Search results

It seems apparent to me this is just reframing the whole, ‘if it’s simulation it must be perfect argument’ into different words.

That’s fair. Then I think we agree.

And yet no one suggests the simulations are perfect. I can see how that would be a ‘problem’ if they did. But they don’t, so?

Two things. 1) I wasn’t responding to your post. 2) I don’t see a heck of alot of difference in those things. Summing them both up as hitpoints seems to be proper language to me.

I think this ignores the inherent ongoing social convergence and expertise expansion that occurs in a prolonged campaign over multiple sessions with the same individuals who are free to leave at anytime.

Yea. That would be the difference. I think one can have a subconscious agenda so no forethought is needed.

I think it depends on what one believes hp represent and/or if the dm has provided some narration that overrides that representation. Which is one reason hp is such a terrible example. There’s far to many divergent underlying assumptions about it.

Do you agree it’s not a primary agenda?

Even then, what specifically they find fun is going to form an agenda, unless they find all things equally fun which would be a bit odd. But at this point we are getting almost exclusively into the domain of psychology.

You won’t like it, but the answer is almost surely a no ;)

If one takes rpg play as an inherently creative activity then any agenda for rpg play would be a creative agenda. That would be my view. Now there might be less ‘pure’ agendas which is what I think typically get construed as no agenda but I think there’s just an extremely nuanced and thus hard...

I dunno. Sim play is a really broad term. I don’t think it’s worth exploring commonalities in games that simply feature simulation because I don’t think there are any serious ones other than their use of simulation. I’d say you have to at least break down sim play into subcategories to get...

Considering most on the simulationist side in this thread have at best skimmed the rules of traveler and at worst taken your descriptions of it as accurate I don’t know why you’d find that surprising. Assuming they know the rules well either 1) he’s just talking about the non-metagame aspects...

I think many would say the metagaming aspect expressly moves it far outside the simulationist camp. I think your simulationist scale is very uncalibrated. There’s a difference in saying d&d combat is t the most simulationist out there and saying it utterly lacks the necessary elements of...

Eliminating stop motion combat would be my focus for realism. For human fighter vs human fighter conflicts I think ac is simple and realistic, it’s just not granular. It’s when you start adding giants into the mix that it just doesn’t make much realistic sense.

I don’t get the whole non-expert criticism. Assuming someone is incompetent but consistent then at worst we have an inaccurate simulation, and given all our simulations have inaccurate elements then that shouldn’t be a deal breaker. What happens in practice is that if a major disagreement...

My proposal, a broad category that lumps together all RPG’s that use simulation as if the use of simulation is a play agenda unto itself isn’t a particularly useful term because the only real commonality between such games is the use of simulation. Anything additional to that which applies to...

Obviously. Do you have a broader point?

I am unsure what you are referring to here

Okay, so simulation isn’t the goal, it’s the biggest method in simulation games. Which then brings me back to my question, shouldn’t ‘agenda’ be the goal and not the ‘method’?