Search results

Well, the core problem is the DM using the term "realistic" when they really mean "verisimilitudinous". Sim priorities are more focused on the setting following its own internal logic, even if that logic isn't "realistic." The core problem with Hit Points in sim play is that people have...

For my personal version of Eberron, I split the difference. The majority of Dragonmarks are passed on via familial/"genetic" lines, but there are enough spontaneous marks that a PC of a different-than-expected race won't be some massively weird outlier. Most Houses are between 90-95% made up...

I'm actually a big fan of the d30, it feels like a d20 but with more granularity in the results.

If the katana isn't doing at least 2d20 damage, they're both wrong. :)

To be fair, recycling the last generation's IP instead of coming up with novel concepts isn't limited to TTRPGs. It's kinda <gestures broadly at everything>.

"That's not how a katana works, Steve! I've been to Japan!" :)

As per usual, the best approach is to ask the player. If they just want it as a mechanical upgrade, work with them to build a small roleplaying hook localized to the character; there's no need to build out setting-level detail for it. If they would like to attach some setting lore to the idea...

But what do we call it if a Dunning-Kruger effect GM thinks they're simulating because they're an "expert", but is actually just making things up? Do we categorize by intent or result? :)

I follow two broad rules for [+] threads. One, don't post if I disagree or have strong negative opinions about the thread topic. If the thread topic was "Post your 5 favorite Star Wars movies/shows", I'm not going to post to that thread if I'm uninterested in Star Wars or actively dislike it...

My interest in this book is…compounding.

"Evoke setting through its own procedures" is a great phrase.

I would make the argument that the disclaiming of decision-making, specifically authorial decision making (the creation of the next scene, event, framing, etc.) specifically for the reason of avoiding any artifact of possible contrivance, is the core motivation of modern sim-oriented play...

Sure, I would agree with most of that. But assuming those arbitrary choices still produce some kind of functional output, I still think the result would be something like a "simulation", certainly for the low granularity sim of a TTRPG. Like, if I ask 20 random strangers to name a type of...

How much of a difference depends on a lot of things, mostly player psychology and how much illusionism is used. Probably not much, but I’m also probably not a pretty good judge, since hard sim is pretty low on my play priorities for most systems.

But it also isn’t trying to model anything either, other than making something planet-like. There’s a difference between a computer model running to determine Earth’s weather next week, and a d20 table where the DM has written in weather patterns they’ve heard of, but both ultimately produce a...

“You’ll never get me Strawberry Smiggles!”

Oh, I definitely think the result of an arbitrary algorithm still counts as a simulation. Any one of the 5 billion planets generated for No Man’s sky is a simulation. Creating a survival mode world off a random seed in Minecraft is a simulation. That’s why I don’t think the “modeling” aspect...

That just doesn't make sense. Blue Lightning is so obviously superior, how can it be a competition? :)

I think it's a little deeper than that. A lot of the support for simulationism comes with the attached idea of "I want to feel like I'm in a real place." And far more than any particular rule or technique, what disturbs that sense are reminders that the table activity is functionally...

Fair point. To build on that, I do think it would be challenging to design a truly arbitrary resolution process, a process that doesn't attempt to simulate something, simply because the usual resolution tools for these kind of games (an encounter table, a weather simulation table, a NPC/faction...