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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6354841" data-attributes="member: 42582">How do you know that it is a simulation? Until you know more about the game rules, you can't tell.The only RPG I know of that uses a coin toss resolution system is Prince Valiant, but it is not a "single toss" system. So instead, here are the action resolution rules for Paul Czege's RPG <a href="http://www.halfmeme.com/WFDrules.html" target="_blank">The World, The Flesh and The Devil</a>:[T]ake a blank six-sider and allocate sides to the World, the Flesh, and the Devil, creating your character's W/F/D die. The way you allocate the sides determines the comparative significance of the three forces in your character's life . . . The only requirement is that you must have at least one World, one Flesh, and one Devil side. . . . The game also requires that the GM have a set of five dice with different allocations of plus and minus symbols on them . . .  in black and red . . . When a player has stated intent for the character to do something where the outcome is in question, the GM will give the player one of the conflict resolution dice with the plus and minus symbols on them. Which one depends on his assessment of the difficulty of the situation and the character's ability to accomplish what the player intends. . . . The player rolls both his W/F/D die and the one the GM gave him. If the result is a Devil+, it means the victory was one in which the character transcended some aspect of the Devil, and the player narrates the outcome. If the result is Flesh-, it's a failure of the flesh and the player narrates the outcome. . . . There are no opposed rolls, and the GM never rolls. However, if a player rolls a red plus or red minus it means the GM narrates the outcome, rather than the player. This give the GM power to introduce bittersweet victories and dramatic, crippling failures.There's also a re-roll mechanic, based on invoking character descriptions.This is an RPG that is very close to a coin-toss resolution system. (Whether it is good RPG or not is another question; per <a href="http://www.indie-rpgs.com/_articles/narr_essay.html" target="_blank">Ron Edwards</a>, "Is there such a thing as Fortune-at-the-beginning? Playtesting so far indicates that it's not very satisfying for Narrativist play; see discussions at the Forge of Human Wreckage and The World the Flesh and the Devil.")And the resolution system is not modelling or simulating anything. It is, quite overtly, a system for distributing among real, flesh-and-blood game participants certain obligations to develop the content of the fiction in certain ways. Someone who sat down to play this RPG, and who said of the resolution system that it is a simulations, but not a very good one because it only models random factors, has simply failed to understand the mechanics of the game. Such a person needs to re-read the rules!Not in my game. The distinction between A and B is the result of the participants in the game agreeing that one or the other is true of the shared fiction. They reach that decision by reference to the hit point tallies, but the hit point tallies are not themselves indicative of anything in the fiction. (For instance, in the fiction there is no difference between defeating a minion giant, who mechanically has 1 hp, and defeating a standard giant, who has 200 hp, except that one turned out to take a bit longer than the other for some reason. Nothing in the system obliges that reason to be narrated as "because the standard one was tougher". It could be narrated as "the minion got unlucky, and parried when it should have thrust."My whole point is that Hussar and I do not play a game that satisfies you "causality" requirement. We play a game in which the ingame causation is one thing (imaginary processes in an imaginary world) and the method for determining the content of the fiction is something else (a series of rules that authorise various participants in the game, at various points during the play of the game, to introduce new content into the fiction, or change existing content.You, personally, may not enjoy playing such a game, but that doesn't change the fact that other people, out here in the real world, are doing it.Obviously. My point is that you are mistaken when you deny that Hussar and I are playing the game as I have described it.For instance, upthread you said, of hit points, that "unless you've house ruled the game so far that they no longer control when you are unable to fight, then they do objectively represent your ability to not get stopped by attacks". Presumably by "you" you mean "my PC" rather than me - what represent my personal ability to not get stopped by attacks is my own (rather limited) skill at fighting and running away.But in my game (and Hussar's) a PC's or other character's hit points do not "objectively" represent that character's ability to not get stopped by attacks. They regulate the conditions under which the participants in the game are obliged to say "that character just got stopped by an attack" or are permitted to say "that character hasn't yet been stopped by any attacks". And this didn't require a house rule. It's just playing 4e as it comes out of the box. The hit points are part of a really existing set of rules that constrain the players. The ingame causal processes are imaginary laws of nature that constrain imaginary people. And the two sets of rules - the real ones and the imaginary ones - are not in any sort of correlation.Unless the hit point loss was all inflicted by Phantasmal Killer, in which case the person looks white as a sheet though otherwise physically hale.There are additional complications, too. For instance, in my 4e game you can't tell from the fact that a person looks badly hurt how many hp s/he has. For instance, in my last session both of the defenders - each of whom has somewhere over 150 hp - took around 300 hp damage, the paladin from falling down a cliff and then being swallowed by a remorhaz at the bottom, the fighter from being beaten up by giants. But between in-combat healing (second wind, lay on hands, healing word etc) and a short rest, they are both at full hp. But obviously there injuries haven't been healed by 5 minutes of rest. They still look terrible. It's just that they're no longer close to falling.For a cinematic analogue, think of Aragorn returning to Helm's Deep after his fall. He still looks terrible as he throws the doors open, but he is not at all close to falling. His injuries are no longer affecting his ability to fight with full vigour.That's not really accurate. If you generate the points needed for victory by using your Swordsman ability, you can't retrospectively declare that you defeated your opponent with your Relentless Logic.Even the much looser RPG The World, The Flesh and The Devil still puts some constraints on the content of the narration of resolution, based on the result of the W/F/D die. I've never heard of an RPG in which resolution can be completed, and have generated no constraints on narration beyond the basic ones derived from genre and scene framing. (Which is not to say that such a game doesn't exist - I haven't heard of every RPG. But HeroWars/Quest is not it.)</blockquote>

Verification