics are narrativist based concepts.In D&D, there aren't simulation mechanics to be had.  They have to be added in, because when you use D&D mechanics, you rarely, if ever, model anything that is happening in the game world.  All you are doing is resolving an action in a very gamist fashion.  Again, using D&D mechanics, in any edition, show me why D&D combat isn't the same as Final Fantasy combat where your character shakes slightly then an enemy has a -X HP number show up above his head.  Thing is, you can't.  Adding in the narrative of the combat is something you have to do, it's not part of the mechanics.  The mechanics only tell you when something is alive or dead.  It doesn't tell you anything in between.  It could be a swashbuckling fight a la the duel in The Princess Bride, or it could be Final Fantasy 2.  Mechanically, there is zero difference.But to get that swashbuckling fight, you have to add in the narrative.  3e and 4e added in a little by using the battle map and making movement and position more important, but, that's very, very minor and not what most people point to when they talk about how D&D simulates things.  So, that's the difference for me.  4e, while it might not be the best narrative game on the market, does have, right out of the box, a number of narrativist elements.  D&D, though, really doesn't have simulationist elements and never did.[/QUOTE]

Verification