Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 7769047" data-attributes="member: 22779">By that point though, I'd argue that "simulation" as a term is so broad as to lose a lot of meaning.  Like I said, a simulation has to actually simulate something or it's not a simulation.  That's the point of a simulation.  My crumpled up piece of paper is not a simulation of a hurricane, no matter how many times I argued with my science teacher.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />  For a system to be simulationist, it actually has to be pretty methodical in its approach to whatever it is it's trying to simulate.  And, sure, we can be fine or broad grained in a simulation.  That's fine, I get that.  But, at some point, I should be able to look at that simulation and have it tell me what's going on within whatever is being simulated.Thus, we get games like GURPS (very finely grained simulation), RoleMaster (Ludicrously finely grained to the point where my brain wants to crawl out my left nostril), Battletech (very broadly grained simulation, quick and dirty really) and various others including a host of excellent war games.But, my point is, in all the years that I've played simulation games, never once have I heard anyone step up and say, "Hey, let's use D&D (any edition) to simulate our fantasy world".  It hasn't been until kinda recently, mostly with the 4e editions wars, that this meme of D&D as sim game has gotten any traction and, honestly, I've only seen it on message boards.  It always kinda smacks of "Well, real RPG's are simulationist.  Everything else is just posing".  Like I say, it's baffling to see anyone with even a modicum of wargaming background try to lump D&D as a sim game with a straight face.-------------I would argue that there is something of the beginnings of change in the 90's that you see really bear fruit in the early 2000's though [MENTION=2205]Desdichado[/MENTION].  ((Hobo is that you? the icon looks so familiar)) The rise of games like FUDGE and the whole "indie press" movement really starts in the 90's.  The 80's sees a bit of it, but, mostly 80's RPG's were pretty similar to traditional RPG's.  I hate to Godwin the thread by bringing up the FORGE but, really, it's not until the FORGE that we see a consistent attempt (I'm not commenting on the success of that attempt, just that the attempt was made) to analyze RPG's in a structured, academic form.  The rise of critical analysis and, heck the tools for critical analysis (hey, look at the discussion I'm having above about whether or not D&D is a simulationist game - that's a direct Forgeism right there) starts in about the mid-90's and continues today.  I mean, heck, the discussion about Old School vs New School is a genre defining exercise, at its heart.  Really, when you think about it, probably the biggest difference between old school and new school, is the ability to actually critique the game in a meaningful way.  Prior to, say, 1980, no one had any idea how to discuss the game because we hadn't invented the language to discuss games yet.  Old school games like AD&D were largely uncritiqued because there was no venue to disseminate any critiques broadly among the fanbase and no shared language to actually make any sort of real critique to begin with.</blockquote>

Verification