Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.

Main Menu

The FitM pattern at other "scales"

Started by Gordon C. Landis, June 01, 2001, 01:22:00 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


Mike -

I think part of the problem is you're trying to define the boundaries of each definition, when there aren't any.

If you're around simulationists, you know it. They're people who are willing to be mind-numbingly bored, and have horrificly unsatisfying stories, rather than break "verasimilitude."

(Not saying this always happens, just that if it does, verasimilitude is more important than having it not.)

             - James

Mike Holmes


Well, I think that I'm more trying to understand whether or not particular tools can be used to create the kind of games that I am interested in.

You have a point though, in that I probably should just go ahead and make those games (I am actually) with those tools and see what happens.

But I also am concerned with the ongoing debate about Simulationism and was hoping to possibly shed some light. I hope that I've been in some small way helpful.

And just because you had to say it, I have to respond. Mind-bogglingly boring to one is completely fascinating to another. To each their own. :smile:

Mike Holmes
Member of Indie Netgaming
-Get your indie game fix online.

Ron Edwards

Hi Mike,

Checking out the Turku/Elayjitist philosophy, discussions of immersion, or some of the material regarding "exploration," I see a concentrated effort to REMOVE exactly those elements we are discussing from role-playing. At best, according to these outlooks, they should arise as emergent properties of immersed/character interactions with no direct player-attention or encouragement.

Similarly, many late-80s rules systems specifically direct role-players to let ALL considerations, especially any "story" considerations, be over-ridden by the probability engines of the system. Take a look at DC Heroes, in its treatment of time, movement, and whether the heroes should "show up in time."

So for both older-style 80s simulationism, and for the more recent light-rules immersive simulationism, I see PLENTY of evidence that the outlook I'm defining exists. Call of Cthulhu is a superior example. If we add LARPing to it and perhaps a fair amount of White Wolf system play, that adds up to a mighty large proportion of role-players.

My very first post on the Gaming Outpost following the first Big Crash, on the thread responding to my review of the Window, I provide a very clear boundary between Simulationist priorities and the Narrativist requirement of plausibility. They really aren't the same thing.


Mike Holmes


I understand that this is definitely not something that has previously been done or possibly even concieved of. I'm hoping that it hasn't and I'm breaking new ground. And many devout Simulationists would reject it out of hand (including my own players, I think). But either way, the real question is whether or not it will work. For people like me.

I've hijacked this thread far to long. If it'll settle the debate, then, OK, I'm a sort of deluded Narrativist. It'll come out in the wash.

Mike Holmes

Member of Indie Netgaming
-Get your indie game fix online.