Let's See - Rethinking "Sim"
Frank Tarcikowski:
Yeah, to me that sounds like pretty solid Sim play as well. I haven't read Vincent's articles, but bear in mind that it's always a question of angles. Some people have found one explanation or another helpful in a certain context, but that same explanation may be confusing in a different context. Plus, Sim contains a multitude of play styles that may differ significantly.
- Frank
Frank Tarcikowski:
P.S.: I just took a look at the discussion on Vincent’s blog and remembered dropping out of a similar discussion with him before. With respect, I don’t think Vincent is doing Simulationism (or the Right to Dream, if you prefer) justice. That’s a small surprise, as he says himself he doesn’t like it, and doesn’t really even want to explain it. But as people obviously want him to explain it, well, what can the poor man do.
If you are interested in my personal angle on Simulationism, I humbly recommend the following threads:
[Vampire 2E Sabbat] Of Evil and of Simulationism, with a bit of confusion on Big Model terminology on my part in the beginning which gets cleared later;
The Players’ Role in Partcipationist Play, which tackles Participationism as one functional way of playing Sim;
[liquid] Well, I just rolled the dice for show, which is primarily about Exploration, not Sim, but relates to your point about the role of rules and mechanics.
- Frank
lumpley:
Hey Simon!
Here's what jumps out at me:
Quote from: Simon C on May 12, 2009, 07:09:24 PM
It was fun when "just playing my character" got us into trouble. I think all the players enjoyed these moments to some extent, and each character had their own traits that could be relied upon to cause trouble.
What kinds of traits? What was up with Ook that put him in conflict with reality and got them into trouble, for instance? What was up with your favorite other characters?
-Vincent
JoyWriter:
This is exactly the kind of thing I love; if right to dream is about "realising the ideal", then this was about realising an unknown ideal! It was not explicitly set out before, like in Vincent's right to dream examples, you're not just expressing how your guys are the amazing strategists, and being given setting fuel to "prove it" with.
You have a challenge, as players, to portray a group of characters striving for something within a setting, portray them honestly, and build a rules system that works with them just enough. The result of that challenge, the success and reward, is when you produce setting events that are never before seen, but fit into everything that you were interested in seeing and the kind of tone you wanted. They move in the right way, the details are right, and they have the right connotations. Now there is a certain pride there too for the player, you beat the puzzle, you made the words come out just like you wanted, and like everyone else wanted too, but even if all that creativity was down to the rules, you'd still be stoked that the rules produced what you wanted.
So what about all the rules, the nuts and bolts? They are a machine and not a sculpture, there to aid you in producing these interesting and magnificent events. You're not into the weight of a pregnant seal, so it's not in the rules! Like any machine you want to fine tune it, and strip out all the dead time where the machine is just running. If you could, I imagine you'd cut handling time down to zero for the rules system, so a magical oracle immediately turns your questions and uncertainties into answers that are just right, within the range you wanted but unexpected.
Now I probably wouldn't, because I like the way that following certain forms of actions shifts how you approach stuff, but that's another story.
So have I characterised you correctly?
Caldis:
Quote from: Simon C on May 12, 2009, 10:15:15 PM
In Right to Dream, it's "Let's see... something?" I'm still not sure. We sure as heck had a pretty big focus on exploration, on that "Let's see" aspect of play, as I've discussed. But to what end?
The way I'd put it is this.
"Let's see if we can get something that feels right."
In your example we have the roguish outlaw sci-fi setup and we want it to feel realistic and there to be challenges for the characters. Our goal is to mix this all together and get it to work while still being entertaining to us as participants. That system affirming or denying your view is a big part of it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page