Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="evileeyore" data-source="post: 6354588" data-attributes="member: 1768">And this is as close to sim as D&amp;D really gets.&nbsp; 3rd ed which is often decried by those whom hate the system as being too &quot;crunchy&quot;, too &quot;gritty&quot;, or too &quot;sim&quot;.And yet... how does the PC break down the door?&nbsp; Does he kick it in?&nbsp; Shoulder it?&nbsp; Bash it with a club?&nbsp; Chop it with an axe? (Yes I know 3e allowed for both &quot;bursting the door in one go&quot; and &quot;slowly chopping through it&quot;, but then 3e is farther away from what D&amp;D &quot;is&quot; to me than the other editions.)No, it's &quot;Narrativist&quot;... kinda.&nbsp; Without the narrative mechanics.&nbsp; Gamist is in the fact that it's a simple mechanic to achieve a goal; Door is locked/barred/stuck - PCs need to open it - They make a &quot;Bend Bars/Lift Gates&quot; or &quot;DC xx to Bash in the Door&quot; check - Door is either open or closed.&nbsp; How they did it does not matter for the roll (baring the split method in 3rd ed), only for the narrative.In GURPS, such a check would be based on the door's thickness, or the lock's strength, or the frame's thickness, pick the worst, and applied versus the PC's STR or weapon damage (in which case it's probably the Door's DR and Hit Points).&nbsp; They might get a Charging bonus if they rush at the door, they might be using a ram which gives a different bonus, how well trained is their Forced Entry skill is, etc.How they are doing it informs the roll in GURPS, which is why I classify it as &quot;sim&quot;.&nbsp; In most editions of D&amp;D, it's an abstraction, which is why I don't.And as Hussar keeps poking:&nbsp; Hit Points!&nbsp; D&amp;D does this very &quot;gamisty&quot; while GURPS tries to get closer to simulating real world physics.&nbsp; And yes there are those on the SJGames' GURPS forums that are grinding it even finer...It's basically how I see &quot;sim games&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="evileeyore, post: 6354588, member: 1768"] And this is as close to sim as D&D really gets. 3rd ed which is often decried by those whom hate the system as being too "crunchy", too "gritty", or too "sim". And yet... how does the PC break down the door? Does he kick it in? Shoulder it? Bash it with a club? Chop it with an axe? (Yes I know 3e allowed for both "bursting the door in one go" and "slowly chopping through it", but then 3e is farther away from what D&D "is" to me than the other editions.) No, it's "Narrativist"... kinda. Without the narrative mechanics. Gamist is in the fact that it's a simple mechanic to achieve a goal; Door is locked/barred/stuck - PCs need to open it - They make a "Bend Bars/Lift Gates" or "DC xx to Bash in the Door" check - Door is either open or closed. How they did it does not matter for the roll (baring the split method in 3rd ed), only for the narrative. In [I]GURPS[/I], such a check would be based on the door's thickness, or the lock's strength, or the frame's thickness, [i]pick the worst[/i], and applied versus the PC's STR or weapon damage (in which case it's probably the Door's DR and Hit Points). They might get a Charging bonus if they rush at the door, they might be using a ram which gives a different bonus, how well trained is their Forced Entry skill is, etc. How they are doing it informs the roll in [I]GURPS[/I], which is why I classify it as "sim". In most editions of D&D, it's an abstraction, which is why I don't. And as Hussar keeps poking: Hit Points! D&D does this very "gamisty" while [I]GURPS[/I] tries to get closer to simulating real world physics. And yes there are those on the SJGames' [I]GURPS[/I] forums that are grinding it even finer... It's basically how I see "sim games". [/QUOTE]

Verification