I was wondering if there was an elegant way to allow a character (and the game mechanics itself) to advance in such a way that at low "experience" levels, his actions are guided by simulationist style mechanics, but as he becomes more experienced (really, as he becomes more enlightened) the resolution mechanics become more narrativist and subjective?

For example, let's say the setting I'm modeling is a martial arts (though NOT wuxia) background. At low experience, a character is guided mostly by hard-wired neural stimulus and technique, and hence there's a very simulationist approach to how to deal with combat. However, as the character becomes more experienced, and as his spiritual levels rise, he goes beyond technique and beyond form...reaching the formlessness of subjectivity. This subjectivity can be modeled by taking a more freeform and narrativist approach to mechanics.

Is there a way to segue relatively seamlessly from simulationism to narrativism like this?

Dauntless wrote: This subjectivity can be modeled by taking a more freeform and narrativist approach to mechanics.

Is there a way to segue relatively seamlessly from simulationism to narrativism like this?

Fang Langford was designing the Scattershot rules so they could transition Narrativist with play. My impression is that the transition wasn't aligned with character advancement. But I imagine you could impose a constraint that would achieve your desired result.

The Scattershot forum is here. And that's maybe not too useful. But someone more familiar with Scattershot can probably offer some specific thread references.

Paul

Hello,

Ralph Mazza's game in development, Robots & Rapiers, is an amazing example of precisely this design goal.

Everyone should get as much information about this game as they can, and Ralph should finish it.

Best,
Ron

Ralph Mazza's forthcoming Robots and Rapiers is very much like this, as far as I can tell. Characters are robots in a Louis XIV-themed disneyland where all the humans are dead. As play begins, they are controlled almost entirely by their programming--they have to play along with the (GM's) plotline for the benefit of the (now dead) tourists. As robots go along, they have the opportunity to Spark--gain self-awareness. Once they've Sparked, they can begin to do things beyond the Tapestry and become true thinking, beings. An old link is here, but I'm sure the most up-to-date stuff can be found on http://universalis.actionroll.com

Nag Ralph to finish the darn game while you're there.

Edit: Cross posted with Ron. Consider this a heary second recommendation.

I think that the easiest way to transition from Sim to Nar is for the players to start telling you what they want and feeding it back into the game itself. But if you want the rules to force the change I would look at some way to increase the ways that the players can effect the fortune system as they get better in the game. Give them feats which would cause them to have greater power at a greater price. Help them to define more of the world around them and help them hook into that world.

The nagging on R&R has been heard. Progress is being made. Slow, sometimes painful, but positive improvements have been made. A playtestable beta version should be available in the not too ridiculous distant future.

However, I will note that Dauntless doesn't seem to really be talking Simulationism vs. Narrativism but rather moving from rules crunchy causal mechanics to rules lighter narrative based (not necessarily Narrativist) mechanics.

Thor wrote: Give them feats which would cause them to have greater power at a greater price.

First, I want to point out that you don't neccesarily need different mechanics to acheive this effect. You can simply have a 'lite' mechanic that relies heavily on narration, and then just narrate the results appropriately to the character's 'level' of enlightenment.

That said, I actually think this effect would be pretty easy to achieve. You start with some sort of personality/behavior mechanic. Then, you have some sort of mechanism that allows you to bypass that particular mechanic, that increases as you gain levels.

For example, you could have an 'Anger' roll that tells you if you go into a rage. You then can have either a bonus that increases with level, or you can have some sort of currency (which increases with level) that lets you override the mechanic altogether.

Is that the type of thing you were thinking about?

Hello,

A couple of people have chimed in with a very important point: the whole concept of Narrativist vs. Simulationist mechanics can potentially lead this discussion into meaningless noise.

The only thing that can really "be" Narrativist, Simulationist, Gamist, or any combination of them is personal desires and preferences, on the part of the real people.

Now, it is the case, I think, that System as a whole (or near-whole) can reinforce and help satisfy these desires and preferences. That's been my thesis from the beginning. But to think that sneaking in "a Narrativist mechanic" can then transform the preferences and desires themselves is often mistaken.

What can happen is that if the group, or most of the people in the group, share an unrealized (meaning "unfulfilled") Narrativist preference, then introducing such techniques can have a brushfire, inspiring effect which yields fantastic Narrativist play. I've seen that happen dozens of times. But you cannot take a Simulationist-preference group and "transmogrify" it by introducing techniques, especially not in isolation from the rest of the system.

A good older thread to check out: You can't sneak up on mode.

Best,
Ron

I agree that the GNS terminology is indicative of a preference of style, and that the system rules help reinforce this as well as deliver the mode of exploration of that preference.

But that's exactly why I want a way to be able to transition the game mechanics themselves in order to reflect the very same changes the players themselves (and not just their characters) go through.

In this regard, the setting itself will challenge the players' points of view, just as in the real world our points of view change. For example, when I was a senior in high school, I was emphatically a hard-core empiricist and objectivist. But as I started discovering through the scientific process itself, I realized that there was more to things than pure reductionism, causality and objectivism. I slowly realized that our perspective of things, how we saw things influenced those things. I was no longer a mere observer, but a participant. In that sense, I'm a sort of weird Simulationist-Narrativist.

What interests me about martial arts is this same sort of progression. One starts with very formalistic and technical training. Gradually however, one realizes that there is no form within form, and that within formlessness there is form. In game terms, the players will be beaten by those who don't seem to be following the "rules".

So I want the mechanics of the game to evolve as the players (hopefully) evolve. I want them to experience not just for their characters, but to allow them to change how they see things through their roleplaying and discovery in the setting of the world itself.